Page 541 of 848
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:33 am
by 6ftstick
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:26 am
Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:18 am
If I was Head of Twitter Safety, I'd have to remove disslaxx' post, since in fact Rupert Murdoch explicitly denied what a journalist says 'people close to him' said he said. So not only is no one who said he said it on the record, but the one guy on the record is the guy accused of saying it and he denies it. Shouldn't we remove this post? Am I doing this right?
But you are not for good reason. Just because a person denies something you would not remove a story.
The NY Post story yesterday was clearly in the realm of disinformation (clearly a lie). The Murdoch story is not the same thing.
When there's absolutely NO PROOF of something about Trump it MUST BE BELIEVED
When theres overwhelming proof of anything that supports TRUMP it is to be ignored denied and removed.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:39 am
by RedFromMI
6ftstick wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:33 am
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:26 am
Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:18 am
If I was Head of Twitter Safety, I'd have to remove disslaxx' post, since in fact Rupert Murdoch explicitly denied what a journalist says 'people close to him' said he said. So not only is no one who said he said it on the record, but the one guy on the record is the guy accused of saying it and he denies it. Shouldn't we remove this post? Am I doing this right?
But you are not for good reason. Just because a person denies something you would not remove a story.
The NY Post story yesterday was clearly in the realm of disinformation (clearly a lie). The Murdoch story is not the same thing.
When there's absolutely NO PROOF of something about Trump it MUST BE BELIEVED
When theres overwhelming proof of anything that supports TRUMP it is to be ignored denied and removed.
There is actually more proof that this particular piece of news is manufactured disinformation than real news. But you are not seeing that FACT.
The real problem is there is little that ACTUALLY supports Trump on this.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:44 am
by Peter Brown
6ftstick wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:33 am
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:26 am
Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:18 am
If I was Head of Twitter Safety, I'd have to remove disslaxx' post, since in fact Rupert Murdoch explicitly denied what a journalist says 'people close to him' said he said. So not only is no one who said he said it on the record, but the one guy on the record is the guy accused of saying it and he denies it. Shouldn't we remove this post? Am I doing this right?
But you are not for good reason. Just because a person denies something you would not remove a story.
The NY Post story yesterday was clearly in the realm of disinformation (clearly a lie). The Murdoch story is not the same thing.
When there's absolutely NO PROOF of something about Trump it MUST BE BELIEVED
When theres overwhelming proof of anything that supports TRUMP it is to be ignored denied and removed.
If it has not been too obvious for the last few years, it should be by now that Democrats are easily the most fascistic. totalitarian party we have ever had in America. The coordinated takedown of conservative voices on Twitter and Facebook the last two days is scary if you actually value differences of opinion and free speech (and no, not the law itself, but the notion that speech is valuable).
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:48 am
by seacoaster
A friend of mine just sent me this, and I thought I'd share it for a laugh:
"Ok. I think I know how to fix the country. Bear with me.
First, Democrats win presidency and both houses of Congress. This is the hard part.
Second, get rid of filibuster. Easy.
Third, accept a request from Vermont (or other sane and willing state) to split itself into 200 states. Vote to admit all of those states. That only requires an act of Congress under article IV, section 3 of the Constitution. There is some question on whether a state may split itself up, so we may need parts of two states to join up to form new states. California and Vermont seem like the best option. Another viable
alternative is to admit DC not as one state but as 200.
Fourth, pass a law if necessary but hold immediate special elections for the new states, maybe called Vermont-1 through Vermont-200. Seat the legislators.
Fifth, congress proposes constitutional amendments - take your pick, but the gist will be disallowing the minority from permanently enshrining itself with power. Getting rid of electoral college; prohibiting religions from getting a pass on laws of neutral applicability; removing hate speech from 1st amendment; 10 year terms for Supreme Court justices that will be selected by non-political means. National standards and funding for elections and campaigns. Corporations aren’t people for purposes of Bill of Rights. Etc etc. Final amendment will be that upon passage the states will revert to current states, adding DC, Puerto Rico, and overseas territories, each as 1 state. And also the amendment will prohibit the admission of new states thereafter without a supermajority of states agreeing, so Republicans can’t do the same thing in the future.
Sixth, pass all constitutional amendments in Vermont-1 through 200 Legislatures. Other states’ votes are immaterial to 3/4 threshold necessary for amendment.
