Fox and MAGA News Expose
I watched Laura Ingram, Tucker Carlson, and Sean Hannity last night. They have changed from defending Trump, to attacking Biden and the left, just like they did with Obama. Only the name has been changed. They are up to their old tricks.
I'm going to try to post their propaganda everyday to expose who and what they really are.
https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-new … day-2021-1I have to wonder, peoplepower, is Carlson implying that white supremacy and conservatism are inseparable? Why would he believe that true conservatives would be offended by attacks on the concept of white supremacy?
It would be quite a revelation on his part.Sharlee: I'm not sure I understand what you are asking. But it seems in any case you would have to ask Tucker what he means.
I haven't seen Hannity but I can tell you that labeling every protest and opposing view as white supremacy is disgusting and racist. It insults anyone who has white skin and doesn't agree with far left ideals.
The left is purposely trying to dehumanize an entire segment of the population. If you don't think I'm scared of what the left is doing, you should accept that those who don't accept the narrative being spun right now feel as if the left is going to push this further and further until they do radicalize people. And I believe that is their intent.
I just wish that instead of demonizing opposition everyone would start listening to each other. I talk to people across this country every day and the people I talk to who lean left sound so hateful and mean. They spit venom. It's scary. Someone has got to stop this and from the voices I am hearing from the left they don't want to stop it. They want to escalate it.What am I saying, what is it that Carlson said or meant?
I thought all reasonable people on either side of the political spectrum was against white supremacy in principle and only the most extremist kooks believe otherwise.
We are not talking about possession of white skin, but the attitude of white supremacy and they are not one in the same.
Why does Tucker believe that Biden, mentioning this as undesirable, was an attack on conservatives?
There can be no room for accommodating intolerance and bigotry which is dehuminazation in itself.
That is all that I am asking, no slight of hand or tricky question.
By the way, I have seen just as many "scary" and unpleasantly adamant Trumpers in this part of Florida, like a plague of locusts.
Oh my gosh! Political pundits attacking politicians on the opposing side.
I never! How dare they! The left has never used those tactics.The left has used those tactics, but they also present the news. When Obama was president, Fox was dedicated to denigrating him and the left.
When Trump was president, they were dedicated to promoting Trump to the point of a Trump run state news and still denigrating the left.
Now that Biden is president, they are denigrating him and the left, just like they did with Obama.
It is my opinion, there will never be unity in this country as long as Fox News and the MAGA news is allowed to present their propaganda. There are now 74 million people who voted for Trump and a large majority of them still believe that Biden has become president by illegal means and must be overturned from being president as the drumbeat continues from those outlets.Wonder if they ever realize the hypocrisy in all of this. This is actually a serious social problem, a segment of our population can't realize this form of hypocrisy.
They can't see it. It's so hilarious, in some levels. Not so much on others.
Notice one response here. 'Yeh, the left did it. But that was news.'
No differences of opinion allowed in that cult. I'm just hoping they aren't preparing to reenact Kristallnacht. They are certainly using the rhetoric needed to get away with it.Yes, their rhetoric could lead to some form of Kristallnacht. However more like a civil uprising.
LTL: What do you think the attack on the Capitol was? They broke windows the same way as in Kristallnacht. The ones that led the break in were trained paramilitary and highly coordinated with comm systems.
Trump gave their cause purpose which was to overthrow the government, so he could remain their leader, but they failed. Fox and MAGA news wants people to think that white supremacists are the left wing, but in fact they are Trump's radicalized right wing.In my view ---This analogy is hurtful and insulting to every Jewish man, woman, and child. IMO your opinion was ill-thought-out.
On November 9 to November 10, 1938, in an incident known as “Kristallnacht”, Nazis in Germany torched synagogues, vandalized Jewish homes, schools, and businesses, and killed close to 100 Jews. In the aftermath of Kristallnacht, also called the “Night of Broken Glass,” some 30,000 Jewish men were arrested and sent to Nazi concentration camps. Merely for being a Jew!
Perhaps it is time to realize the left is dangerous spouting these kinds of analogies.
Kristallnacht was a night in that one race of people persecuted people for their religion, their very culture. "Judaism can be thought of as being simultaneously a religion, a nationality, and a culture."
Last I looked the people that rioted at the Capitol were American's dissatisfied with their Government. Right or wrong that was the cause. Nothing at all to do with, religion, culture, and persecution of a people.
What the hell kind of society have we become when we can bend " the night of broken glass" to suit a riot that clearly was about some of its citizens being dissatisfied with the Government.
I think your ideology is dangerous, much like those that spurred the Nazis on the night of broken glass.
I would think the majority of Americans well realize it was a combination of far-right groups and Trump protesters that attacked the Capitol. The FBI identified many to belong to far-right groups. I have no idea what any talk jocks are pushing, maybe they are the biggest part of the problem.Sharlee: I saw people carrying flags that had NAZI swastikas on them. They were others with shirts and flags with Auschwitz on them and all the while they were shouting, "USA, USA."
Now either these people are so radicalized that they don't know what the hell they are doing or they do know what they are doing. How can they be shouting United States of America when they are going against the basic tenants of being an United Country?
I believe to them, if you are not white, then you are the "others." In Charlottesville, they were shouting "We will not be replaced." When interviewed, they said they did not want to be replaced by Jews and blacks who were taking their jobs.
This all goes back to Trump, Fox, and MAGA News emboldening these people to finally culminate in attacking the Capitol and shouting USA, carrying confederate flags and, even using the flag that we pledge allegiance to break in and bludgeon those who tried to stop them.
If they would have succeeded in stopping this constitutional process of certifying a president elect, what do you think their next step would be?Yes, they broke windows, did they cart off 30 million citizens to concentration camps? A bit of a hyperbolic stretch.
Comparing something as Kristallnacht to a gang of extremists trying to protest with violence something their Government was doing is not by any means close to what was done to the Jewish people.
You don't need to point out to me what happened at our Capitol or Charlotteville. I clearly see militia groups were present at both riots. And as I pointed out I saw what the FBI claimed that the groups were organized extremists trying to stop our Government from proceeding with their constitutional duty at the Capitol riot. This attack was planned, and to disrupt our government from confirming the election results.
It was not in response to the hate of a religion or culture.
"If they would have succeeded in stopping this constitutional process of certifying a president elect, what do you think their next step would be?"
.
I would surmise they would strike again and again. That's what thugs do when they are left to lawlessness. Just like the riots in our Dem cities that are still going on today after months and months of being let to run loose. Right or left violence the fact is at this point in our history it seems to be on the rise. You want to see broken glass have a look at what rioters are doing to the Ice Building in Portland.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L0vqPFwysJA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGTuZbWBQXo
"The majority of scholars identify Nazism in both theory and practice as a form of far-right politics."
Sharlee, unless you think the encloypedia is a source of liberal bias, Nazism is clearly a right wing philosophy, not a leftwing one. Why are so many of the Trump faithful sporting the swastica if Nazism was actually left wing Socialism in practice?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/NazismThis is the next update for Hannity and the big reveal about the alleged Hunter Biden laptop. Notice how Hannity feeds this guy leading questions to get him to unsuccessfully admit there was criminal activity.
https://video.foxnews.com/v/6225508218001#sp=show-clips
Watch Tucker Carlson falsely accuse CNN from removing their death counter.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/cnn-fact … 97669cb481
Laura Ingram and Stephen Miller claim Biden is inciting violence against the U.S.
https://www.mediaite.com/news/laura-ing … t-the-u-s/Hold up !!! Please don't deflect off my comment. This was the comment I was replying to. No mention of far-right ideology was present in his comment. In fact, if you read my comment I added at the end---
"I would think the majority of Americans well realize it was a combination of far-right groups and Trump protesters that attacked the Capitol. The FBI identified many to belong to far-right groups. I have no idea what any talk jocks are pushing, maybe they are the biggest part of the problem."
And before you start pointing fingers maybe have a look at what far-left groups were doing all last week in Portland outside the ICE building. Ya want broken windows to have a look-see. Thugs are thugs on the right or left. Both have sick ideologies and promote violence.
I don't condom any form of violent riots. I also don't applaud BS statements that are ill-thought-out. The Night Of Broken Glass in no respect should be compared to a handful of thugs charging the capitol. Very poor analogy.
On November 9 to November 10, 1938, in an incident known as “Kristallnacht”, Nazis in Germany torched synagogues, vandalized Jewish homes, schools, and businesses, and killed close to 100 Jews. In the aftermath of Kristallnacht, also called the “Night of Broken Glass,” some 30,000 Jewish men were arrested and sent to Nazi concentration camps. Merely for being a Jew!
Really hyperbolic comparison at best.
If I were a Jew and had to pick what riot I had to live through --- That would be the Capitol riot. Broken windows and all. No genocide was involved as I recall.Sharlee: I would like to point out one other thing. While the Capitol was under attack, there were Trump supporters both in congress and as voters who looked the other way. In fact there are still people in congress and voters who still believe that Biden did not win the election fair and square.
In NAZI Germany, the populous for the most part looked the other way while 60 million Jews were carted off to concentration camps. Trump's rallies were very similar to Hitler's rallies, in that people were radicalized to believe propaganda and lies about the enemy of the people and fake news. That is how it starts and Trump planted those seeds.
I don't know about Antifa and the other riots, but I will look into it. I wouldn't put it past those rioters being white supremacist posing as Antifa. We shall see.Not pointing fingers Sharlee, I know that the rioters in the Northwest have been behaving badly. But as peoplepower suggests, they could be Rightwingers in disguise. Why would Democrats and anti Trump types continue making problems after the target of their ire has left?
I know about Krystalnacht, I understand your point.
The 1938 event was anti-Semitic, what was the 2021 event about- anti-government, anti-democracy? There is more than enough evidence that certain protestors were not going to stop with mere vandalism. This was more like the Reichstag fire but with people on hand as potential victims.As I said, the FBI has reported that many arrested were from far-right groups and did plan the violence and some threatened to kill.
I certainly could see this violence against the Government becoming a problem. My point again was the analogy. I think there is a big difference between attacking one's own Government and the Genocide of a religion.
That's the point I was making. The violence at the Capitol was inexcusable. I don't see any difference between right or left violent groups.
Violence is violence.Sharlee: Do you think that Hitler started with sending 60 million Jews to concentration camps? He started very slowly with just a small group who wanted to Make Germany Great Again after being decimated by WWI.
If you didn't believe in his cause, there was violence. As time went by, they intimidated the people. Hitler took over the news organizations. And if you weren't with him, you were the enemy of the people and fake news. That's how it starts on a small scale with a paramilitary group. They were called the brown shirts, just like Mussolini called them his group.
That's why people who understand that history are concerned about what Trump and his followers did and are still doing." He started very slowly with just a small group who wanted to Make Germany Great Again after being decimated by WWI. If you didn't believe in his cause, there was violence. As time went by, they intimidated the people"
This statement gives little respect to the 70 plus million people that voted for Trump. You seem to be categorizing or grouping a segment of our society as people that would commit some form of violence, due to "following Trump". I see this at best as an unrealistic thought, very hyperbolic.
To be honest I am already very unhappy with Biden, and his pen... I can honestly say I have not become angry or thought of doing any form of violence. My thoughts lead me to ---Oh well in four years, he will be booted due to the damage he did. Presidents come and go... (just my cynical opinion).
"That's why people who understand that history are concerned about what Trump and his followers did and are still doing"
Perhaps you might want to be concerned that so many American's are so dissatisfied with our Government. It is you as an individual that is making this about a "certain kind of people", as a certain group"... Pitting citizen against citizen.
