Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 03/06/2020 in all areas

  1. It's simple. Project veritas puts out actual statements. you can complain about the cuts, but how many of the videos that have been contested in court have not stood up to the test? In fact, just this week, ABC, a company that once tried to spin the veritas videos as false, took them seriously enough to suspend an employee that got veritas'd. In addition, they have won over 200 case, that's not "a little", that's a slam pretty much each and every time somebody steps to them. 200+ to 1. You need a little more than that to disprove them as a legit outlet. Unless you are also going to hold literally every single news outlet to that exact standard, which you would have to, as they have even more editors and quality checkers, meaning they should have fewer flaws overall than veritas. the bar is 1 retraction, Feel free to name even one outlet in existence with zero retractions to its' name. And then you can use only that outlet ever if your argument is that even one fail out of over 200 battles should not legitimize them. Yet they couldn't even find a single crime to pin him on for the articles. Several congressional scholars, and several lawyers, all stepped up to defend the president on this one, and the democrats even lost a senator over trying to impeach along party lines, when there was zero chance of it mattering (they needed 67 votes in the senate for it to work. they got something like 48). Drop it dude, you already got your "impeachment" and it did more harm than good for your party. he's been "impeached" along party lines. whoopee. Did you ignore the videos, and article, where an antifa protestor actively brags about causing that particular incident? i'd bet winter disaproved of the life lost, but also understands how circumstance works. And your argument had better not be "This one guy who caused a single death in what could clearly be seen as an accident, is in any way worse than these dozens of cases where this group specifically takes actions that could easily kill far more innocent people purposefully, persistently and consistently". You have one guy, who we have clear evidence pointing towards being partially provoked into the actions he took, versus people who after writing a manifesto, have actively tried to firebomb a republican building(s), And literally shot at both border patrol and republican official. Antifa, and people who sympathize with them, do not have a lower body count for lack of trying. stop trying to play that game. It's stupid, and you should already know this by now So you are ignoring the corruption of the DNC within the country to try defending a video of biden actively bragging about partaking in corruption? We sat through several YEARS of the democratic party bullshitting their way through a false investigation about a foreign power engaging in election meddling. But trump wants a single event investigated and the world's on fire for you? Get out of here with that mess. We got a 3 year russian investigation and you didn't say shit, we have literal video evidence of biden bragging about his corruption and the world's ending? No. Did you even watch the videos? Here, i timestamped it for you: 0:28 - 0:39 and 12:05-12:22 in particular. for the comey one. Comey was wrong, he tries to spin it right after, as if he were talking about an unseating coup, or claiming "nothing they were accused of was true" when the video itself clearly has him admitting that the steel dossier was a shit article and that article was the foundation of the investigation renewal several times. On top of him trying to claim there was no misconduct, when the only reason they haven't slapped the whole thing with misconduct is because, as horowitz stated, they can't tell if it was intent or stupidity. The steele report does nothing for his arguments, it takes down several of them simply by how it was used, and you claimed it had practically nothing to do with the investigation back when the investigation was going on, when the interview here tells us the exact opposite. On top of that, cohen clearly overlooked several major issues in the report on review, whenever he dealt with it, yet continues to flounder around denying even the clear comments proving his arguments wrong. Cohen is full of it, and then i know you ignored the second video if you screwed up that badly on the wiretap claim. Barr directly stated that a member(s) of the trump party was spied on, he just couldn't openly declare it as either illegal or justified. On top of that, we KNOW paul manafort, a prominent trump party leader in 2016, was wire tapped, and that he had a residence in trump tower that was tapped. Yeah, he lived in trump tower at the time of tapping. The claim that the fbi wiretapped the trump party is an allegation that is proven by the existence of paul manafort having been on trumps team while he was tapped, and the allegation of trump tower being tapped is proven by manafort having been wiretapped at his place of residence, and his place of residence (at the time) being trump tower. Now if the argument is that "they were investigating manafort over something else" or "The wiretapping wasn't illegally done" then you can try to make it, but there is no doubt that the FBI wiretapped a member of trumps campaign, in the trump tower. You can have the british bits, even if the steel dossier was from a former m16 member. even without it, Comey still fucked up, and refuses to admit it outright. No it wasn't smart. She flat out robbed him, and instead of challenging her like someone who was trying to win a fair game would, he decided to kiss up to her, but we all know the results of that now. Hilary lost, even after cheating her way to the top. Maybe this time he'll learn his lesson, but i doubt it. and slight fact you may have forgotten, but in 2016 i was actually more of a bernie fan than a trump fan. All this is coming from someone who would have wanted bernie in 2016, and vocally shit on hilarry for stealing it from him, but I moved on. Bernie had his shot, he blew it, and if he tries it again, I am telling you that he will lose. Socialism is not as popular as his supporters would have you believe, especially when (in any context) his supporters are advocating and continuously committing acts of violence. Yeah he's republican? So A republican can just say they can or will do something and you'll take them at their word so long as it hurts the trump train? Get over it. The republican who made the claim was both wrong and an idiot. There was already movement to pardon assange, why would anybody need to make a bribe at that point? And why do so by asking for something that assange has already done? Speaking of russia though, Did you forget that bernie has advocated for soviet russia several times, and neither condemns nor revokes his support of the regime. In fact, literally just 4-5 days ago, at the last debate, the dude unironically made the "This one terrible dictator did all this, but at least he got this one thing right" argument via his "Castro made the literacy rate rise" comment. other notable comments include (paraphrased) "Venezuela (2016) has a wonderful system" and "(What soviet russia had were Mandatory) bread lines are a good thing". And yes, i can keep going with quotes that bernie made. several of the horrible regimes he supporter collapsed almost right after he praised them. Trust me on this. if bernie runs, trump will either come