Seventh, give every state a right to decide to remain in United States or to leave, but only on the condition that if the United States later deems it necessary for its national security, any leaving state must pay the United States for construction of a border wall.
The leaving states by constitutional amendment will be referred to individually and collectively as Qanonia.
I believe all of this is permitted under existing statutes, constitutional provisions, and Supreme Court decisions on Congressional power to admit states."
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:56 am
by holmes435
Income source:
https://apnews.com/article/7b5cf4eec7d5 ... f34d3b7f35
I'm sure someone will come along and complain that Obama's speaking fees and book deals after his election are somehow the same as owning property where diplomats and lobbyists stay at while working inside the White House (among other major legal and moral conflict of interest issues). The projection is amazing. And there's even projection about projection!
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:24 pm
by cradleandshoot
seacoaster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:48 am
A friend of mine just sent me this, and I thought I'd share it for a laugh:
"
Ok. I think I know how to fix the country. Bear with me.
First, Democrats win presidency and both houses of Congress. This is the hard part.
Second, get rid of filibuster. Easy.
Third, accept a request from Vermont (or other sane and willing state) to split itself into 200 states. Vote to admit all of those states. That only requires an act of Congress under article IV, section 3 of the Constitution. There is some question on whether a state may split itself up, so we may need parts of two states to join up to form new states. California and Vermont seem like the best option. Another viable
alternative is to admit DC not as one state but as 200.
Fourth, pass a law if necessary but hold immediate special elections for the new states, maybe called Vermont-1 through Vermont-200. Seat the legislators.
Fifth, congress proposes constitutional amendments - take your pick, but the gist will be disallowing the minority from permanently enshrining itself with power. Getting rid of electoral college; prohibiting religions from getting a pass on laws of neutral applicability; removing hate speech from 1st amendment; 10 year terms for Supreme Court justices that will be selected by non-political means. National standards and funding for elections and campaigns. Corporations aren’t people for purposes of Bill of Rights. Etc etc. Final amendment will be that upon passage the states will revert to current states, adding DC, Puerto Rico, and overseas territories, each as 1 state. And also the amendment will prohibit the admission of new states thereafter without a supermajority of states agreeing, so Republicans can’t do the same thing in the future.
Sixth, pass all constitutional amendments in Vermont-1 through 200 Legislatures. Other states’ votes are immaterial to 3/4 threshold necessary for amendment.
Seventh, give every state a right to decide to remain in United States or to leave, but only on the condition that if the United States later deems it necessary for its national security, any leaving state must pay the United States for construction of a border wall.
The leaving states by constitutional amendment will be referred to individually and collectively as Qanonia.
I believe all of this is permitted under existing statutes, constitutional provisions, and Supreme Court decisions on Congressional power to admit states."
I hope your friend is recovering nicely from the mental breakdown. Trump has that effect on some people. Does he live in Vermont 42 or Vermont 71?
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:29 pm
by seacoaster
cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:24 pm
seacoaster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:48 am
A friend of mine just sent me this, and I thought I'd share it for a laugh:
"
Ok. I think I know how to fix the country. Bear with me.
First, Democrats win presidency and both houses of Congress. This is the hard part.
Second, get rid of filibuster. Easy.
Third, accept a request from Vermont (or other sane and willing state) to split itself into 200 states. Vote to admit all of those states. That only requires an act of Congress under article IV, section 3 of the Constitution. There is some question on whether a state may split itself up, so we may need parts of two states to join up to form new states. California and Vermont seem like the best option. Another viable
alternative is to admit DC not as one state but as 200.
Fourth, pass a law if necessary but hold immediate special elections for the new states, maybe called Vermont-1 through Vermont-200. Seat the legislators.
Fifth, congress proposes constitutional amendments - take your pick, but the gist will be disallowing the minority from permanently enshrining itself with power. Getting rid of electoral college; prohibiting religions from getting a pass on laws of neutral applicability; removing hate speech from 1st amendment; 10 year terms for Supreme Court justices that will be selected by non-political means. National standards and funding for elections and campaigns. Corporations aren’t people for purposes of Bill of Rights. Etc etc. Final amendment will be that upon passage the states will revert to current states, adding DC, Puerto Rico, and overseas territories, each as 1 state. And also the amendment will prohibit the admission of new states thereafter without a supermajority of states agreeing, so Republicans can’t do the same thing in the future.
Sixth, pass all constitutional amendments in Vermont-1 through 200 Legislatures. Other states’ votes are immaterial to 3/4 threshold necessary for amendment.