IMO All American's are free to be satisfied or dissatisfied with our Government. You may be dismayed with some that are no longer satisfied with our Government. But to infer the "other half " could become a part of genocide seems very unrealistic.Sharlee:
S: This statement gives little respect to the 70 plus million people that voted for Trump. You seem to be categorizing or grouping a segment of our society as people that would commit some form of violence, due to "following Trump". I see this at best as an unrealistic thought, very hyperbolic.
M: Who do you think attacked the Capitol and who motivated them to do it? I'll give you a hint. He is being impeached for inciting an insurrection.
S: To be honest I am already very unhappy with Biden, and his pen... I can honestly say I have not become angry or thought of doing any form of violence. My thoughts lead me to ---Oh well in four years, he will be booted due to the damage he did. Presidents come and go... (just my cynical opinion).
M: Of course, that is your opinion, but how about those who were willing to commit violence to stop Biden from becoming president?
S: Perhaps you might want to be concerned that so many American's are so dissatisfied with our Government. It is you as an individual that is making this about a "certain kind of people", as a certain group"... Pitting citizen against citizen.
M: I'm not pitting citizen against citizen. The white supremacist certainly are. That's their job.
S: IMO All American's are free to be satisfied or dissatisfied with our Government. You may be dismayed with some that are no longer satisfied with our Government. But to infer the "other half " could become a part of genocide seems very unrealistic.
M: I did not say the other half. I said this is how it starts and how it started in NAZI Germany. The fact is this is how it starts in all countries where the government is overthrown. It would pay for you to read this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics … ol-attack/Who do I think attacked the Capitol -- A handful of people that broke the law. It has been reported that there were over 40 thousand people at Trump's Jan 6 rally. Let me repeat over 70 million people voted for Trump. All individuals with individual values, and individual ways they conduct themselves. Again your statement indicates that if one supports Trump they promoted the attack on the Capitol.
' But how about those who were willing to commit violence to stop Biden from becoming president?"
How about them? They are a reality --- they are most likely only going to become more violent as they become more dissatisfied with the Government. This is where the country is. Instead of pointing the finger, ask yourself why have ended up so divided.
" I'm not pitting citizen against citizen. The white supremacist certainly are. That's their job."
Do you feel comment inferring that people take support Trump could support him in Nazi-like violent actions is not pitting citizens. Liberals are good, Trump supporters nazis.
IMO a government uprising where citizens are dissatisfied with how the government is governing or feeling an election was unfair does not in any respect compare to a genocide of a culture, a religion."How about them? They are a reality --- they are most likely only going to become more violent as they become more dissatisfied with the Government. This is where the country is. Instead of pointing the finger, ask yourself why have ended up so divided"
So, i am on the left and am not satisfied with the status quo either, does that give those dissatisfied on the Right an excuse to attack the Capitol building and threaten the safety of those legislators therein? The goals of progressives and Rightwingers are always diametrically opposed, compromise is the only way we have survived.I was answering PeoplePowers question ---PP -- "But how about those who were willing to commit violence to stop Biden from becoming president?"
My response -- How about them? They are a reality --- they are most likely only going to become more violent as they become more dissatisfied with the Government. This is where the country is. Instead of pointing the finger, ask yourself why have ended up so divided.
Our conversation is complicated and started with a comment that compared the Jan 6th riot to "The Night Of Broken Glass". It ended up as you see with PP feeling that our current situation mirrors Nazi Germany's rise of Hitler/Trump. If you please you can read the ongoing
conversation.
What I made an attempt to point out was the fact is we have a segment of citizens that did become violent, and could again due to being dissatisfied with Government. This is my opinion. I in no respect condoned the Jan 6th rioters or the way they chose to handle their displeasure of the election. I do not feel the 74 million that voted for Trump and support him to one extent or another will ever become Nazis and start an uprising against the Biden Government.
So you ask --- does that give those dissatisfied on the Right an excuse to attack the Capitol building and threaten the safety of those legislators therein? --- NO, it does not. I was pointing out realistically where we are right now as I see it we have citizens in our society that did become violent, did attack the Capitol, and are most likely only going to become more violent as they become more dissatisfied with the Government.
"So, I am on the left and am not satisfied with the status quo either, does that give those dissatisfied on the Right an excuse to attack the Capitol building and threaten the safety of those legislators therein?"
In no respect, I am I in agreement with any form of protesting that turns violent. Let me make it clear I don't agree with anyone thinking they have the right to commit violence due to being dissatisfied with the Government or just want to burn down ICE headquarters or someone's business. I don't distinguish between a Senator or a cop when it comes to being hurt or killed during a riot. I am realistic to the fact we have people in our society that feel they have the right to be violent, as witnessed at our Capitol and all week in Portland and Seattle. To me, they are all thugs and deserve to be arrested and have the book thrown at them.Sharlee: You are not getting what I'm saying. Trump is the one who is at fault. He encouraged division in this country. Yes there has always been division in the country, but not to the extent of what his lies, rhetoric, tweets, and rallies created.
Taking over a government is a process. It doesn't happen over night. The attack on the Capitol was a function of that process. Trump still has people who are members of that process and believe that not only was the attack on the Capitol justified, they believe Biden did not win fair and square and he should be removed.
In addition, there are many GOP senators who will not convict Trump because if they did, they would not only be admitting Trump's guilt but there own. There is even one congress women who is a member of Qanon. That tells me white supremacy has infiltrated our government. That is part of the process of taking over.
Trump converted many of his lower level cabinet people to civil service employees. That means Biden can't remove them and they are there for the duration. That makes it convenient for Trump in 2024 and tougher for Biden's agenda. It's all part of the process.
Yes there are 74 million people who voted for Trump, you keep conflating that I believe all 74 million of those people can be converted to NAZI's. That is not my point, but the white supremacist in this country support fascist ideologies and Trump has given their cause purpose.
Make no mistake, I love my country. The white supremacist and the people who attacked the Capitol love their country as well, but we are not on the same page as to what that means. Therein lies the problem. They shout USA at the same time, they shout Hang Pence, and Kill Pelosi.You are deflecting all over the place. Here is the subject we started with, and I have stuck to.
https://hubpages.com/politics/forum/350 … ost4172167
I read your comment and have no report to your opinion. It does appear you dwell on what perhaps happened, and what could happen. This would be hard to argue due to it being your opinion and bears no factual proof. Although very compelling, as well as plausible.Deleted
" What was their motivation for doing what they did? They wanted Trump to stay as president because he supports white supremacy in all its glory."
This is your opinion. It would be well accepted that this group was unhappy with the election and our current Govenmnet, and do think they felt Trump was fixing many things they see as problems. I in no respect feel Trump supports white supremacy groups. Just not buying that.
You speak of your original post --- "I watched Laura Ingram, Tucker Carlson, and Sean Hannity last night. They have changed from defending Trump, to attacking Biden and the left, just like they did with Obama. Only the name has been changed. They are up to their old tricks.
I'm going to try to post their propaganda everyday to expose who and what they really are."
Here is my response to the subject you posted ---
Your comment is true --- I don't distinguish (they CNN, Fox, MSNBC.) one media network from the other. Sorry for not being more specific.
In regard to what Tucker said, can't comment I did not watch Tucker or Biden's inauguration. I will keep an eye out, and watch his deeds.
It should be apparent after all the times I have claimed I don't buy into media talk shows or any form of 'If Come" or "Whataboutism".
Your comment in this thread follows along those lines in my view. Your statement in regard to Krystallnacht no matter how you spin it to me came off as hyperbolic at this point we have no idea even if there will be any further trouble from far-right groups or Trump being their leader. It all seems to be once again a far fetched conspiracy theory. None of us know the future... Or can we do much about something that has not happened?
At this point, I find the left extremists pose more problems than the ones on the right. They have been going strong for 8 months. Media keep all that on the backburner... Left media have not really been reporting the problem. However, all the local papers in Portland, Seattle do report the nightly riots. One just need look. You won't hear the reports on CNN or MSNBC. You won't see the nightly videos, but they are there on youtube in all their glory.
Dec --https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vshMUa-Y0DU
Nov --https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EiNBpzrokY
Oct -https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b_5BQyNoex8
Sep --https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tvfVm4fw6uA
Need I go on... these thugs are out nightly... And destroying cities. Did you realize this is occurring nightly for over 8 months? I have provided you with facts, not "what if Trump" gets a bunch of thugs and takes over the Government. I could literally offer you a nightly video of leftist rioters. Has CNN or MSNBC kept you informed on this carnage? How about we talk about the fact the left fascist groups have been out almost every night, breaking glass! So when I commented on the subject of your thread I agreed with you but in my view, CNN and MSNBC can join the ranks of nightly fox dribble from talk jocks propaganda hosts.
I suggest we agree to disagree. I find facts much more critical than what if Trump does this or that. My fact shows leftist groups are out of control for over 8 months and it well seems you are able to look for Trump to cause a repeat of The Night Of Broken Glass --- Have a look at my links you will see we have lots of broken glass all over Dem cities.
So, I have no interest in talking about what could happen --- take a look it is happening. And it has nothing to do with Trump.Sharlee: I watched all of your links. The first three are all the same thing. They are about a protest against George Floyd's treatment by the police and how the the Portland police responded to that protest. In fact the police were in violation of specific laws and were being sued.
The last one was a protest about the mayor and how he responded to the protest. They want him to resign. You don't want me to use whataboutism. However that is what you are precisely doing with those links.
Talk about hyperbole, you said they are destroying cities. I don't see a city being destroyed. I see people protesting on a street based on what they feel is justification against one black man. And the police saying what if they do more damage, which they didn't
You want to compare those first three links that are all the same and the fourth one about a mayor, to protesting about Trump not winning an election and rioting at the Capitol of the United States, I call false equivalence. You make it sound like they are destroying cities across America. You said the MSM doesn't cover that type of news. Well here it is.
Here is CNN's coverage of the Portland protest from four days ago.
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/202 … on-vpx.cnn
Here is NBC's coverage from five nights ago
https://www.nbcnews.com/video/police-di … 9780165598
ABC
https://abcnews.go.com/alerts/portlandSo, it appears you can look at the links I offered, and for some reason look past the carnage. The fires, and boarded businesses, the broken and those breaking it. You can excuse it all due to it being what you call a Protest held on behalf of George Floyd. These protests as I said have been nightly for over 9 months now, and no end in sight. And you can write them off as peaceful protests due to CNN telling you they are wonderful, they are peaceful. And you fear Fox is spreading propaganda--- That would be you, sir... I would post a few links on what Portland actually looks like today after all the nightly peaceful protests. But that would be a waste of energy now would it not? It would seem you can ignore what's in front of your eyes. You are pushing an ideology that CNN has been pushing for many months in regards to the Trump/Hitler scenario. IMO a very far-fetched peace of propaganda.
And yes we now have leftist portland protesters that have lumped Biden into their hatful idelogy. They hate our government as much as the far-right thugs. Who would ever think the two could have so much in common.
PP --"Talk about hyperbole, you said they are destroying cities. I don't see a city being destroyed. I see people protesting on a street based on what they feel is justification against one black man"
I see violence and the results of these thugs' violence causing devastation to business owners, and people that call those areas their home. I see 33 people dead, and many law enforcement officers hurt. It would appear you just may have something in common with those that participated in "The Night Of Broken Glass" --- They thought their cause was just, their protest was worthy of violence. As do those that protested in the name of George Floyd that caused such violence and devastation.
At any rate, it's more than apparent I found your analogy in regard to Krystallnacht distasteful at best. And we need not continue to discuss the many protests that were linked to the unjust killing of George Floyd. I see the violence and death that occurred in his name as abhorrent, uncalled for. Just as I saw the Capitol attack abhorrent, uncalled for.
