Agreed. Only real use for tweets is to link something from more credible sources. In that case I would simply bypass a tweet storm and post a link directly.
thats why i think its weak to look at tweets and op-eds and cry fake news. the actual news goes through more rigorous editorial standards and vetting. sometimes they still get things wrong, in which case they should retract and correct
djohn is a tweetbot so i have no doubt hed had posted a bunch of theseWhat percent of those do you think were posted here to bolster one’s position? I’m thinking around 75%.
i have consistently said people shouldnt be getting their news from tweets, have i not?
Agreed. Only real use for tweets is to link something from more credible sources. In that case I would simply bypass a tweet storm and post a link directly.
I’m not crying about fake news I’m laughing at how ing wrong all these national security writers/lawyers/political pundits got it so wrong. Twitter is a very influential platform and it’s used to try to shape the public narrative on a daily basis.
I’m not comparing it to actual news so instead of trying to debate that why don’t you just sit back loosen up and laugh at them with me
So a report hundreds of pages long boils down to 25 seconds of stillted ass questioning from some piece of Republican in congress? Not watching it.
GTFO.
the narrative isn't one I like
Actually not a single question or word from a Republican in Congress it’s 25 seconds of Horowitz. Still not watching it?
Could you project any harder right now?
Watched it. Nothing really new. It is merely the narrative you want to push, just like those you decry as being wrong.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 12-11-2019 at 07:56 PM. Reason: rule one
Who would have thought the Obama appointed IG would be helping me of all people to push a narrative
lets not pretend just earlier in this thread you weren't calling the WaPo and NYT articles (not tweets) fake news when they gave the overview of what the IG report conclusions would be
but arite i'll throw you a bone we can look back at things somebody else got wrong based on reading or misreading tweets
Talk about an ironic post. Given your derision of those who had the nerve to speak truth to power for the corrupt wanna-be dictator you seem to be working to serve.
The people who devote their lives to public service are so ethical and competent, you have a hard time comprehending them. Rather than seeing them as what they say they are, you view them through some stilted filter of whatever echo chamber you seem to get your information from.
You would do well to put some serious effort into learning critical thinking processes. Your lack of critical thinking has led you to some serious errors that you don't seem to be learning anything from. We have pointed them out to you repeatedly, but you have not given any indication that you have the self-awareness to re-visit your thinking processes.
You would do well to put some effort into moral reasoning. But that goes for most people. I think if you did you might see the echo chamber of cynicism for what it is.
I said I was wary of those articles specifically because of the authors and their previous reporting on the Russia investigation.
And djohn is too easy of a target. Seriously starting to feel bad for the guy.
I devoted 8 years of my life to public service I can comprehend them just fine
I called the Trump/Russia hoax and FISA abuse. My critical thinking is fine. You’re projecting again.
i think you're using hoax pretty loosely. it was a legitimate investigation that ultimately didnt produce evidence to support charges. not the first time that ever happened
your ankle-biting asshole is WRONG on both
Last edited by boutons_deux; 12-11-2019 at 09:21 PM.
When using hoax I’m referring to the Trump/Russia narrative that was pushed for 2+ years. Called the investigation results as well. Along with the Steele dossier being bull . I just find it hilarious when RG goes on these holier than thou rants while refusing to see his lack of critical thinking and echo chamber sources are what caused him to buy into the false narratives in the first place.
Why do you need to use Ginger software to type?
what i mean is its hard to call it a hoax just because it didnt lead to charges being pressed. there was still a legitimate investigation into it. wasnt something the fbi concocted just to nail trump
Might want to pump the brakes on that until you hear what Barr and Durham found out in Rome. This thing is far from over. Some here will laugh at me for saying this like they always do and down the road I’ll get to on them like I always do.
Comey vindicated
I’ve always respected Wallace and I hope he makes Comey answer for this bull on Sunday.
again, depends... vindicated as to what? as to the claims that he was plotting to take down trump and invented a bogus investigation? yeah. as to the claims that the fbi did nothing wrong throughout the process? nope
well, they knew the dossier was unverified. thats different than knowing the claims had specifically been refuted.
i think wallace will grill him generally as to the report and all the wrongdoing
We know Page was on the receiving end of the FISA applications. That doesn’t mean he was wronged.
The problem with Barr and Durham is that they’re politically attached to Trump.
That’s why the IGC investigation always had more value, whatever the result.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)