Seventh, give every state a right to decide to remain in United States or to leave, but only on the condition that if the United States later deems it necessary for its national security, any leaving state must pay the United States for construction of a border wall.
The leaving states by constitutional amendment will be referred to individually and collectively as Qanonia.
I believe all of this is permitted under existing statutes, constitutional provisions, and Supreme Court decisions on Congressional power to admit states."
I hope your friend is recovering nicely from the mental breakdown. Trump has that effect on some people. Does he live in Vermont 42 or Vermont 71?
Actually, the guy is pretty close to genius level smarts. He lives in Oregon. And we're just having fun.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:39 pm
by Peter Brown
cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:24 pm
seacoaster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:48 am
A friend of mine just sent me this, and I thought I'd share it for a laugh:
"
Ok. I think I know how to fix the country. Bear with me.
First, Democrats win presidency and both houses of Congress. This is the hard part.
Second, get rid of filibuster. Easy.
Third, accept a request from Vermont (or other sane and willing state) to split itself into 200 states. Vote to admit all of those states. That only requires an act of Congress under article IV, section 3 of the Constitution. There is some question on whether a state may split itself up, so we may need parts of two states to join up to form new states. California and Vermont seem like the best option. Another viable
alternative is to admit DC not as one state but as 200.
Fourth, pass a law if necessary but hold immediate special elections for the new states, maybe called Vermont-1 through Vermont-200. Seat the legislators.
Fifth, congress proposes constitutional amendments - take your pick, but the gist will be disallowing the minority from permanently enshrining itself with power. Getting rid of electoral college; prohibiting religions from getting a pass on laws of neutral applicability; removing hate speech from 1st amendment; 10 year terms for Supreme Court justices that will be selected by non-political means. National standards and funding for elections and campaigns. Corporations aren’t people for purposes of Bill of Rights. Etc etc. Final amendment will be that upon passage the states will revert to current states, adding DC, Puerto Rico, and overseas territories, each as 1 state. And also the amendment will prohibit the admission of new states thereafter without a supermajority of states agreeing, so Republicans can’t do the same thing in the future.
Sixth, pass all constitutional amendments in Vermont-1 through 200 Legislatures. Other states’ votes are immaterial to 3/4 threshold necessary for amendment.
Seventh, give every state a right to decide to remain in United States or to leave, but only on the condition that if the United States later deems it necessary for its national security, any leaving state must pay the United States for construction of a border wall.
The leaving states by constitutional amendment will be referred to individually and collectively as Qanonia.
I believe all of this is permitted under existing statutes, constitutional provisions, and Supreme Court decisions on Congressional power to admit states."
I hope your friend is recovering nicely from the mental breakdown. Trump has that effect on some people. Does he live in Vermont 42 or Vermont 71?
If Democrats could have their own country, who would they import to perform necessary trade skills like plumbing, policing, construction, engineering, and aviation?
Also, can a society survive if everyone is on welfare or selling insurance to each other?
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:40 pm
by cradleandshoot
Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:39 pm
cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 12:24 pm
seacoaster wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:48 am
A friend of mine just sent me this, and I thought I'd share it for a laugh:
"
Ok. I think I know how to fix the country. Bear with me.
First, Democrats win presidency and both houses of Congress. This is the hard part.
Second, get rid of filibuster. Easy.
Third, accept a request from Vermont (or other sane and willing state) to split itself into 200 states. Vote to admit all of those states. That only requires an act of Congress under article IV, section 3 of the Constitution. There is some question on whether a state may split itself up, so we may need parts of two states to join up to form new states. California and Vermont seem like the best option. Another viable
alternative is to admit DC not as one state but as 200.
Fourth, pass a law if necessary but hold immediate special elections for the new states, maybe called Vermont-1 through Vermont-200. Seat the legislators.
Fifth, congress proposes constitutional amendments - take your pick, but the gist will be disallowing the minority from permanently enshrining itself with power. Getting rid of electoral college; prohibiting religions from getting a pass on laws of neutral applicability; removing hate speech from 1st amendment; 10 year terms for Supreme Court justices that will be selected by non-political means. National standards and funding for elections and campaigns. Corporations aren’t people for purposes of Bill of Rights. Etc etc. Final amendment will be that upon passage the states will revert to current states, adding DC, Puerto Rico, and overseas territories, each as 1 state. And also the amendment will prohibit the admission of new states thereafter without a supermajority of states agreeing, so Republicans can’t do the same thing in the future.