I look at lawlessness as breaking our laws. You can dance about, and provide the different reasons the Portland protester comes up with for their nightly lawlessness. I don't care who commits violence or their given cause. Violence is violence, breaking the law... Laws are made for all of us, we need not set them aside to protect protesters no matter their cause.
Sharlee:
S: Last I looked the people that rioted at the Capitol were American's dissatisfied with their Government. Right or wrong that was the cause. Nothing at all to do with, religion, culture, and persecution of a people.
M: I understand your point and it’s a good one. I applaud you for sticking to your guns. What was their motivation for doing what they did? They wanted Trump to stay as president because he supports white supremacy in all it's glory.
They are dissatisfied because they are the forgotten ones. They want to MAGA because Trump is their leader and stands for everything that they think will fix the country that they live in.
You look at Krystallnacht as what the result was. I look at it as what the NAZI were doing. They broke the glass. They broke the glass in the storming of the Capitol to get to the people to persecute them. They were not 60 million, but their intention was the same. In Kyrstolnacht, It was the people who broke the glass along with the government.
It's just like taking out Catherine the Great of the Romanoff's by the people of Russia. That's how Communism was stared it was a grass roots movement started by the people.MIke, just a general observation. You have gone over the edge with your "Nazis," Germany comparisons. And then your "Krystallnacht" comparison was a final straw.
How cool, we all now know what " Krystallnacht" means. And how scholarly of one to offer it as an illustration of one's opinion of current events. I wish I had thought of that so I could be cool too.
We are not talking about a Hitler movement, we are talking about folks dissatisfied with their government.
I won't get into the weeds and argue this point with you. I just think you have adopted a mantra and feel you are validated in your perspective. And I just think that you are only seeing the part of the picture that agrees with your perspective. What is it that you call that this when you are discussing Trump supporters? Brainwashing? Or, simply "confirmation bias."?
GA
When the system is taking away your voice, ignoring your pleas, and no longer represents your interests... what is it exactly you feel should be done?
You believe the system still functions... it seems a growing majority of Americans, on both sides, for varying reasons, no longer feels that way.
Take a moment to view this video, consider the topic discussed, the awareness of the person presenting the matter that the SIDE (left or right) is not the problem, the system/federal-government is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kz2xDpZoz3o
I think this is becoming the majority perspective of people, which puts our government in a dangerous position, as I have always said, when the "game" of getting the Left and Right to blame one another ends, and they start putting the blame where it belongs, on a corrupt government, then the real "revolution" so many people seem to think is needed will come.
Until then, the political game of blaming one side or the other, will keep the masses under control and the wealthy getting wealthier at their expense.Ken, YOU are THE VOICE of REASON! Please say this again!
The same society that is convinced Trump is the equivalent of Hitler, long before he is ever elected.
https://www.newsweek.com/just-how-simil … ler-501252
A comparison that started in 2015. But if you go back, you will see some compared Romney when he ran against Obama to Hitler, many complained that Bush was as bad as Hitler while he was in office... the more extreme elements of the "Left" spectrum seem to do this to all serious opposition.
With Trump however, they went hyperbolic.
I would say we have entered a new phase of this however, as we saw with all social media platforms banning Trump as well as many who support him, and now the outcry seen here that the "propaganda" of Fox news must be shut down, such "brainwashing" needs to be banned.
I would expect in the coming couple years, such matters will be dealt with, and those problems will be remedied.Sharlee, GA, Ken:
You all state the people who attacked the Capitol were just dissatisfied with their government and my comparison to NAZI, Hitler and Trump is just "over the edge" fantasy on my part. I believe there is a gross generalization on your parts. Please read these links perhaps, maybe then you will understand where I'm coming from.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/arti … itol-riot/
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congre … m-n1254319
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackbrewst … b15fb4568f
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/a … ler-happenThe Democratic party has proven itself to be the more authoritative party. It has become obvious from their hope to run every part of our lives. They have planted the root of groupthink and offered all that are willing to adopt this "new groupthink" a lofty position. --- this position provides them with the opportunity to believe they can canceling out anyone they disagree with. They have a media that sensors other's speech, and promotes groupthink.
It may be time perhaps you realize it the Democrat that hope to usher Hitler's policies back into existence.
So, odd when I read your links I associated them with the Democratic ideologies.
All week Biden has been destroying policies that half the country supported, he is doing this with glee. A glee that would shame Hitler's satisfaction with The Night Of Broken Glass... Policies that put America on a more solid footing, and provided many American's with better ways of life. But the Democrats know what's good for all. Having their sticky fingers in our lives. Does this remind you of the Communist government we fought so hard to fight for decades?
So, don't be insulted at my analogies, because I see factual evidence to back my thoughts. You provided four such links that solidify my opinion.Sharlee: You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. I have given you proof, but you are in denial. That is what Germany did, they looked the other way, when they knew what was going on.
Isn't it interesting we can both look at the same evidence and draw different conclusions based on our values and belief systems. I believe Trump ruined this country with his policies. You believe Biden is ruining the country, by reversing many of Trump's policies.
I believe Biden is doing the right thing. I also believe Trump will be exonerated for his incitement of the attack, because the GOP is afraid of what he can do to them. I also believe he is not going away.
If I steal a loaf of bread, I will go to jail. This man incites an insurrection at the highest level of government and he is not even held accountable. What's wrong with this picture?
MikeQuite a bit is wrong with that picture...if the assumption is made that the claim of inciting an insurrection is true.
As it is not, the bigger question becomes "What is wrong with the picture where politicians make false claims, and hold faux "trials" to prevent a political opponent from ever opposing them again". What is wrong with the picture of politicians using political pressure to bypass the law in preventing opposing views?
When it requires massive spin and assumptions to make the claim at all, it becomes quite apparent what is happening...and the previous attempt at removal makes it even more obvious. So does the massive party line votes on such a gray matter, at least IMO.Wilderness: Show me proof that Trump did not incite an insurrection. Do you think all these hate groups just acted on their own volition when they had the goal of stopping a constitutional process and wanting to hang and kill people?
Nope: you claim the incitement, it is up to you to prove it. Not with insinuations, not with opinions, not by changing his words and not by making those words mean anything but what they say. Not even my opinion of what those words might have meant means anything, for that opinion is as worthless as yours is, but by actual proof.
Ball's in your court, not mine, for it is up to you to prove your allegations. You and the Democrat party, anyway, and I fully expect them to fail as thoroughly as they did last time they tried to remove a political rival that didn't kowtow to their agenda.Wilderness: Nice try, asked what's wrong with this picture and you answered my question by asking more questions disguised as claims. You and I both know you don't answer questions by asking more questions.
But I answered your question! "Quite a bit is wrong with that picture...if the assumption is made that the claim of inciting an insurrection is true."
Once answered, I asked another question, one that not depend on your assumption of Trump's intentions.
Is there any proof Trump incited a riot, other than the media pundit opinion he did? In my opinion, your second sentence appears to outwardly imply Trump aided in planning the Capitol attack? What proof do you have to verify that statement? Once again you have used a very outwardly sensationalized statement that you have no way of justifying with facts.
You hit the nail on the head ---It appears some are very happy to accept a Government where politicians make false claims and hold faux trials to prevent a political opponent from ever opposing them again, and to feed red meat to their supporters. They do not care if they bypass our laws and our Constitution, neither do the people that support their quest for power.
No one is looking the other way. Many have been arrested, and the Capitol attack is an open FBI and DOJ investigation. The people that committed the attack at the Capitol are being tracked down and arrested. This is a fact, and I would assume they will be harshly punished for their acts of violence.
And perhaps you need to check how many jobs have been lost in the past few days due to Biden's policies. The next jobs report will tell the truth of all the "good" he is doing. Some today are out of work due to a pandemic, some are out of work because of Biden shutting down the pipeline. I disapprove of him shutting down the pipeline.
You can bring a horse to water, but you can't make it drink. I have given you proof, but you are in denial. In many cases, liberals are gorging on the water in front of them. They drink and eat anything stuck in front of them. keep in mind the pandemic of groupthink.
Keep in mind you shared articles that in your opinion supported your view. They read differently to me.Sharlee: I understand that about the same articles draw different conclusions. I'm the one who said it. I think you are playing a childish game called, I'm rubber, your glue, everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you. If you read those articles and you can turn it around to apply to me, then that is precisely what you are doing.
Whether you realize it or not, our values and beliefs are driving our motivation and emotions. Biden has been in power for six days and you and others have already determined the country is going down the tubes under him. I see what he is doing as a return to normal.
You may find normal boring, but I find it refreshing. We now have normal press briefings, No more enemy of the people, fake news, blame games, twitter storms, firing those who didn't agree with Trump, A coordinated effort to distribute the vaccine from the the federal government with cooperation from the states. Re-establish our relationships with foreign governments. It's all very boring, but it sure is nice to wake up in the morning and not have to deal with Trump and all his chaos and dysfunctional behavior, including lying and misinforming over 10,000 times.Laura Ingrham and Tucker Carlson defending Q Anon
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppShare
Hannity up to his old tricks.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 … -first-we/Here are the facts about the Keystone Pipeline and Biden destroying 11,000 jobs.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppShare
"Sharlee: I understand that about the same articles draw different conclusions. I'm the one who said it. I think you are playing a childish game called, I'm rubber, your glue, everything you say bounces off me and sticks to you. If you read those articles and you can turn it around to apply to me, then that is precisely what you are doing."
What makes your perception of those articles more valid than mine? You have loftily said I am playing a game due to me stating my opinion is different than yours. Let me repeat in reading those articles I found they related more to actually Demacrsatic ideology than Conservative/Republican ideology.
In regards to Biden's first six days, he is a train wreck. He puts on his little blue suit and gets out there and reads the answers to questions that the press people are provided to ask him. He literally is squinting while he is reading... He is and always has been a do-nothing politician. His words are fluffy and meaningless. He most likely will tank the country. He is in the middle of an impeachment that has no chance with the filibuster, and then there is the Dems today offering a bill to make DC the 51st state. Again tossing spoiled red meat to their followers. No chance of passing and they know it. But, it's a phony gesture they can say, we tried. So, yeah the Democrats are providing you with a well-known norm. Waste time and money on anything, even knowing it will fail, it's feed.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congre … e-n1255841Sharlee: Have you received your vaccination yet? Do you know why, because Trump failed to have any distribution plan. He did make them develop the vaccine very fast, but he left it up to the states and local government and it is now a soup sandwich, because Trump and company didn't know or care about distribution.
Their plan was leave it to others, if they fail, it is their fault, not mine. That's Trump for you, he would never admit his mistakes, but is very good and shifting the blame to others.
You talk about me thinking about the process of the hate groups continuing into the future, but you have already made up your mind that Biden is and will always be an abject failure. As far as Trump inciting insurrection, you need to read this.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021/1/1 … ary-speechIt would seem you are spinning out of control --- Now are on to Trump and his handling of the pandemic. I see no point in this kind of obsession.
On Jan 15th Joe promised 100 million shots in arms in 100 days. What happened? It would appear Trump was on a good path to provide more than 100 million in 100 days. We would have no vaccine as of yet if it were not for Trump's problem-solving. Biden is a politician he said what you wanted to hear... And now whines and blames Trump, just like a politician. Get accustomed to it, Biden is in over his head. he has walked back his great COVID plan... In my opinion, he should have never promised something he could not deliver on. Biden has a history of doing nothing, I fully expect he will live up to that reputation. As he has with the 100 million shots in arms promise,
The promise of getting 100 million shots in arms was just a lie. Hopefully, this lie will make it onto the list at Politifact. And so all I mentioned in my last comment shows me he is playing politics that shows he lacks respect for American's in general. He won't answer questions from the press unless he provides the question.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-v_z1lmH1U
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/22/politics … index.html
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/l … =joe-bidenIt appears you aren't a state's Rights advocate peoplepower. It sounds like you are saying it is only the Federal government that can solve our problems, not the leaders closest to the problem.