close to, or break, reelection records. The articles of impeachment didn't EXIST during the russia investigation. You spent that entire time trying to claim that the steel dossier wasn't a key point of the investigation, and comey himself couldn't deny that the steel dossier, even after being found false, was used to renew the investigation. Go ahead, tell me again that the investigation wasn't based on a false premise, when the fisa renewal itself was based on a false premise. Tims' own opinions are not the same as the actual articles he uses. Yes, tim has bias, He clearly admits as much several times a week and tells his listeners to use other sources to keep balanced views. In fact, it's one of the things people on his own channel often say to him as well. Your argument at the start of the ti pool discussion was "Tim pool is not a legit source" as if the articles he uses are false. Now do you want to change that to something like "Tim pool has bias and that makes his sources invalid"? You clearly tried to play the game as if tim pool were not a legit source, if that is not your claim, then stop playing like me using pool vids somehow isn't a valid source. if your argument is he's biased, yeah. He is. Every channel has that. Who cares so long as the articles are legit. you don't see me reaming politico and buzzfeed like you try to do with tim, even though they're obviously far left leaning. Jose is an idiot. an absolute idiot. But let me explain, because you seem to have been infected by him. Tim has AN ENTIRE CHANNEL covering the kinds of things he talked about in that video. Videos pointing out that society has a clear bias towards women, and articles proving the assertion he made. Remember that. Jose decided to debate tims' views under the microscope, and he didn't even try to go for a hard one. He arguably picked the simplest one he could. Tim has videos using articles that contrast mens treatment in courts, for both crimes, alimony, accusations, and custody, and they all back his assertions and use legit sources. He can have the point he makes about tim not being on point when he brings women, in, but tim has video after video that backs his assertions. Hell, you can go the timcast page where you will see video after video of tim making similar arguments on several topics, using article after article in video after video. Stephen frye is an ass about it, but he is fighting using the very laws that exist on the books, to point out the flaws of those laws when it comes to mens rights in both law and society. While what tim thinks is irrelevant to that particular article, tims own views overall are just that, his own views. You can isolate points all you like, but jose seems to have ignored that people who are not him have views that he does not have. Jose also clearly doesn't understand that all you have to do to backup to tims claim is to look at the channel, which has videos going back years demonstrating the exact same thing that he's claiming in htis one. Yeah, he read a single article in that video, but he has several other articles in the same day, and dozens of others in the same week, making all manner of valid points. it's a channel, the history of videos proves the point tim makes there. to use one exemplary example: (EDIT: 3-2-2020; ...For some reason the youtube link killed several paragraphs beneath this link when it activated, but the point was essentially: Tim tells you several times in that video, that he is clearly biased, and that's yet another mark in his favor to me. He knows that his own views are skewed, but he is often willing to accept, or at the very least understand, that people have different opinions than him, and encourages other s to go out and seek those views to get a proper perspective. He may attack ideas, but he rarely attacks people, and unlike many of his ideological opponents, he never attacks people, nor does he condone attacking people. I said it better the first time, but it's been several days since then, and for the life of me i can't remember how i said it the first time.) she won popular vote huh? well, seeing as we already pointed out the flaws in the tim is not a source argument, let's go for this vid, reading the article but ignoring the tim: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6bQBEjkdT3 There are counties with hella unorganized voter rolls, and the argument against organizing them on the democrat side is muh racism (just try and find me any article that defends keeping the voter rolls untidied that doesn't try to tie race or sexism or some other character attack into it). There are legitimate arguments for fixing the voter registration rolls, in fact, fixing it would be the common sense thing to do if you want to streamline the process for everyone, but instead? We have counties that have more votes than eligible population, and more voters than the whole population. You do know the case was not ruled in favor of any side right? You also know that judge chupp admitted to not even reading the arguments before dismissing charges and trying to get it hushed right? and that the case is still ongoing right (in fact, funimation just tried to get and extension and ron/rial just missed her deadline in the case as well, damaging her own )? to claim that's a loss is to ignore how litigation works on all levels, and to pretend that retrials are some new concept all of a sudden, sit down before you overhype yourself yet, the case isn't over. Oh? People calling bernie a russian asset? Sounds like another candidate i heard of this one time... can't remember the name. Must not be that important. in other news, Trump is overflowing on the campaign trails, and competing with record numbers for reelection primaries, even though people don't even have to vote for him. This is just a reelection campaign. but don't worry, people aren't getting complacent, we already know the DNC cheats. Sleeping in is not how trump will get reelected. Also, bernie seems to be losing south carolina after bernie praised a cuban dictator. also, bernies has, several times alienated his own members via statements, has had a literal heart attack, and failed to condemn the near perpetual violence of his supporters. If you want to support him, fine, but he really isn't looking like a strong candidate imo. Either way, if you support him, best keep an eye out. The DNC has already shown they will cheat him to win. Unlike trump, your candidate has to fight his own party to get ahead. Comey himself, has admitted it, the steel dossier was used to renew the fisa, and on top of that, Horowitz is in the video, directly stating that the steel dossier was used heavily. The hill is straight up wrong, just like politico. My video was december 15th, your article is the 11th, the horowitz report was released on the 11th in other words, your article was likely bunked by the time my own video surfaced, and in either case, my video is direct from the horses mouth. you know what else is from horowits' mouth that your link ignored? That is horowitz's own mouth. Affirming that the fisa was gained using the steele dossier. Right from his mouth, and lied about via omission thanks to your articles. On top of that? The FBI knew page was an CIA agent, which is one of the parts that destroys the steel dossier. Once more nullifying the validity of the renewals, via omission of relevant facts to the case. Any other bunk articles you wanna bring out?
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...