Sixth, pass all constitutional amendments in Vermont-1 through 200 Legislatures. Other states’ votes are immaterial to 3/4 threshold necessary for amendment.
Seventh, give every state a right to decide to remain in United States or to leave, but only on the condition that if the United States later deems it necessary for its national security, any leaving state must pay the United States for construction of a border wall.
The leaving states by constitutional amendment will be referred to individually and collectively as Qanonia.
I believe all of this is permitted under existing statutes, constitutional provisions, and Supreme Court decisions on Congressional power to admit states."
I hope your friend is recovering nicely from the mental breakdown. Trump has that effect on some people. Does he live in Vermont 42 or Vermont 71?
If Democrats could have their own country, who would they import to perform necessary trade skills like plumbing, policing, construction, engineering, and aviation?
Also, can a society survive if everyone is on welfare or selling insurance to each other?
We may find out sooner than you think.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 1:56 pm
by ggait
The leaving states by constitutional amendment will be referred to individually and collectively as Qanonia.
Better name suggestions:
Gilead
Red-istan
Banana Republicana
The Nation of Cracker Barrel
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 2:18 pm
by CU88
Does anyone else find it ironic that it appears that Trump and his people are propagating hacked Russian material once again, breaking the law, in order to label Biden's family a "crime family"?
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:00 pm
by old salt
CU88 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 2:18 pm
Does anyone else find it ironic that it appears that Trump and his people are propagating hacked Russian material once again, breaking the law, in order to label Biden's family a "crime family"?
I'm waiting for detailed reporting which exposes the Russian connection or discredits, in detail, the NY Post story.
The MSM is either playing catch up or simply ignoring the story, while the tech oligarchs censor social media.
Rudy & the NY Post are both in NY. The shop owner is in DE. All (D) jurisdictions. Where are the NY & DE AG's on this ? Why are the NYT & WP not discrediting, in detail, the NY Post stories.
The Biden campaign's non-denial denial is carefully worded. It just says the meeting wasn't on Biden's calendar.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:04 pm
by cradleandshoot
CU88 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 2:18 pm
Does anyone else find it ironic that it appears that Trump and his people are propagating hacked Russian material once again, breaking the law, in order to label Biden's family a "crime family"?
I always remember the FLP code of conduct. It goes something like this... the seriousness of the allegations require a thorough and complete investigation into activities in question. Do a colonoscopy on Hunter Biden. The country needs to drag his ass out in front of the American people and investigate every single thing he did while in his position in Ukraine to make a chitload of money. This needs to be a very complete and thorough colonoscopy that goes all the way up to Hunters secum. Because as we all know... the seriousness of the allegations require it.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:05 pm
by Typical Lax Dad
old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:00 pm
CU88 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 2:18 pm
Does anyone else find it ironic that it appears that Trump and his people are propagating hacked Russian material once again, breaking the law, in order to label Biden's family a "crime family"?
I'm waiting for detailed reporting which exposes the Russian connection or discredits, in detail, the NY Post story.
The MSM is either playing catch up or simply ignoring the story, while the tech oligarchs censor social media.
Rudy & the NY Post are both in NY. The shop owner is in DE. All (D) jurisdictions. Where are the NY & DE AG's on this ? Why are the NYT & WP not discrediting, in detail, the NY Post stories.
The Biden campaign's non-denial denial is carefully worded. It just says the meeting wasn't on Biden's calendar.
Was it in Prague?
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:15 pm
by RedFromMI
old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:00 pm
CU88 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 2:18 pm
Does anyone else find it ironic that it appears that Trump and his people are propagating hacked Russian material once again, breaking the law, in order to label Biden's family a "crime family"?
I'm waiting for detailed reporting which exposes the Russian connection or discredits, in detail, the NY Post story.
The MSM is either playing catch up or simply ignoring the story, while the tech oligarchs censor social media.
Rudy & the NY Post are both in NY. The shop owner is in DE. All (D) jurisdictions. Where are the NY & DE AG's on this ? Why are the NYT & WP not discrediting, in detail, the NY Post stories.
The Biden campaign's non-denial denial is carefully worded. It just says the meeting wasn't on Biden's calendar.