I think the right approach is to get the virus into the hands of the states and let them find the most appropriate way to get it to their citizens. Others appear to think it is only the Federal government that can do such a job. I disagree.
The Federal government isn't there to control everyone's lives, no matter how much some think that is how it should be. It appears West Virginia, (that backward hillbilly Red State), is apparently among the most effective states for vaccine distribution into citizen's arms, yet the Blue state of New York, ( a bastion of nanny state states), is among the worst at distributing the vaccines. How does that speak to the argument of putting the Federal government in charge of everything?
GAGA: I'm not advocating putting the federal government in charge of everything. You saying that is a big stretch, but the way I see it Trump left a big hole in the process. There are some things that are done better by federal agencies than at the state level.
Biden sees the pandemic as a national emergency. Why do we even have federal agencies like the CDC, FAA, FCC, FDA, et al? It's because they manage national issues that affect everybody in every state across the board and they can provide a coordinate response.
It has nothing to do with states rights, it has to do with providing a uniform coordinated process for everybody as the vaccine is distributed down from the top to states and local governments and then to the people. Right now we have no uniform process at any level.I will give you the benefit of the doubt Mike. Maybe you aren't supportive of such government control as your comment about a lack of a Federal vaccine plan makes you sound.
I strongly support the government's plan to get the vaccine into states' hands, and then let the states handle their vaccine distribution. The closer the problem solver is to the problem the more likely they will find the right solution, and the Federal government is a very long way from the local county level of states where actual vaccinations will take place.
I think proponents of such an idea that a master plan from the Federal
government is the best solution have a much different perception of both
Federal government proficiency, and, state's Rights than I do.
GA
In Michigan, we get out the vaccine as quickly as we get it. This week in the first 4 minutes the website where we make our appointments gave out all appointments in 4 minutes. The vaccine is given out by our health departments and our very large Hospital groups. So, no problem getting the vaccine just not enough as of yet. And we relied on Joe's promise to uses the Defense Production act... He has not. A promise made -- A promised walked back. He makes it up as he goes. And the media looks the other way. Many of us don't look the other way.
Now when Trump saw the need for vents he was quick to invoke the DPA to provide life-saving vents. Trump was a problem solver. Not much of a guy that claimed I am going to" more of man that said "it's done...
We need more vaccines it is very clear, Joe has the power to initiate the DPA. He has walked back his entire COVID plan. Which actually was nothing to began with.Sharlee: So your perception is that in one week, he walked back his plan. He has barely had enough time to go to the bathroom, based on what Trump left him with, but again, you want him to fail because you don't like him, just like I don't like a Trump.
You think he squints and makes fluffy talk, what the hell that means? Trump squinted as well and he couldn't even put coherent sentences together unless he was on a teleprompter and then he sounded like a third grader trying to read. You just chose not to see those things.
Trump had plenty of time to straighten out this mess, but instead he was busy sabotaging things for Biden and making false claims about voter fraud. Oh and inciting violence at the federal level. Give me a friggin break.
What do you think about your governor being attacked by those right wing white supremacist that were encouraged by Trump to liberate your state?He seems to have had enough time to instruct ICE to ignore our immigration laws, refuse to spend money congress appropriated (shades of Ukraine, right?), put tens of thousands out of work in the energy field, end our energy independence and pander to those demanding the country join them in pretending they are of the other sex, though.
Perhaps it is a matter of priorities, not time available?Joe's promise that he will use the Defense Production to get the vaccine quicker. This is an EO, would take a few moments to initiate. he talks a good game but has not delivered on this very important promise. He delivered on his Pipeline shutdown and stopping the building on the wall. Guess that should help with the worse crisis on hand.
What is fluffy talk -- a speech filled with sentimental verbiage, and at the end one walks away realizing he really answered no solutions that could solve anything. In Biden's case, he plays the race-bait card each in most of his speeches, and doom and gloom to pull in people that are vulnerable to that kind of wringing hands rhetoric. Then he throughs in "I want to bring all American's together... While throughout his speech he baits on Americans against another. It's laughable and disgusting.
No problem with squinting to read. My complaint was he squints while reading answering questions that he or his handlers provided the press to ask him. No problem at all with squinting. I have a problem with the fact he does not even try to hide the fact he will only answer questions that he prepared. He actually has crib notes on the podium. Trump was assessable almost daily to answer questions, and none were composed by him or did he have crib notes.-- It's like when Hillary always had the little girl with the big red bow in her hair everywhere she was expected to answer questions. His speeches are beyond fluffy, they are "Downy" soaked.
In regard to my Governor, wouldn't want to be her. She was one of the few governors that killed thousands by sending COVID Pts into nursing homes. She was taken to court to remove her powers and we are working on recalling her. As I said in previous comments I in no way support any form of violence. AS I said would not want to be her, we have people on the news almost nightly blaming her for the death of a loved one. Hey, she definitely has many that hate her. Hate breeds violence. Hopefully, the speedy arrest of the people that planned to kill her will deter others from trying to harm her.
https://www.michigancapitolconfidential … d-patientsSharlee:
S: Joe's promise that he will use the Defense Production to get the vaccine quicker. This is an EO, would take a few moments to initiate. he talks a good game but has not delivered on this very important promise. He delivered on his Pipeline shutdown and stopping the building on the wall. Guess that should help with the worse crisis on hand.
M: https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/news- … 9-vaccines
You are a little behind schedule. If you would stop listening to right wing propaganda, you might find the truth.
S: What is fluffy talk -- a speech filled with sentimental verbiage, and at the end one walks away realizing he really answered no solutions that could solve anything. In Biden's case, he plays the race-bait card each in most of his speeches, and doom and gloom to pull in people that are vulnerable to that kind of wringing hands rhetoric. Then he throughs in "I want to bring all American's together... While throughout his speech he baits on Americans against another. It's laughable and disgusting.
M: Sounds like something right out of the Fox News right wing playbook
S: In regard to my Governor, wouldn't want to be her. She was one of the few governors that killed thousands by sending COVID Pts into nursing homes. She was taken to court to remove her powers and we are working on recalling her. As I said in previous comments I in no way support any form of violence. AS I said would not want to be her, we have people on the news almost nightly blaming her for the death of a loved one. Hey, she definitely has many that hate her. Hate breeds violence. Hopefully, the speedy arrest of the people that planned to kill her will deter others from trying to harm her.
M: So then you agree withTrump when he incited the violence by saying "lock her up?"
https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbre … dc3d9e8207Here we go, blame Antifa for the storming of the Capitol.
https://www.freep.com/story/news/politi … 590216002/
Tucker Carlson defends Q Anon
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppShare
Sean Hannity trying to influence the Impeachment Trial
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppShareActually, I am not behind in times. Context matters. My comment - Joe's promise that he will use the Defense Production to get the vaccine quicker. This is an EO, would take a few moments to initiate. As I said his EO could be easily initiated. As of yet, he could use it, but as of yesterday has not.
Jenn Goodman
PUBLISHED
Jan. 27, 2021 --- "In an executive order last week, President Joe Biden said that he will use the Defense Production Act to boost the production of vaccines, testing and equipment to help fight the COVID-19 pandemic.
The executive order authorizes federal agencies to fill shortages as soon as possible by “acquiring additional stockpiles, improving distribution systems, building market capacity or expanding the industrial base.”
"While the specifics of how the administration will use the DPA are still being worked out, it’s likely that in the coming days and weeks, the administration will use or CONSIDER using the law to ensure access to critical healthcare equipment and facilities, according to Alex Hontos, a partner at the international law firm Dorsey & Whitney in procurement law and government contracting."
https://www.constructiondive.com/news/b … ct/593915/
Just don't watch any of the talk jocks. I noted Biden race-baiting, and actually started a thread on the subject. He race-baits frequently. And he certainly is a gloom and doom fellow or perhaps it whoever is writing his speeches.
M: So then you agree withTrump when he incited the violence by saying "lock her up?"
Not sure how you came to this conclusion, and it would be rude of me to conclude how you came to that opinion.Sharlee: You posted this and didn't copy in your reply.
https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbre … dc3d9e8207
M: So then you agree with Trump when he incited the violence by saying "lock her up?""M: So then you agree withTrump when he incited the violence by saying "lock her up?"
Sharlee reply ---Not sure how you came to this conclusion, and it would be rude of me to conclude how you came to that opinion."
Your comment held an unfounded acuzation. You made an assumption first that I think Trump incited violence. Secondly, this implies I approve of violence.
So, I must ask where do you get off making such a statement? It would appear you are feeling for some reason you have the right to say whatever you please. In this very thread, I have repeated over and over I do not agree with any form of violence.
The link you offered has been removed.Sharlee: You call it a statement. When in fact, it is a simple question that can be answered with a simple yes or no. I'm not accusing you of anything. Instead, you remove a factual, verifiable article.
Last time I looked, this is America and I do have the right to say whatever I please, just like trump has the right to incite the crowd with lock up the governor of Michigan, but that doesn't make them right.
If you are against all forms of violence and attacking your governor is a form of violence then it follows you are against Trump and the people in that rally saying lock her up. Am I right or wrong? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Trump knows his words matter and he doesn't have to articulate the exact intent of what he means. His people understand what he is getting at. It's the same with the attack on the Capitol. He didn't have to say go hang Pence, they knew what he meant.. In this way, he can always say, I never said that. It's like a code or a dog whistle. How about when he says, "beat the crap out of them and I will pay your fines:?" There is a difference between the physical act of violence itself and inciting violence. In my book, Trump is the inciter of violence. He always gets others to actually do it.The problem with this line of reasoning is that it depends on the assumption that Trump uses code language to speak to only a portion of the people, that only you and those he wishes to speak to understand that code, and that the coded words mean something other than what Webster assigns to the same words.
All of those are unsupported assumptions which in turn means that the conclusion (Trump incited violence) is also unsupported. Now if you can find the "code book", listing the meanings of his words as you assign them, it might be different. Instead you simply build on your unproven assumptions, assigning meanings that only you can interpret, and conclude that because one event (a riot) followed another (a speech without incitement) the one was caused by the other. A very difficult thing to prove and doubly so when the entire argument relies on your personal interpretation of a hidden code.Wilderness: You hit the nail right on the head. That's the genius of Trump. That's why he will be exonerated in a court of law, because they can't ever conclusively prove that he is the inciter based on what he says.
You are telling me those "rioters" were acting on their own when they built the gallows to hang Pence and they were shouting and carry flags that said the election was stolen. This was after months of Trump's drum beat of, "If I don't win, the election is rigged." "And if Pence doesn't do the right thing, there will serious consequences."
It's not me that can just interpret those words, it is all the white supremacists and his base that know what he is asking them to do. Does he ever put down their actions? No he says, "there are good people on both sides and he told the rioters to go home and we love you all."
Do you think dictators who incite coups actually do the physical violence? Do you think Hitler actually physically killed any Jews? Do you think
Bashar al-Assad physically killed Syrian people? They all spoke in code and dog whistles in their rallies, just like Trump.
What does MAGA really mean When the U.S. has always been great. Why were the "rioters" wearing those hats and Trump emblazoned clothes and flags and banners?
This says it all.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppShare
"If you are against all forms of violence and attacking your governor is a form of violence then it follows you are against Trump and the people in that rally saying lock her up. Am I right or wrong? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Trump knows his words matter and he doesn't have to articulate the exact intent of what he means. His people understand what he is getting at."
