Discussion
captain_cynic said:
F1GTRUeno said:
It does seem like you want there to be dirt as validation for your posts and nothing we say or link to in the process of trying to argue against you is going to sway your already locked in position that there MUST be dirt because we aren't being told about it.
It is a waste of time to try and argue with sense and reason with these conspiracy theorists. They've utterly convinced themselves of "the truth" that any attempt to break their cognitive dissonance with verifiable fact will be met with violent resistance. For them,
The past was erased, the erasure forgotten, the lie became truth.
Just mock them as they aren't worth any more effort.
F1GTRUeno said:
It does seem like you want there to be dirt as validation for your posts and nothing we say or link to in the process of trying to argue against you is going to sway your already locked in position that there MUST be dirt because we aren't being told about it.
On the contrary, it's not my position that's locked in.It's those posters who know and are asserting it's not true for all manner of reasons. Trump bad, the Russians, Trump family corruption, even some genius babbling on about warranties and serial numbers, the list goes on.
Even Byker has said the photos and some mails are real, I wonder how we can tell which are real and which aren't.
All the whatabouterry, squirrels and tangential links are not enough to be able to 100% convince me that this doesn't warrant a deeper look.
If it all turns out to be nonsense, then fair enough move on. But 'I don't want it to be true so it can't be' doesn't work for me and I'm surprised that it does for others.
Edit: What has been said or linked do you think puts this whole thing to bed? I will look at them again to see if I can be satisfied.
Edited by vetrof on Thursday 22 October 08:18
captain_cynic said:
Sam.M said:
Well, do let us know what you find after doing "research"
Don't do this.... Give us your data, publish your methodology and let us see if we can verify your conclusions independently. That is how research works.
That's pretty much all I'm asking for.
vetrof said:
captain_cynic said:
Sam.M said:
Well, do let us know what you find after doing "research"
Don't do this.... Give us your data, publish your methodology and let us see if we can verify your conclusions independently. That is how research works.
That's pretty much all I'm asking for.
You're making the claim, the onus is on you to support it.
Others who have supported their conclusions with data have not reached the same conclusions as you.
Also, another axiom from actual scientists... Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
vetrof said:
On the contrary, it's not my position that's locked in.
It's those posters who know and are asserting it's not true for all manner of reasons. Trump bad, the Russians, Trump family corruption, even some genius babbling on about warranties and serial numbers, the list goes on.
Even Byker has said the photos and some mails are real, I wonder how we can tell which are real and which aren't.
All the whatabouterry, squirrels and tangential links are not enough to be able to 100% convince me that this doesn't warrant a deeper look.
If it all turns out to be nonsense, then fair enough move on. But 'I don't want it to be true so it can't be' doesn't work for me and I'm surprised that it does for others.
My bold for emphasis. On the first - I tried to explain earlier how we'd know but you were pretty flippantly dismissive. The person who currently claims to hold the raw data (Rudy) can provide that to reputable independent sources of his choosing that can then verify if an email is real or not from the meta data, and share that analysis with the rest of the world for scrutiny. He so far has not done so, and instead has ONLY provided what is essentially a print out of it (a PDF) which contains absolutely no meta data that could prove legitimacy.It's those posters who know and are asserting it's not true for all manner of reasons. Trump bad, the Russians, Trump family corruption, even some genius babbling on about warranties and serial numbers, the list goes on.
Even Byker has said the photos and some mails are real, I wonder how we can tell which are real and which aren't.
All the whatabouterry, squirrels and tangential links are not enough to be able to 100% convince me that this doesn't warrant a deeper look.
If it all turns out to be nonsense, then fair enough move on. But 'I don't want it to be true so it can't be' doesn't work for me and I'm surprised that it does for others.
On the second - what kind of deeper look do you mean? People on the internet digging in to it? You know that these hard drives have been in the possession of the FBI since December 2019, yeah? Isn't that deep enough? I'd personally be quite keen to hear what the FBI's assessment contains, but since its almost been a year with no indictments, I'm not expecting much there. But in mean time, if that doesn't satisfy you and want other intrepid homespun investigators to look into it for you, then that again would require Giuliani to release the raw data. What part of this do you not get?
So when a source won't provide news outlets with verifiable evidence, those press outlets will refuse to break the story. When one outlet decides to debase themselves - to the point where the author won't even put his name on it, falsely name a second person as a co-author, and then take a byline from a third person willingly who is a diehard Bannon/Stone/Hannity fangirl - other aggregating platforms such as Twitter or Facebook have to decide whether they want to be responsible for giving something unlimited amounts of air that might turn out to be complete lies. Why would they want to be complicit in that?
Had there been a media story on Hunter Biden that ran thanks to access to the slightest bit of verifiable evidence, then they wouldn't have taken any action to suppress the story at all.
pinchmeimdreamin said:
So in an attempt to distance this thread from the Trump thread,
Can anyone point out 3 stories ( not conspiracy theories) that SM/MSM is hiding ?