5 Points On Why The New ‘Biden Emails’ Distortion Is So Bogus
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/fivepoint ... s-so-bogus
Summary of article:
1. There are so many red flags - laptop full of stuff dropped off without leaving name/contact, never paid for. Story includes long debunked allegations of why the Ukrainian prosecutor was fired (not to protect Hunter Biden). No way to verify anything the Post reported, and no evidence they tried to verify anything.
2. Widely mocked by the rest of the press after seeing years of the same distortions. Why release now? Data apparently available (PDF metadata) for at least a year.
3. Backstory is preposterous - laptop held from April 2019 to December 2019 then handed over to FBI (subpoena never seen) and Giuliani (why?). Bannon filled the Post in about the story in September this year.
4. Story does not check out. Assertion that Joe Biden lied that he said his son Hunter never asked him about business in Ukraine. Email (likely fake as true given its chain of custody) has nothing to do with any allegation about why Joe Biden pushed to fire the prosecutor.
5. Who is the source of the disinformation? Parallels both Russian disinformation about Burisma (connected with impeachment), and Derkach, the Ukrainian parlementarian sanctioned by US for interfering in the 2020 election. No clear answer here.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:16 pm
by cradleandshoot
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:39 am
6ftstick wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 11:33 am
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:26 am
Peter Brown wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 9:18 am
If I was Head of Twitter Safety, I'd have to remove disslaxx' post, since in fact Rupert Murdoch explicitly denied what a journalist says 'people close to him' said he said. So not only is no one who said he said it on the record, but the one guy on the record is the guy accused of saying it and he denies it. Shouldn't we remove this post? Am I doing this right?
But you are not for good reason. Just because a person denies something you would not remove a story.
The NY Post story yesterday was clearly in the realm of disinformation (clearly a lie). The Murdoch story is not the same thing.
When there's absolutely NO PROOF of something about Trump it MUST BE BELIEVED
When theres overwhelming proof of anything that supports TRUMP it is to be ignored denied and removed.
There is actually more proof that this particular piece of news is manufactured disinformation than real news. But you are not seeing that FACT.
The real problem is there is little that ACTUALLY supports Trump on this.
Very simple and basic question for you, what is the proof you speak of? You gotta link for us or is the proof something you just feel with all your heart. Your being too damn vague here for me to come close to believing you. A cynical person, maybe not me, would say you have reached way up your backside to pull this out. That could explain the foul odor lingering around it.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:26 pm
by cradleandshoot
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:15 pm
old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:00 pm
CU88 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 2:18 pm
Does anyone else find it ironic that it appears that Trump and his people are propagating hacked Russian material once again, breaking the law, in order to label Biden's family a "crime family"?
I'm waiting for detailed reporting which exposes the Russian connection or discredits, in detail, the NY Post story.
The MSM is either playing catch up or simply ignoring the story, while the tech oligarchs censor social media.
Rudy & the NY Post are both in NY. The shop owner is in DE. All (D) jurisdictions. Where are the NY & DE AG's on this ? Why are the NYT & WP not discrediting, in detail, the NY Post stories.
The Biden campaign's non-denial denial is carefully worded. It just says the meeting wasn't on Biden's calendar.
5 Points On Why The New ‘Biden Emails’ Distortion Is So Bogus
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/fivepoint ... s-so-bogus
Summary of article:
1. There are so many red flags - laptop full of stuff dropped off without leaving name/contact, never paid for. Story includes long debunked allegations of why the Ukrainian prosecutor was fired (not to protect Hunter Biden). No way to verify anything the Post reported, and no evidence they tried to verify anything.
2. Widely mocked by the rest of the press after seeing years of the same distortions. Why release now? Data apparently available (PDF metadata) for at least a year.
3. Backstory is preposterous - laptop held from April 2019 to December 2019 then handed over to FBI (subpoena never seen) and Giuliani (why?). Bannon filled the Post in about the story in September this year.
4. Story does not check out. Assertion that Joe Biden lied that he said his son Hunter never asked him about business in Ukraine. Email (likely fake as true given its chain of custody) has nothing to do with any allegation about why Joe Biden pushed to fire the prosecutor.
5. Who is the source of the disinformation? Parallels both Russian disinformation about Burisma (connected with impeachment), and Derkach, the Ukrainian parlementarian sanctioned by US for interfering in the 2020 election. No clear answer here.