Your statement is not really logical. You have assumed, and taken it upon yourself to assign a meaning to Trump's words, and not only the words some at the rally shouted, but why a given individual may have been shouting the words"lock her up." You seem to assume all were literally ready to lock her up or kidnap and kill her. Trump's rallies had huge crowds, they had many mantras. Most very patriotic. You should realize, yes you have every right to believe what you please. You have no right to assume what I believe. PP-- "then it follows YOU ARE against Trump and the people in that rally saying lock her up."
You are putting all that attend a rally in a category, not looking at each as an individual. In my view yelling "lock her up" is not an act of violence.
When I speak of violence I am talking about an individual that loots, burns, physically cause harm.
"Fry 'Em like bacon --- or this sweet BLM sentiment --- What do we want -- Dead cops -- When do we want them -- NOW!
If I followed your thought process, I would ascertain that BLM members intend to kill cops. Each and every member of BLM would intend to follow the cry, and kill cops. BLM mantra is very provocative and very much more violent than the lock her up mantra.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFJmkws1Q40Sharlee: You still didn't answer my question. I'm not assuming what you believe. I'm asking a simple question do you believe Trump is capable of inciting violence? Yes or No.
Instead you dilute the people who attacked the Capitol into good guys and bad guys when it is apparent the ones who breached the Capitol were there to commit violent acts and they did, but their leader told them to go home as he was saying we love all of you. If Trump can tell them he will march with them to the Capitol and then tell them to go home and he loves them, then that is pretty good indication in my book that he is their leader of all the white supremacists groups that he embraces and there were several different ones at the Capitol.
This is what I told Wilderness and I'm going to tell you the same thing.
You are telling me those "rioters" were acting on their own when they built the gallows to hang Pence and they were shouting and carry flags that said the election was stolen. This was after months of Trump's drum beat of, "If I don't win, the election is rigged." "And if Pence doesn't do the right thing, there will be serious consequences."
It's not me that can just interpret those words, it is all the white supremacists and his base that know what he is asking them to do. Does he ever put down their actions? No he says, "there are good people on both sides and he told the rioters to go home and we love you all."
Do you think dictators who incite coups actually do the physical violence? Do you think Hitler actually physically killed any Jews? Do you think
Bashar al-Assad physically killed Syrian people? They all spoke in code and dog whistles in their rallies, just like Trump.
What does MAGA really mean When the U.S. has always been great. Why were the "rioters" wearing those hats and Trump emblazoned clothes and flags and banners?
This says it all.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politicNo, I do not feel Trump in any respect set out to incite violence. I have viewed the speech several times, and I found nothing to indicate he was using a dog whistle tactic or do I feel his words were inflamitory.
"Instead you dilute the people who attacked the Capitol into good guys and bad guys when it is apparent the ones who breached the Capitol were there to commit violent acts and they did,"
Provide a statement that I diluted the attack on the Capitol. There were thousands that attended the rally on Jan 6th. A handful entered the Capitol. I consider any that entered that building broke the law. I will look forward to you providing a statement where I diluted the capital attack in any respect
PP -- "You are telling me those "rioters" were acting on their own when they built the gallows to hang Pence and they were shouting and carry flags that said the election was stolen. This was after months of Trump's drum beat of, "If I don't win, the election is rigged." "And if Pence doesn't do the right thing, there will be serious consequences."
Again I have not speculated who planned the attack. I did not tell you anything in regard to who planed what. I have no idea whatsoever who planed it, and I am not directing blame on any person but the persons that the DOJ has charged. You seem to be able to place blame with ease, I consider that a problem. "Acting Washington, D.C., U.S. Attorney Michael Sherwin said Tuesday that they have identified 400 suspects and have arrested 135 to date in connection with the attack on the U.S. Capitol."
"Does he ever put down their actions? No, he says, "there are good people on both sides and he told the rioters to go home and we love you all."
( again Trump was talking about the actual people that were at that protest that wanted to keep the status in place)
Trump condemned white supremacists over and over... You just were not in any respect willing to listen. You hear what you want to hear. I hear words and place a context to complete sentences and paragraphs. As I mentioned we have very different thought processes.
I don't in any respect put Trump in the same category as a dictator. I was very pleased throughout his four years and was sad to see him lose. I like his way of Governing, I don't like big government, and I am a capitalist. So, in my view, I was really very satisfied with his job performance. I find it shocking to hear Trump compared to any of the dictators. In my view, he worked his butt off for America.
And yes you might feel America has always been great. But half the country doesn't agree with you. During the Obama administration, many of us did not like or recognize America. Hence Trump. You preach as if your words are fully the truth, the very last word. I hate to tell you, it's your opinion, no more than that.
Your link goes to the MSN News Frontpage News. Not sure what report you hoped to share or perhaps you were just sharing their front page? Not at all into MSN. I find them so bias...Sharlee: Sorry, here is the actual link.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppShareYes, very interesting to hear what the former FBI agent felt about the situation. I was pleased to see a name backing up his opinion.
I very much agree that the Country most likely will see more attacks from different groups, that would include far-right groups. IT is very evident we have many in the country ready to commit violence in the name of a cause they feel is just. The divide is great, and hate is fueling many to say it's time to turn to reject the current Government with violence. How far will this go, no way of telling?
This in no respect surprises me. It disappoints me but does not surprise me.
I am sure you viewed IB's comment. I will address it due to it being part of our conversation.
My first opinion was very different from my final opinion. I broke my own rule. I only watched half of a speech, selected only half the speech to form my opinion. As I made mention in my comment to you "I do not feel Trump in any respect set out to incite violence. I have viewed the speech several times, and I found nothing to indicate he was using a dog whistle tactic or do I feel his words were inflammatory."
I walked back my first statement. A statement I made in hast without really having all the information to make a prudent opinion. I was certainly prone to offer an emotional response in the first days after the Capitol attack.
Sharlee: How much time and money have the GOP wasted over the years? Trump stole money from the defense budget to pay for his wall that was supposed to be paid by Mexico. Biden is inheriting Trump's national debt of over 27 trillion, when Trump took office, it was 19.9 trillion.
I will respond to this comment. However, it seems as the deflection has gone from Trump is Hitler to poor old Joe has inherited Trump's debt. I get it you hate Trump.
March 2020 Trump signs a $2.2 trillion coronavirus rescue package -- Dec 2020 signed into law a $2.3 trillion. 4.5 trillion added to budget due to COVID stimulus. Trump was at 3.3 trillion pre-pandemic. Trump would have had to spend tons before he could keep up with Obama's spending.
The U.S. debt increased $9 trillion during the 8 years under Obama.Not sure you heard Biden promised 4 billion to Mexico to help with immigration problems... Maybe just should have finished the wall. Biden seems to be offering lots of money to solve problems.. LOL
Yes, I realize as you pointed out "Hitler" is always pulled from the
"Democratic Sure Political Gems Playbook". What shocked me is it has truly become such a dog whistle that promotes such a strain of hate. To even insinuate that former president Trump was in any fashion trying to promote one American turning on another physically sickens me.
IMO the Democrats and the left media have become a burden, a threat to the Country. I finally must admit, we are in trouble, my friend.
Hannity's entire career has been based on espousing racists rhetoric and spreading unfounded conspiracy theories.
It well appears this is true. What goes around has now come around. They are pretty much replacing the Trump /Russia for Biden/ plus all kinds of accusations.
Sharlee: What is true? Please be more specific don't use "they." Please use specific names.
What is true ?--- "I watched Laura Ingram, Tucker Carlson, and Sean Hannity last night. They have changed from defending Trump to attacking Biden and the left, just like they did with Obama. Only the name has been changed. They are up to their old tricks."
Your comment is true --- I don't distinguish (they CNN, Fox, MSNBC.) one media network from the other. Sorry for not being more specific.
In regard to what Tucker said, can't comment I did not watch Tucker or Biden's inauguration. I will keep an eye out, and watch his deeds.
Are people really that ignorant? Hilter and his cronies killed over 11 million people. Hilter started WWII. Trump didn't start a war and look at what happened in the Middle East while he was in office. Comparing Trump to Hilter is decreasing the crimes of the Nazis. Making a statement that compares Trump or even Obama to the psychopath is ignorant and parroting the news media.
GA: That's fair. I just believe there are somethings that are more suited to be handled by the federal government than the states. Notice, I said it starts at the federal level and then is handled by the states and local governments. But there has to be uniform policies put in place and the most logical place, in my view is at the top of the chain of command.
Now that is what a reasonable discussion should be. We disagree, but with civility.
I could never agree that with the thousands of different county situations to be faced, a Federal plan would be the best option, but I can understand your position. I just think it is wrong.
GAShe is a Georgia House Representative.
https://www.businessinsider.com/marjori … ire-2021-1♫ Idiots to the Left of me ♫, ♫ Idiots to the Right ♫
What is your point PeoplePower? Remember Jessie Ventura, Al Franken, Mayor Barry? We could trade idiots from either party forever.
GAI dont know what was his point. But she is not only an idiot.
But in any case, she is a dangerous idiot and shouldn't be a congresswoman. The GOP (and the country) are in big problems if people like her keep being elected. That says a lot about the salt-of-the-earth right-wing voters.GA: This is what I should have posted for your dining and dancing pleasure.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppShareIt seems like even the Republicans don't want her. Damned non-conformist. They make everyone's life harder. ;-0
But I am still missing your point—relative to the original discussion where you introduced her.
GANonconformist? What a quaint word for an elected official who advocated shooting Nancy Pelosi in the head.
I guess those GOP voters like "nonconformists." Must be true "patriots."Just like a woman driver. You just can't get there from here. This nonsense of equating "patriots" with the worst of Trumpers is more harmful than helpful.
Folks that have such a mindset should pause for a moment and consider just how much of America they are demeaning.
But, yes, when it comes to the status quo, most of the GOP probably does prefer non-conformists. And the reality of our recent political history seems to show that many of you non-GOP folks should' prefer the non-status quo too.
GAYou seem to be misunderstanding my use of the term. The "patriots" are those who label themselves as such while plotting to kill Pelosi and other "enemies." I am not including all Trumpers in that description, only those who proclaim themselves to be patriots while attempting to subvert our laws. That is why I put it in quotes.
And your "nonconformist" advocates killing pretty much the same people as the "patriots" do.
I cannot believe you think "nonconformist" is an acceptable descriptor for that violent, whacked woman.My bad. I didn't intend for my comment to be descriptive of her. I think she is an idiot.
GA
Even as I can agree, based on the Qanon and other conspiracy stuff, that I think she is an idiot, I also think that her constituents have every Right to vote her in as their representative.
I am sure you will think there is no comparison, but I bet a lot of folks think AOC is an idiot, for her Green New Deal, (and other), demands.
And speaking of "saying a lot . . ." What does your thought that she shouldn't be a Congresswoman say about enlightened Democrats? Don't y'all think everyone has a Right to pick their representatives?
GAI am sure you will think there is no comparison, but I bet a lot of folks think AOC is an idiot, for her Green New Deal, (and other), demands.
So? Like I said, she is more than just an idiot. Also, she is dangerous. So yes, no comparison.
Where did I mentioned rights? Yes, everyone has a right to pick. The problem is that she was an option.
Still says a lot that people elected someone like her.
Oh, btw, Im not a democrat.
Well, I agree with you about the Right of the voters to choose their representative, but I will say that this does not say much about them.
But if any of the representatives or senators were co-conspirators involved in the January 6th riot, I have every expectation that they should be hung at the yardarm. That would include your non-conformist.Hmm . . . What does Al Franken or Jessie Ventura, or Marion Barry say about their supporters, (the voters that chose them?). Is that shoe pinching yet?