1) The accusations of sexual misconduct by Biden with far more evidence than against KavanaughCan anyone point out 3 stories ( not conspiracy theories) that SM/MSM is hiding ?
2) The opposing views on covid, only Doctors and Scientists who follow the narrative.
3) Any serious look into Epstein's "Suicide".
dasigty said:
1) The accusations of sexual misconduct by Biden with far more evidence than against Kavanaugh
2) The opposing views on covid, only Doctors and Scientists who follow the narrative.
3) Any serious look into Epstein's "Suicide".
1. They're not hiding those stories. They're simply not giving much time to them. Because they're bullst.2) The opposing views on covid, only Doctors and Scientists who follow the narrative.
3) Any serious look into Epstein's "Suicide".
Countdown said:
dasigty said:
1) The accusations of sexual misconduct by Biden with far more evidence than against Kavanaugh
2) The opposing views on covid, only Doctors and Scientists who follow the narrative.
3) Any serious look into Epstein's "Suicide".
1. They're not hiding those stories. They're simply not giving much time to them. Because they're bullst.2) The opposing views on covid, only Doctors and Scientists who follow the narrative.
3) Any serious look into Epstein's "Suicide".
Reputable news agencies need to worry about their reputation. Printing easily disproved lies is not conducive to that.
There's no conspiracy to hide the truth... Just a bunch of conspiracy theorists trying to hide from the truth.
dasigty said:
1) The accusations of sexual misconduct by Biden with far more evidence than against Kavanaugh
2) The opposing views on covid, only Doctors and Scientists who follow the narrative.
3) Any serious look into Epstein's "Suicide".
1) Trump has full power of federal government available. Therefore he has had almost four years time to do something about it.2) The opposing views on covid, only Doctors and Scientists who follow the narrative.
3) Any serious look into Epstein's "Suicide".
2) Like Nigerian doctor from Texas, Dr Immanuel?
3) Trump is on top of this one also.
captain_cynic said:
Countdown said:
dasigty said:
1) The accusations of sexual misconduct by Biden with far more evidence than against Kavanaugh
2) The opposing views on covid, only Doctors and Scientists who follow the narrative.
3) Any serious look into Epstein's "Suicide".
1. They're not hiding those stories. They're simply not giving much time to them. Because they're bullst.2) The opposing views on covid, only Doctors and Scientists who follow the narrative.
3) Any serious look into Epstein's "Suicide".
Reputable news agencies need to worry about their reputation. Printing easily disproved lies is not conducive to that.
There's no conspiracy to hide the truth... Just a bunch of conspiracy theorists trying to hide from the truth.
The way they have behaved in the past few years as be shocking
Years of Russia and Trump
The Kavanaugh nonsense
The Covington students disgrace
Jussie Smollett joke
Mainly peaceful protest crap,
It goes on and on.
I don't have a problem with them obviously having a narrative and being biased. It's when they claim they are not and delusional or intentional dishonest people defend them.
Edited by Not-The-Messiah on Thursday 22 October 13:58
Just ONE example of current FAKE news.
The headline...Politico 10/19/20
Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say
More than 50 former intelligence officials signed a letter casting doubt on the provenance of a New York Post story on the former vice president's son.
3/4 into the story... "We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement,”.
dasigty said:
Just ONE example of current FAKE news.
The headline...Politico 10/19/20
Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say
More than 50 former intelligence officials signed a letter casting doubt on the provenance of a New York Post story on the former vice president's son.
3/4 into the story... "We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement,”.
What part are you struggling with?The headline...Politico 10/19/20
Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say
More than 50 former intelligence officials signed a letter casting doubt on the provenance of a New York Post story on the former vice president's son.
3/4 into the story... "We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement,”.
thewarlock said:
dasigty said:
Just ONE example of current FAKE news.
The headline...Politico 10/19/20
Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say
More than 50 former intelligence officials signed a letter casting doubt on the provenance of a New York Post story on the former vice president's son.
3/4 into the story... "We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement,”.
What part are you struggling with?The headline...Politico 10/19/20
Hunter Biden story is Russian disinfo, dozens of former intel officials say
More than 50 former intelligence officials signed a letter casting doubt on the provenance of a New York Post story on the former vice president's son.
3/4 into the story... "We want to emphasize that we do not know if the emails, provided to the New York Post by President Trump’s personal attorney Rudy Giuliani, are genuine or not and that we do not have evidence of Russian involvement,”.
So
a) It is Russian disinfo say the intel officials.
b) well its not definitely but we are casting doubt on it being legit
c) actually scratch that we have no evidence that Russia was involved at all.
Not-The-Messiah said:
The way they have behaved in the past few years as be shocking
Years of Russia and Trump
Are you aware of/have you read The Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee report into Russia's interference in the 2016 election? It's over 1,000 pages, and I assume you have not read it, but it's pretty damning for team trump. So was the Mueller report, despite Barr's efforts to totally misrepresent it. Have you read that?Years of Russia and Trump
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff