posted by QuakerOats
Witch hunt is essentially going after somebody when there is no ‘there’ there.
Properly investigating a crime that has been committed and publicly admitted to, is not a witch hunt.
Take care.
What crime?
posted by iclfan2So anyone see the crazy/ hoaxer who stood up in an AOC meeting and said we should be eating babies to prevent climate change? LOL https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HULW-ODeqLg
Before you say it's completely crazy and obvious, some loony "scientists" have already suggested it... https://www.businessinsider.com/cannibalism-eating-human-flesh-climate-change-2019-9
Hoaxer or not......AOC did absolutely nothing to stop it. She just went on with talking points
posted by SpockHoaxer or not......AOC did absolutely nothing to stop it. She just went on with talking points
Of course she did. She's a muppet who's been ordered to stay on script if she wants to remain the chosen one. A lot of politicians are a lot more like Ron Burgundy than we realize.
posted by SpockWhat crime?
Biden’s felonious bribery of a foreign government.
Follow the bouncing ball.
posted by iclfan2She said mentally unstable, I went with retarded.
LOL. No doubt triggered the insensitivity meter. :)
Fred Phelps was a prophet. Change my mind!
*skips away*
So a woman, Trish Paytas, identifies as a "trans gay man indentifying as female". I mean, can we get any more stupid than this?
Does it speak Russian, in French?
posted by CenterBHSFanSo a woman, Trish Paytas, identifies as a "trans gay man indentifying as female". I mean, can we get any more stupid than this?
So wait ... a person born a woman, transitioned to male, identifies as a woman, and is gay?
posted by O-TrapSo wait ... a person born a woman, transitioned to male, identifies as a woman, and is gay?
posted by O-TrapSo wait ... a person born a woman, transitioned to male, identifies as a woman, and is gay?
I understood it to be a woke way of saying "straight female".
So a key witness in that Amber Guyger trial was murdered, and the twitterverse immediately began to claim it was a hit for payback testifying against a white cop....turns out it was just a drug deal gone bad.
You know, because common sense would tell you if it was a hit that's supposed to be done BEFORE he testifies.
posted by gutSo a key witness in that Amber Guyger trial was murdered, and the twitterverse immediately began to claim it was a hit for payback testifying against a white cop....turns out it was just a drug deal gone bad.
You know, because common sense would tell you if it was a hit that's supposed to be done BEFORE he testifies.
Common sense would also tell you to wait to see the facts.
posted by gutI understood it to be a woke way of saying "straight female".
Sweet lord, that's confusing. It's like transgendered inception.
Transception.
It's interesting how Biden keeps talking about Trump/Ukraine....but can't seem to come up with a good explanation for Hunter's business dealings in China and Ukraine. I wonder why that is?
posted by gutIt's interesting how Biden keeps talking about Trump/Ukraine....but can't seem to come up with a good explanation for Hunter's business dealings in China and Ukraine. I wonder why that is?
Because there isn't one.
posted by gutIt's interesting how Biden keeps talking about Trump/Ukraine....but can't seem to come up with a good explanation for Hunter's business dealings in China and Ukraine. I wonder why that is?
Cuz it was debunked.
Right?
posted by Dr Winston O'BoogieBecause there isn't one.
Lol
“Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told reporters Thursday his controversial July call with President Trump involved no bribe, blackmail or quid pro quo, as impeachment-minded Democrats claim.”
LOL – the dems star witness says there was no wrongdoing. But let’s impeach anyhow because we at least hoped for a crime. Good God. It’s almost Stalin-esque --- guilty till you prove yourself innocent (and without due process to defend yourself). The Soviets are sitting in our House of Representatives.
posted by QuakerOats“Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky told reporters Thursday his controversial July call with President Trump involved no bribe, blackmail or quid pro quo, as impeachment-minded Democrats claim.”
LOL – the dems star witness says there was no wrongdoing. But let’s impeach anyhow because we at least hoped for a crime. Good God. It’s almost Stalin-esque --- guilty till you prove yourself innocent (and without due process to defend yourself). The Soviets are sitting in our House of Representatives.
Honestly, what do you expect the Ukranian guy to say? He knows which side of his bread is buttered. I'm not in favor of impeachment either, but I wouldn't call this guy's assertion particularly helpful.