The seriousness of the allegations deserve a complete and thorough investigation. You can use the term colonoscopy because that is probably closer to the truth. Where are all those red flags? Why should i give a f**k if the press mocked it? Story does not check out?? where is as Lanny Davis would say... the poooof? Who is the source of the disinformation?? Hence the reason for the colonoscopy. Holy smokes Red you just bulldozed a big ole barge full of horse manure hoping that maybe there is a nugget of gold buried in the pile somewhere. The seriousness of the charges deserve a complete and thorough investigation by the proper legal controlling authorities. I am guessing if ole Joe wins this issue will be suddenly buried so deep it will rest right next to Jimmy Hoffa.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:28 pm
by Typical Lax Dad
cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:26 pm
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:15 pm
old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:00 pm
CU88 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 2:18 pm
Does anyone else find it ironic that it appears that Trump and his people are propagating hacked Russian material once again, breaking the law, in order to label Biden's family a "crime family"?
I'm waiting for detailed reporting which exposes the Russian connection or discredits, in detail, the NY Post story.
The MSM is either playing catch up or simply ignoring the story, while the tech oligarchs censor social media.
Rudy & the NY Post are both in NY. The shop owner is in DE. All (D) jurisdictions. Where are the NY & DE AG's on this ? Why are the NYT & WP not discrediting, in detail, the NY Post stories.
The Biden campaign's non-denial denial is carefully worded. It just says the meeting wasn't on Biden's calendar.
5 Points On Why The New ‘Biden Emails’ Distortion Is So Bogus
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/fivepoint ... s-so-bogus
Summary of article:
1. There are so many red flags - laptop full of stuff dropped off without leaving name/contact, never paid for. Story includes long debunked allegations of why the Ukrainian prosecutor was fired (not to protect Hunter Biden). No way to verify anything the Post reported, and no evidence they tried to verify anything.
2. Widely mocked by the rest of the press after seeing years of the same distortions. Why release now? Data apparently available (PDF metadata) for at least a year.
3. Backstory is preposterous - laptop held from April 2019 to December 2019 then handed over to FBI (subpoena never seen) and Giuliani (why?). Bannon filled the Post in about the story in September this year.
4. Story does not check out. Assertion that Joe Biden lied that he said his son Hunter never asked him about business in Ukraine. Email (likely fake as true given its chain of custody) has nothing to do with any allegation about why Joe Biden pushed to fire the prosecutor.
5. Who is the source of the disinformation? Parallels both Russian disinformation about Burisma (connected with impeachment), and Derkach, the Ukrainian parlementarian sanctioned by US for interfering in the 2020 election. No clear answer here.
The seriousness of the allegations deserve a complete and thorough investigation. You can use the term colonoscopy because that is probably closer to the truth. Where are all those red flags? Why should i give a f**k if the press mocked it? Story does not check out?? where is as Lanny Davis would say... the poooof? Who is the source of the disinformation?? Hence the reason for the colonoscopy. Holy smokes Red you just bulldozed a big ole barge full of horse manure hoping that maybe there is a nugget of gold buried in the pile somewhere. The seriousness of the charges deserve a complete and thorough investigation by the proper legal controlling authorities. I am guessing if ole Joe wins this issue will be suddenly buried so deep it will rest right next to Jimmy Hoffa.
Joe could shoot someone on Avenue of The America’s and it won’t matter.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:30 pm
by old salt
cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:26 pm
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:15 pm
old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:00 pm
CU88 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 2:18 pm
Does anyone else find it ironic that it appears that Trump and his people are propagating hacked Russian material once again, breaking the law, in order to label Biden's family a "crime family"?
I'm waiting for detailed reporting which exposes the Russian connection or discredits, in detail, the NY Post story.
The MSM is either playing catch up or simply ignoring the story, while the tech oligarchs censor social media.
Rudy & the NY Post are both in NY. The shop owner is in DE. All (D) jurisdictions. Where are the NY & DE AG's on this ? Why are the NYT & WP not discrediting, in detail, the NY Post stories.
The Biden campaign's non-denial denial is carefully worded. It just says the meeting wasn't on Biden's calendar.
5 Points On Why The New ‘Biden Emails’ Distortion Is So Bogus
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/fivepoint ... s-so-bogus
Summary of article:
1. There are so many red flags - laptop full of stuff dropped off without leaving name/contact, never paid for. Story includes long debunked allegations of why the Ukrainian prosecutor was fired (not to protect Hunter Biden). No way to verify anything the Post reported, and no evidence they tried to verify anything.