'Hung from the yardarm'? Really Cred? Just imagine if a 'patriot' had said that.
GAAre any of those people calling on their supporters to kill their "enemies" and overturn an election?
The point was that there are idiots of every stripe, everywhere. To use any of those idiots to paint their larger group is dangerous and usually inaccurate.
I would easily criticize this particular idiot and could just as easily think of a few more that fit her mold. But I would label them individually, not as generally representative of the labels being tossed around, (even if only "tossed around" by implication)
GA
This is why I'm concerned about White Supremacy, being like NAZI Germany.
https://time.com/5932489/white-supremac … jQiXbbkyzEThe stupidity of MSM (IE - Time) articles such as that are only superseded by the people that engross themselves in the tripe they produce.
The concept of white supremacy being a serious threat is laughable, partly because half the people considered white have bought into the "white guilt" that has been part of our social programming (IE - TV shows, News) for decades now. And partly because whites are the minority throughout much of the country (IE - CA, TX) and will be the minority in America from here on out.
Such articles shift focus from the REAL struggle in America today, it shifts people's attention from reality to hating one another based on race and identity politics.
And people who bang on the drum of these issues are the BIGGEST reason why there is racism and identity politics.
The real reason there is rioting in the streets, by LEFT and RIGHT extremes, the reason why fedearl buildings are under attack in Oregon and why people are storming the Capitol Building is because the system is FAILING them.
it's because during this "pandemic" the wealthy have gotten obscenely wealthy, while working men and women are told to stay home, and lose their jobs, lose their businesses, etc.
The banks have nearly tripled their Demand Deposits on hand in the past year, trillions have been given out mega corporations (who in turn fire their employees), hedge funds, investment firms, etc.
These are the REAL problems... brought on by a failing economic system out of control state governments shutting down businesses and a corrupt federal government that does what is best for the corporations and banks not the people.Ken: You will probably think this is tripe as well, but it is worth the read.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppShareNo, it wasn't, it was tripe for the easily manipulated.
That was obvious as soon as it detailed the sources of information.
I don't expect you to understand that though.
This reminds me of when Trump was running for the nomination.
Many conservatives here didn't like him, called him a liar, a bully, not qualified, etc. But, once it became clear he was the frontrunner, they claimed he was no worse than any other politician. Some even claimed they liked him all along.
This is very similar. Just three weeks ago, Trump incited a riot. We all saw it with our own eyes and ears and processed it with our brains. That incitement resulted in his fans desecrating the Capitol, killing an officer, and injuring many othets. That initial revulsion toward what Trump did (what they saw with their own eyes, ears, and brains) was justified. it was reality. But, you know, three weeks have gone by and subsequent re-interpretations offered by Trump loyalists have easily swayed some people to change their minds, to deny what they really saw.
The psychology of Trumpism is fascinating and will be studied for years to come.
Just keep denying what your eyes, ears, and brain tell you and you can remain a loyal Trumper to the bitter end...."This is very similar. Just three weeks ago, Trump incited a riot. We all saw it with our own eyes and ears and processed it with our brains."
You're right - we all saw and heard it. It was during that "processing" part where the meaning of the words was changed to mean something other than what was said by some of the brains "processing" what had been heard. Like "talk to your representative" means "shoot and hang them", or "march on the Capital" means "break in and rampage about". Even "fight", used for centuries to mean a political battle in the legislature, suddenly means personal violence against legislators.
TDS has a way of doing that - when the desired conclusion takes priority over understanding and truth that is natural.You're a master. I've always said so. Has Trump hired you yet? You can lead the next disinformation campaign. The midterms are only two years away. Maybe you can help get even more conspiracy theorists elected to Congress. Sandy Hook was a hoax and Trump is single-handedly fighting a secret cabal of Satan-worshipping pedophiles. Time is short! :-D
Wilderness: It's not the words by themselves that have meaning. It is the context they are used in. Do you think every time Trump said the word fight, that he meant a political fight when there were armed paramilitary troops in his audience ready to breach the Capitol and even kill people if necessary, which they did.?
He may have used the words, but he incited and created a monster. But I must admit, he did have control over them. When he told them to leave and he loved them, they obeyed their master.
Yup. Someone here once said she wouldnt vote for Trump because she had dignity.
That didt last long. Now she's almost in the same league of, what was her name? Colorfulone or something like that. Yikes.Oh my, colorfulone! I had forgotten about her. She was the one who compared Trump to the God Thor. She was an early model for what it takes to be a true Trumper.
When she and so many others actually saw what a scoundrel he actually was, they quietly slinked from public view.
Yes, I remember that. LOL
She was a Qanon sympathizer before it became mainstream.*sigh* Bless her heart, she was a misguided soul, wasn't she?
If only she had hung around so you could help see the error of her ways.
not-LOL
GAThis is Trump's speech transcript for Jan. 6 speech. I've highlighted the passages that I think were Trump used language to motivate the attack on the capitol
https://sway.office.com/f0zVNBtZTX1ohKBP?ref=LinkPerhaps it wiser to listen to his speech in full, it offers the listener his tone, his demeanor, and not just selected highlighted words. IMO this can offer a more balanced way to form an opinion. However, it is well apparent we have a segment of our population that are more or less trained to select words and forgo all other contexts.
Sharlee: Here it is. I would love to hear your impression of the entire speech. It's an hour and ten minutes long. Now you have the transcript and the live version. I would think that would be enough context to form a balanced opinion. I'm not doing this just for you. I'm doing it for everybody in this forum so they can all have a balanced opinion of what went down that day.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9& … AG21pBvVAkI have listened to it at least three times. As I mentioned in one of my very first posts here at HP on the subject, I tuned out early in the speech and went shopping. I told my husband this is inciting the crowd. I came back and found that the Capitol was attacked.
In the days after I decide to listen to the speech in full, due to all I was hearing from the media. In the end, I came out feeling somewhat diffrently. The full context of the speech and how he lead up to summing up and asking those at the rally to walk to the capitol.
Trump summed up by telling this to his supporters --- His tone and demeanor were calm and upbeat, encouraging.
Trump ---' If you don't FIGHT like hell you're not going to have a country anymore'
"I know that everyone here will soon be marching over to the Capitol building to PEACEFULLY and PATRIOTICALLY make your voices heard."
"We're going to walk down to the Capitol and we're going to CHEER on our brave senators and congressmen and women, and we're probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them."
Does this sound as if he is telling the crowd to attack the Capitol or commit violence?
It would sell appear media grabbed on to one-word FIGHT... They did not choose to provide the other words he used --- PEACEFULLY and PATRIOTICALLY: Cheer.
Are these in any respect dog whistles that would promote violence?
After listening to the speech in full, I saw a man that was not in any respect backing down from his beliefs that the election was stolen, in the first part of the speech he vented, he then went on to offer the crowd encouragement that he would not give up his fight, he ended in telling his supporters they created a movement that was worth continuing the fight. And then closed with they must do it peacefully, patriotically, by cheering on the brave senators and congressmen and women that were at the Capitol on that day fighting for their cause.
In the end, that's what I heard, and saw by watching the video. Tone and demeanor were very important to come to my opinion. This impeachment is a witch hunt. A despicable Democratic ploy. Hopefully, it backfires. Wake up and take note you have fallen into media spin. It's dangerous.
IN FULL WITHOUT SELECTED HIGHLIGHTED SENTENCES -- All the quotes I posted just were not highlighted as the link you offered, odd is it not? --- It would seem your link was geared to contort the contexts of the speech. Maybe you might read the transcript in full, not just highlighted words. Better yet have an actual listen to the video. You can find it in full on Youtube.
https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/do … -january-6
Did some at the rally and in the months before choose to hear dog whistles that lead them to attack the Capitol, it would well appear they did --- But the majority of Trump's followers chose not to run into the Capitol. And would argue they did not feel Trump was attempting to incite a riot. Do I think Trump purposely sought to send dog whistles out to some? I can't be sure, so I will not accuse him. It would seem a very serious accusation to
place forward if there is any doubt.
Thanks for the link Mike, and your highlighting efforts, but I don't need it. I listened to the speech the day it was given and was disgusted by it.
I don't need to nit-pik or argue particular words or phrases to defend or condemn. My opinion is firm. I think that speech, along with his previous 3 weeks of urging, clearly revved-up that crowd of supporters to do what some of them did.
But, I also think the Jan.6 speech was not the match that lit the fuse. I believe the fuse was already lit. Some folks came to that rally prepared—with weapons and plans. They didn't need the incitement of the Jan. 6 speech. It was just the final permission.
My bottom-line is that I do think Pres. Trump is responsible for spurring on the group that assaulted the Capital, but it is the responsibility of 3 weeks of action, not that one speech.
GAGA: I agree with you totally. That speech was the culmination of Trump's drumbeats including the fake news, the enemy of the people, the weak republicans, the radicalized democrats, and the election being stolen that lit the fire. He had been repeating this for months, and in some cases for years as he played it to a very select audience.
Everybody: The topic of this forum is about exposing Fox and MAGA news. So keeping with that, here is an article about Fox News losing viewership after Trump's gambit. And another one about how Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson distort what Q Anon is about.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/ … o-decades/
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppShareAre you confusing a well laid out program to give viewers what they want with producing faux news?
People appear to want the sensational videos, the rabid violence type of thing in their news. Truth, the whole story rather than part - these things do not seem important to the general viewership any more.
So if viewership falls I'm not sure it could be laid to faux news no matter what you personally think of the honesty of the network. Actually, I'm pretty darned sure it could NOT be laid at that, but then I'm pretty jaded any more about media and what causes people to prefer one source over another. Mostly they tune in to what they want to hear, IMO, and if they don't get it they go elsewhere but that hardly means that what they didn't want to hear was "fake news". Only that they didn't want to hear it.Wilderness: I find that the prime time Fox and MAGA news is dangerous to this country and has and continues to create a great divide in the country.
Make no mistake, The days of Walter Cronkite and the Huntly Brinkley report are over. What Fox and Company call news today is not news, it is attack the others agenda while defending their agenda.
It's all about ratings and the flow of money from the sponsors to the corporation and then to the talking heads on both sides of the aisle. If the rating start to drop, the corporate heads will do something to bring the ratings backup and increase the flow of money. It is all done at the expense of keeping the people divided, while catering to their values and belief systems.Personally I find the current trend to turn the news into commentary to be a far greater danger to the country than an occasional positive tidbit about Trump or Trump's actions. But then my own emphasis is not on trashing Trump, but on getting "the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth" out to those wanting the news.
And CNN, ABC, CBS, etc. are, if anything, worse than Fox is about that. There is indeed an agenda in MSM today, and it is not to provide that whole truth to the listener.Wilderness: In reference to your last sentence, how do you come to that conclusion?
From watching them. How did you come to your conclusion about Fox?
Wilderness: We buy you books and you bring them home and tear out the pages. When are you going to learn, you don't answer a question by asking another question? I'll ask you again. How did you come to your conclusion?
I'll answer your question. I came to my conclusion by switching between CNN and Fox, when Laura Ingraham, Tucker Carlson, and Sean Hannity are on. I don't do it all in one day. At the same time they are worlds apart.
Here is Tucker Carlson about our Q Anon representative in congress.
https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-car … er-beliefs
Here is what Q Anon is really about. You can draw your own conclusion.
https://www.nytimes.com/article/what-is-qanon.html
I find what you call the "dangerous" Fox News agenda no more dangerous than what I see coming from the Left-leaning news. In short, I think we are talking about influencing people. (heaven knows how easily we are influenced), and for me, one is as bad as the other.