There are no "Soviets" in the congress. There are people in there you disagree with, fine. But that' not new. It's how our system has always operated. The difference today is the 24 hour news and commentary cycle. It immerses people into the ugly mechanisms of things. If you turn that shit off and ignore it, the world will go on quite fine and you will safe all of our disgust (feigned or real).
posted by Dr Winston O'BoogieThe difference today is the 24 hour news and commentary cycle.
The difference today is the blindly partisan nature of almost all media. Forget cable news - the traditional media outlets are no longer objective, and really not even journalists anymore.
I think the public comments Trump made are impeachable (nevermind the long list of other comments and tweets that, taken together, probably amount to impeachable). But it's disgusting to watch conservative outlets defend Trump, while the liberal outlets ignore/defend Biden.
Trump is exposing hypocrisy and corruption, alright. Just probably not in the way he and his supporters expected.
posted by gutThe difference today is the blindly partisan nature of almost all media. Forget cable news - the traditional media outlets are no longer objective, and really not even journalists anymore.
I think the public comments Trump made are impeachable (nevermind the long list of other comments and tweets that, taken together, probably amount to impeachable). But it's disgusting to watch conservative outlets defend Trump, while the liberal outlets ignore/defend Biden.
Trump is exposing hypocrisy and corruption, alright. Just probably not in the way he and his supporters expected.
I agree with your comments except that the media is partisan "today". Throughout history, the media has always been partisan in some way. The idea that once upon a time the news media was objective is a myth. It's produced by people who are all opinionated. The difference today is we have to hear about it 24/7. Both sides complaining about the bias of the other.
posted by Dr Winston O'BoogieI agree with your comments except that the media is partisan "today". Throughout history, the media has always been partisan in some way. The idea that once upon a time the news media was objective is a myth.
I disagree. Opinions used to be reserved for the Opinion/Editorial section. Today, the news is opinion and the opinions are straight-up partisan propaganda. "Just the facts" doesn't appear to exist in most reporters' purview. Definitely not true 25 years ago.
And the actual quality/mastery of most Opinion has declined precipitously. A good persuasion piece honestly addresses the best arguments on the other side. You'll rarely see that today. Most Opinion pieces today are built around strawmen and non-sequitors. The NYT, at least its editorials, is practically a tabloid now.
posted by gutThe difference today is the blindly partisan nature of almost all media. Forget cable news - the traditional media outlets are no longer objective, and really not even journalists anymore.
I think the public comments Trump made are impeachable (nevermind the long list of other comments and tweets that, taken together, probably amount to impeachable). But it's disgusting to watch conservative outlets defend Trump, while the liberal outlets ignore/defend Biden.
Trump is exposing hypocrisy and corruption, alright. Just probably not in the way he and his supporters expected.
I'd say part of that is because, with him, it's not that hypocrisy and corruption are a problem, it's that they are a problem when he's not the beneficiary of them. Hell, this morning, I saw a headline concerning Trump ripping on Fox News because they have a poll up saying that 51% support impeachment and removal, basically lamenting how, in the "old days", they were on his side. It's kind of a microcosm of the big issue of the time where the public, being generally stupid, would rather have news saying what they want to hear instead of what actually is factual. Kind of the QQ SYNDROME, where he'll blast the media for being deranged and biased constantly, then put up a link to a story/column on a conservatively-biased site and then, if anyone mocks the source, will deliver a bitchy "gotta attack the messenger if you don't like the message" post, conveniently ignoring how that's what he does constantly.
It's really a quicksand pit that I don't see any way out of, as people by nature seem to just want to hear whatever supports their bias and notions, regardless of how much factual merit it has. It's why the left harps on every single thing Trump does until it's far beyond losing all meaning and it's why the CCs and QQs of the world harp on the Clintons/Obamas/Bidens as if they believe that if they can claim criminal acts by them 1 billion times, something will actually stick.
Quid Pro Joe's campaign is deader than Corn Pop. The latest is he's crying to NYT for writing an article about Hunter's pay-for-play profiteering.
Fits really well with the discussion on partisan media. Only a Democrat could write the NYT and say "c'mon man, who's side are you on anyway?"