2. Widely mocked by the rest of the press after seeing years of the same distortions. Why release now? Data apparently available (PDF metadata) for at least a year.
3. Backstory is preposterous - laptop held from April 2019 to December 2019 then handed over to FBI (subpoena never seen) and Giuliani (why?). Bannon filled the Post in about the story in September this year.
4. Story does not check out. Assertion that Joe Biden lied that he said his son Hunter never asked him about business in Ukraine. Email (likely fake as true given its chain of custody) has nothing to do with any allegation about why Joe Biden pushed to fire the prosecutor.
5. Who is the source of the disinformation? Parallels both Russian disinformation about Burisma (connected with impeachment), and Derkach, the Ukrainian parlementarian sanctioned by US for interfering in the 2020 election. No clear answer here.
The seriousness of the allegations deserve a complete and thorough investigation. You can use the term colonoscopy because that is probably closer to the truth. Where are all those red flags? Why should i give a f**k if the press mocked it? Story does not check out?? where is as Lanny Davis would say... the poooof? Who is the source of the disinformation?? Hence the reason for the colonoscopy. Holy smokes Red you just bulldozed a big ole barge full of horse manure hoping that maybe there is a nugget of gold buried in the pile somewhere. The seriousness of the charges deserve a complete and thorough investigation by the proper legal controlling authorities. I am guessing if ole Joe wins this issue will be suddenly buried so deep it will rest right next to Jimmy Hoffa.
I'm going to repost & reply in the Facegram & Instabook thread, where it's already under discussion.
Re: 2020 Elections - Dems vs Trumpublicons
Posted: Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:37 pm
by cradleandshoot
Typical Lax Dad wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:28 pm
cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:26 pm
RedFromMI wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:15 pm
old salt wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 3:00 pm
CU88 wrote: ↑Thu Oct 15, 2020 2:18 pm
Does anyone else find it ironic that it appears that Trump and his people are propagating hacked Russian material once again, breaking the law, in order to label Biden's family a "crime family"?
I'm waiting for detailed reporting which exposes the Russian connection or discredits, in detail, the NY Post story.
The MSM is either playing catch up or simply ignoring the story, while the tech oligarchs censor social media.
Rudy & the NY Post are both in NY. The shop owner is in DE. All (D) jurisdictions. Where are the NY & DE AG's on this ? Why are the NYT & WP not discrediting, in detail, the NY Post stories.
The Biden campaign's non-denial denial is carefully worded. It just says the meeting wasn't on Biden's calendar.
5 Points On Why The New ‘Biden Emails’ Distortion Is So Bogus
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/fivepoint ... s-so-bogus
Summary of article:
1. There are so many red flags - laptop full of stuff dropped off without leaving name/contact, never paid for. Story includes long debunked allegations of why the Ukrainian prosecutor was fired (not to protect Hunter Biden). No way to verify anything the Post reported, and no evidence they tried to verify anything.
2. Widely mocked by the rest of the press after seeing years of the same distortions. Why release now? Data apparently available (PDF metadata) for at least a year.
3. Backstory is preposterous - laptop held from April 2019 to December 2019 then handed over to FBI (subpoena never seen) and Giuliani (why?). Bannon filled the Post in about the story in September this year.
4. Story does not check out. Assertion that Joe Biden lied that he said his son Hunter never asked him about business in Ukraine. Email (likely fake as true given its chain of custody) has nothing to do with any allegation about why Joe Biden pushed to fire the prosecutor.
5. Who is the source of the disinformation? Parallels both Russian disinformation about Burisma (connected with impeachment), and Derkach, the Ukrainian parlementarian sanctioned by US for interfering in the 2020 election. No clear answer here.
The seriousness of the allegations deserve a complete and thorough investigation. You can use the term colonoscopy because that is probably closer to the truth. Where are all those red flags? Why should i give a f**k if the press mocked it? Story does not check out?? where is as Lanny Davis would say... the poooof? Who is the source of the disinformation?? Hence the reason for the colonoscopy. Holy smokes Red you just bulldozed a big ole barge full of horse manure hoping that maybe there is a nugget of gold buried in the pile somewhere. The seriousness of the charges deserve a complete and thorough investigation by the proper legal controlling authorities. I am guessing if ole Joe wins this issue will be suddenly buried so deep it will rest right next to Jimmy Hoffa.
Joe could shoot someone on Avenue of The America’s and it won’t matter.
You think ole Joe could actually hit someone?