But to end on a note of agreement:
"It's all about ratings and the flow of money from the sponsors to the corporation and then to the talking heads on both sides of the aisle. If the rating start to drop, the corporate heads will do something to bring the ratings backup and increase the flow of money. It is all done at the expense of keeping the people divided, while catering to their values and belief systems."
Amen brother. The motives and people behind those motives are really secondary to your statement. Once more people realize that we just might have the uprising that Ken has been preaching.
And yes, I do realize that I am as susceptible to that manipulation as anyone else is. It is just human nature to agree with what agrees with your perspectives.
GAGA: You might call it influence. I call it brainwashing. Here is Tucker Carlson from last night.
https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-car … er-beliefs
Here is what Q Anon is really about. I'll let you draw the conclusion as to whether Fox News is dangerous or not.
https://www.nytimes.com/article/what-is-qanon.htmlTo the point of your first link, and specifically, what Carlson said; I agree with him and have said so. He only spoke to the point that she was legitimately elected by the large majority of her constituents. I think each of us has the Right to vote for who we want to represent us.
Nothing said in the Carlson segment makes me think he and Fox News are dangerous. It seems you don't agree with that.
GAGA: There is a difference between freedom of speech and freedom of reach. Did you read the link about Q Anon? They were the ones who were wearing the "Q" and stormed the Capitol. The guy with the horns is Q Anon Shaman. They believe Trump was giving them coded messages in his speech. Therein lies the danger of Fox News supporting this cult.
That may be your opinion, but I don't see how you get all that from the Carlson link you provided. I understood his segment to be addressing our freedom to select our representatives—not our freedom of speech Rights, nor any legitimizing of holding nutty or dangerous views.
Maybe that link wasn't the one you intended, or, maybe you are insisting that I ignore what was said and read between the lines to understand what was meant, or, maybe yours is a case where anyone not on the 'bashing bandwagon' is dangerous, no matter what they are talking about?
GAGA: As I told Sharlee, it's interesting how two people can look at the same video and hear and see the same thing but come to different conclusions.
Here it is again:
https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-car … er-beliefs
If you notice the banner at the bottom of the screen says "freedom of thought is no longer allowed." That implies that democrats are saying this and it is just another way of saying they don't want freedom of speech.
And then at about half way through the video there is a popup that says "freedom of speech" as he continues to defend her. Then he says she has bad opinions and implies democrats are chastising her for her "bad opinion."
When in fact, she belongs to a cult. The only reason she was elected as the representative of the 14th district of Georgia is because all the opposition dropped out. Carlson doesn't tell you that. He just says she won 75% of the vote.
She is a member of Q Anon. Whether you realize it or not, they were the major force in storming the Capitol. They claim they received coded messages from Trump's speech. I don't know how you feel about it, but when a cult infiltrates our government and Fox news pundits defend them I see that as being a danger to our country.
Here is what Mitch McConnel thinks about her.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppSharePP "If you notice the banner at the bottom of the screen says "freedom of thought is no longer allowed." That implies that democrats are saying this and it is just another way of saying they don't want freedom of speech"
You may not like M.T.Green's opinion, the multiple examples of her opinions CNN has presented in their reporting. But she has a right to voice what she pleases. --- "freedom of thought is no longer allowed." Tucker makes no mention of Democrats to make his point.
He certainly made one realize how she was immediately condemned by Congress for her opinions.
PP "
And then at about halfway through the video, there is a popup that says "freedom of speech" as he continues to defend her. "
I have added the transcript to the Tucker link, I could find no evidence that Tucker defended Green's ideologies or Green other than her right to freedom of speech. He was simply defending free speech for all. No more no less. He defends those that voted for her, she defends her right to share her thoughts, her opinion.
Is it possible American's don't need to be told what to think in regards to Green's ideologies? Is it not possible most American's have enough common sense to find her ideas foreign to what our own common sense dictates?
PP "When in fact, she belongs to a cult. "
I can find no evidence of her being a member of a cult. Her ideologies seem very appalling. We are at a very perilous place in our history. People are plain out mad. And suppression of speech and canceling out those we disagree with will add lots of fuel to the fire. That's what I got out of the Tucker link you posted. He simply told a blunt truth, not one word he said could be misconstrued. The context is so clear. It does make me wonder as you mentioned how one could listen or read his words and find such different meanings in them.
"GA: As I told Sharlee, it's interesting how two people can look at the same video and hear and see the same thing but come to different conclusions."
Transcript
"TUCKER CARLSON (HOST): So, how dangerous -- just how dangerous is this three-named congresswoman you probably have never heard of?
Well, so dangerous, that in the name of democracy, she must be expelled tonight from the Congress. That's what they're saying. No one is claiming voter fraud here. The member in question was elected just months ago with 75% of the vote. Now, that's roughly the same percentage of the vote that Nancy Pelosi got out in San Francisco. So, there is no question that her voters very much wanted her to represent them in Washington.
On the other hand, what do her voters have to do with democracy? That's not how democracy works. In the new democracy, CNN gets the veto. If cable news doesn't like your views, you have to leave Congress. That's the rule.
The test is entirely ideological. You don't have to actually harm anyone to lose your job. This new member of congress has barely even voted. She just got there the other day.
But CNN says she has bad opinions. Therefore, she's the greatest threat we face. Now, if you're skeptical about any of this, our advice is to keep it to yourself, because free inquiry is dead. Unauthorized questions are hate speech.
Anyone who suggests that this one member of Congress is not really America's greatest enemy is by definition one of America's greatest enemies."
So, you have the right to find Green's opinions adverse to your own. I find them abhorrent. However, she has a right to her views. We have the right to condemn her views. We don't have the right to punish her for them. Ya talk about Hitler... It's time some think about what has become acceptable to them in regard to punishing others for not agreeing with them. This kind of thinking is dangerous and should be unacceptable in any society.Sharlee: Did I say to punish her? How did anybody punish her so far other than think about taking her off of the Education Committee, for which she has no qualifications?
But it's O.K. for congress to punish Liz Cheney for supporting Trump's impeachment Talk about a double standard. Marjorie Taylor Greene is member of a domestic terrorists group, but that's O.K.
You referenced Hitler. Let's talk about Hitler. She belongs to Q Anon. They support racism and anti-Semitism ideologies, just like Hitler. She agreed to put a bullet to Pelosi's head. Sounds pretty NAZI to me. The Fox pundits are playing to Trump's base which includes Q Anon members and by defending her they are promoting this cult that believes in violence and far-fetched conspiracies as witnessed by storming the Capitol. They are domestic terrorists for God's sake.
She has the right to say anything she wants unless she is harming others with her rhetoric. She has a responsibility to do the right thing as a congresswomen. I know that sounds relative, but people who are earnest in their endeavors know what that means.
Her rhetoric incites other Q Anon members to take action. It is of benefit to her because she looks good by those who don't want Biden or the Democrats to succeed.
That's what Fox and Q Anon are all about. Just like with Obama, a large faction of Fox and the GOP do not want Biden and company to succeed because they still support Trump. They believe that is their job.
That's why this country is divided and that is why I'm on a quest to unveil Fox's pundits for their misinformation and what they are really about. They don't present the news. It is all right wing propaganda to make Biden and the democrats look bad.
CNN actually presents news except for Chris Cuomo. He mainly presents his opinion, but he does have guests from the other side. CNN has actual journalist. What qualifications do Ingraham, Carlson, and Hannity have to be journalists? They are nothing but talks jocks as you say. They are put there by Rupert Murdoch to bring in the big bucks for him and them via viewership and sponsors. Just like Trump said, "We love the uneducated people.
https://news.yahoo.com/marjorie-taylor- … 25291.htmlOh no . . . are you really claiming that CNN's Cuomo is a journalist that presents both sides of an issue?
Damn, my lying eyes must be worst than I thought. Or else, your bias is exactly as strong as I thought. I will go with the latter MIked. I find it crazy that you would portray Cuomo as a legitimate journalist.
Take a look at his nightly shows during the Portland protests. That should be enough to make my point, but if it isn't, then there is no need for any more effort from either of us.
GAPP "Did I say to punish her? How did anybody punish her so far other than think about taking her off of the Education Committee, for which she has no qualifications?"
Let me clarify, I did not hope to imply you personally wanted to punish Green. --- I used the word 'we" as social categorization. I regard her belonging to Q Anon there is no proof of that. In fact, she denies it. I have not read or heard anyone defend her statements or Facebook likes.
PP" She has a responsibility to do the right thing as a congresswoman. "
Since she came to Congress has she done anything that could be called irresponsible in her job performance? And no I am sure she as so many Republicans in Washington don't want Biden to succeed. That's politics is it not?
IMO the country is divided due to So many being so displeased with Government as a whole. Many citizens are just done with the same old - same old. And they are yes fighting mad. Evermore so now with Biden canceling much of what Trump did that so many felt had us on a better path than we have been on in years. So, you are very correct half the country wants Biden to fail, just like many wanted Trumps to fail. You are fooling yourself if you think those on the right could or will be satisfied with going backward.
I can't or won't argue if any of them are qualified to be called journalists. I think it sad that our society is willing to consider nightly talk shows a place to obtain the news. It is very clear it's based on opinions of whoever they dig up on a given night.
The Tucker - link may not have been the best to prove your point.
Could have the statement "we love the poorly educated" been taken out of context? Tonight I watched Bide give a few words he was expressing his condolences to the families of two FBI agents killed while trying to serve a warrant in Florida Tuesday, President Biden used some eyebrow-raising language, noting that “the vast majority of U.S. law enforcement officers are “decent, honorable people.”
I wondered immediately what any FBI agencies were thinking when they heard him say that. I wondered what I would have felt if related to either agent that was killed.
I listened to his entire speech live, so I missed nothing of the context This to me was unforgivable and unforgettable.
You are right about the "two people looking at the same thing" point. You posted a link to a Tucker Carlson segment that I watched and read.
I saw, and read, a segment speaking to the right of constituents to vote for the representative of their choice. You, apparently, saw that same segment as defending support for a QAnon believer. I believe my 'literal' reading' is more truthful than your 'interpreted' reading.
You go with your interpretation and I will go with my literal reading.
GAGA: I learned a long time ago, when teaching, one should put themselves in the place of their students and feel what they are feeling. That is the purpose of what Carlson did, he is not playing to your literal reading. Very clever calling it a reading. When in fact it is your interpretation.
He is playing to his viewership to downplay her status as a member of a domestic terrorists group. And at the same time, he is directing their attention to the evil left for controlling her thoughts as the banner states. He says she won her election fair and square by 75%.
But he does not mention that the opposition dropped out. I call that influence by omission or plain a** weasel wording. I found that out by doing research. I don't care about literal reading.. I care about what is the message that he is sending to his viewers and how are they interpreting it. That's what propaganda is all about.Sharlee: Here is everything you wanted to know about Marjorie Taylor Green, but were afraid to ask.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marjorie_Taylor_Greene
MikeNot really interested in Green. I only jumped in to give my two-cents on Tucker's view of freedom of speech. As I said in an earlier comment I find her opinion and ideologies appalling. However, Tucker was in no respect defending Green's opinions or ideologies.
Here is the same thing I just wrote to Ken. It applies to you as well.
Ken: Nice distraction. Let me remind you. I started this forum and the purpose of it is to expose Fox and MAGA news for what it really is.
Probably your statistics are correct and they are important to the country. But so is exposing propaganda that is dividing this country. We will not be able to accomplish what you want with a divided country.
What I'm doing is curating the BS coming from those outlets on a daily basis and trying to expose them for what they really are.
I find it very interesting that people on this forum can view a video by Tucker Carlson and read the same transcript about Marjorie Taylor Green and miss the most important part of what he is broadcasting which is the banner at the bottom of the entire video which says "Thought Control." That is intended for his audience.
I don't know how old you are but in the 60's advertisers used something called subliminal projection. They found they could flash messages on movies screens at rate that could not be discerned by the audience but caused the audience to go to the lobby and buy what they were flashing subliminally.
That's what Tucker Carlson was doing. He never mentioned "Thought Control." and it was not in the transcript, but it was certainly on the screen the whole time to make his audience think that the left was using thought control to curtail her from freedom of speech.
As it turns out, she apologized to congress about all her Q Anon BS. Because now she knows what side of the toast her butter is on, if you get my drift. But the apology is an admission of guilt.Mama Mia, here we go again. This time Tucker picks up an email from an unknown source who's only identity is "the messenger" and presents it as fact about Biden's chaos with the immigration detention. This time the banner states "Release them all." Notice, he says, "The predictable results is chaos." That is his opinion presented as fact, but his audience will more than likely believe it.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/relea … InAppShareIt is obvious Fox is not walking back or giving any form of retraction of the emails Tucker spoke of. What is your problem with his report of Biden's orders? I would very much assume the White House would walk this back if the email could be disputed. The email states "release them all".
Why are you having a problem with his report? I don't watch nightly shows, but you are acquainting me with Tucker's show. He seems to just report it as he sees it. I can see how the left would not be able to digest Tucker's style. He is very straight forward, aims for common sense, and takes no prisoners.
He quoting an internal email and shows copies. he is out on a limb, but Fox is behind him, and no one has disputed that email. It appears he has the goods and could divulge the names on the email if need to. This is good journalism. He did homework, got the goods, and can stand behind the goods. You now have real insight into how Biden is not really handling our immigration problem, but making it worse. Thank you, Tucker!
You may not want to watch Tucker, he clearly will be reporting facts you don't want to hear. It would seem you are averse to the truth about Biden's immigration plans.I think you are right, this time, that Carlson is 'making hay while the sun shines' regarding this issue of emails. But, a review of the issue does offer a few kernels of possible truth—if the leniency of hyperbole is granted. (since all news media uses the tactic)
First, the email's author is not "unknown," it is redacted. And in the email chain, (yes, there is more than one "unknown" author), there is a "Release them all" statement, but it appears to have been a confused interpretation regarding Covid-19 High-Risk Detainees, (HRDs), that even those in the ICE email chain needed to have clarified.
It does appear the email Carlson exaggerated is real, and that the email chain does show confusion, (chaos?), even among supervisory-level ICE Field Office Directors.
Here is the email chain as documented in the Texas court filing:
State of Texas vs. United States of AmericaIn regards to this and your previous post to me, the issue is the same for CNN, they fabricate and make things up and twist the issues as much as, if not more than FOX.
An objective viewer, not predisposed to one side of the argument or the other, would clearly see this.
The whole argument that one party is capable of addressing the issues is in itself a sign that the person making the argument is ignorant of what is truly going on within our political system.
Democrat or Republican, Socialist or Conservative, CNN or FOX, it is about keeping the people divided and blaming one another so that the those that control the establishment remain in power.
At a time when people want and demand change we are instead being pit against one another with a divisiveness we have never seen, and this is deliberate... on both sides.
A house divided, is being divided on purpose... there is nothing more right, or more true about CNN than FOX... they both serve the same interests.
A great example of how well this system works to keep the people in place and keep change (that people want to see) occurring at a snails pace is the past 12 years.
Obama promised change, the Republicans "stopped" him, Trump promised to "drain the swamp" and the Democrats "stopped" him, both promised their respective supporters sweeping change... the supporters got little of what they were hoping for.
For example the ACA made some small positive changes, but in reality all it really did was make the large Insurance companies rich at the expense of their competition, while also making millions of "middle class" Americans choose between paying for an insurance that covered nothing, or paying a "penalty" to the government for not having insurance at all.
In short, average-joe got screwed by the ACA while the rich Insurance companies got richer.
The two "sides" blamed one another for the last 12 years for the ACA not really working, all the while it was average Americans that got the shaft.
Speaking of back in the 60s (which you mentioned in regards to subliminal programming)... back in the 60s a Construction worker could support a family of six on one salary. Today a single person working in Construction can't support himself, and it requires both parents to work to support a family of four, if they are lucky... if "progress" keeps going at this rate I can only imagine how swell things are going to be in 2060.
" Let me remind you. I started this forum and the purpose of it is to expose Fox and MAGA news for what it really is."
You will get no argument from me about "nightly network news". I have made it clear I feel they do nothing but push propaganda. ALL THERE networks... In this case, you just picked the wrong link to prove your point IMO. You could have pretty much been blindfolded on any given night to prove your point. But your example just did not hit the mark.
First Tucker was careful not to point the finger at either party, he made no mention of Demacrats, as you felt he was referring to in one of the byline banners. He did not defend Green's ideologies whatsoever... He was pointing out some pretty scary aspects of our society as a whole. Sich as cancel culture, and curbing freedom of speech.
It seems you are at this point discussing Green. It is obvious she has some very off the wall ideologies.
"Probably your statistics are correct and they are important to the country. But so is exposing propaganda that is dividing this country. We will not be able to accomplish what you want with a divided country."
You must be kidding... This country started to split under Obama. That's one of the reasons Trump won. You are kidding yourself if you think Fox caused the great divide. You are kidding yourself if you think it will mend with a president that has already disrespected over half the country in his first weeks in office.
Those on the right are resolved not to go backward in any fashion. Why would anyone I mean anyone what too? We have witnessed so much accomplishment under Trump, and he made it all look so easy. Why would we want to go back to all the bureaucracy that Democrats now offer? It's laughable. I realize it's comfortable for many on the left, but we want to move forward. Forward may not be comfortable for some.Sharlee: It's funny what you are supporting is called the conservative movement. That implies they don't want to go forward, but stay where they are. Trump did not go forward, he went backward, to remove regulations that keep this country safe from pollution and greed. That's what MAGA is about. It's to go backwards again to another time.
Liberals on the other hand want to go forward. That's why they are called progressives. They don't want to depend on fossil fuels like Trump. They want new technology and innovation to take us into the future. They want to keep us safe from pollution and greed from Wall Street, and global warming, hence the regulations. Do want us to have another financial meltdown, like Obama inherited from Bush? Do you want more pollution, and the terrible effects of global warming?
As far as the country being divided, it has been divided since Reagan repealed the Fairness Doctrine which opened the door for outlets like Fox News and yes CNN as well. I can curate CNN as well, but I would venture to say they don't have people like Ingraham, Carlson, and Hannity."It's funny what you are supporting is called the conservative movement. That implies they don't want to go forward, but stay where they are.'
Four words --- New conservative in town... Hence we voted for Trump, many of us liked his policies were pleased with the path we were on. You are looking at a new breed of conservative, Kept all the best, dumped the rest, add on some new...
I consider Biden returning to the same old same old. The playbook never changes, not a bit.
No argument with the great divide... It's here to stay for the time being.
Tip --- you might feel better not watching the nightly news. It clearly has you upset, and that's not good for your health. You will be surprised after a few weeks you too will see all more clearly. It will be your individual thoughts. And you will come by them with a sense of clarity that you might not imagine at this point.
And we are headed for a meltdown. Logically we have a pandemic. We have a man in the White House that is making unsound decisions thus far. A meltdown is a gimmie. Safe places are just not going to be available. So buckle up.
Thought --- It would appear many on the left always play the blame game, media help them along. It keeps them in turmoil. Is that where "they" want them? Maybe looking to lean on "them"? Big Government...Sharlee: Actually, I enjoy being in these forums. I feel I'm doing my part to fight a cause that I feel is justifiable by exposing Fox and company for what they are. I also like expressing my thoughts and doing the research. I actually learn every time I do research. I try to be as objective and factual as I can. Also being in this forums allows me to sharpen my writing skills. So it is all good. I appreciate you being concerned about me, but this is actually therapy for me. If I didn't do this I would be holding in my thoughts and then one day, I might explode.
Trump was the biggest blame gamer of them all. He never accepted the blame for any of his screwups, but always shifted the blame to others, many of whom actually supported him.
As far as Biden making unsound decisions, we now have 1% of the population vaccinated and they are going to start distribution to pharmacies. What is unsound about that?
I took my blood pressure this morning after walking three miles and it was 121/61, but I'm on blood pressure meds...white coat syndrome.PP "Sharlee: Actually, I enjoy being in these forums. I feel I'm doing my part to fight a cause that I feel is justifiable by exposing Fox and company for what they are. I also like expressing my thoughts and doing the research. I actually learn every time I do research. I try to be as objective and factual as I can. Also being in this forums allows me to sharpen my writing skills. So it is all good. I appreciate you being concerned about me, but this is actually therapy for me. If I didn't do this I would be holding in my thoughts and then one day, I might explode."
Hey, I enjoy your threads, they are always interesting. Media propaganda is a very interesting subject. And you should fight any cause that you feel needs exposure.
I can't argue the fact that Trump is King of the blame game.
You do realize thus far the number you offered in regard to vaccinations was given on Trump's last couple of weeks in office. And it was Trump that set up the agreements with the many companies CVS, Walgreens, Walmarts, Meijers, and several others to administer the vaccine. This was all done by the folks of Operation Warp Speed. And all announced the summit was televised much of a full day when they rolled out all the plans. unfortunately, CVS will only be starting out in eleven states. Walgreens I believe they will be up and running in 33 states.
Great blood pressure, we have something very much in common I walk daily. At least three miles...
here is a link for Operation Warp Speed Summit It offers representatives from CVS and Walgreens and they explain the roles they will play getting out vaccine into nursing homes as well as to the general public using their many thousand stores ---.Enter at 2.45
Biden did not secure the CVS, Walmarts, Walgreens, Sams Club, and many more that was the Trump administration
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0yclESPhfIUMore propaganda, notice the banner at the bottom of the screen.
https://www.mediamatters.org/laura-ingr … ists-ranks
It's all about money. This is what happens when you lie for ratings.
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/202 … wsuit.htmlNot sure where you are going here? Laura was talking about the Dems cry to vet the military for possible subversive connections to far-right extremists. She pointed out some very good points on how the Democrats in the past could careless about vetting troops when it would not suit their agenda. So the screen banner although a bit hyperbolic was making a point. I don't feel Biden's name should have been used.
And The Dobb's problem --- Hard to comment due to I don't watch Dobb's show, so not sure of what his statements were that got him fired.
I don't think his show should have been canceled due to the lawsuit. It appears Fox fired him after they got wind of the lawsuit, not because of his statements. I think they should have waited until after the outcome of the Civil lawsuit was over to determine if they needed to fire him. I liked America when we had the decency to not condemn ---Innocent until proven guilty. I see this as a poor precedent to set. Some that have been named in that lawsuit claim that they have not even been notified.
I think we as a country are headed down a very bad path when it comes to our individual rights and freedom of speech.
So, both your links do show IMO propaganda, but it is up to the eye of the beholder to determine where the propaganda lies.Sharlee:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles … on-disinfo
It seems in congressional hearings, one is guilty until proven innocent. How many times was Hillary brought before the investigative committee on Bengahzi, until Trey Gowdy and company finally gave up.
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/29/us/p … ghazi.htmlI can't argue that this kind of guilty until proven innocent. has been going on for some time. Both parties are guilty of it. So, do you this kind of justice is fair? Point a finger, and claim you are guilty until you are proven innocent?
We were discussing one case, the Dobb's case. I would speculate to say the same was done to Hillary Clinton. I have no party when it comes to justice. I prefer to hold on to my values. A person is innocent until proved guilty. I could never condone canceling someone on an "if come". Plenty of time to inflict a just punishment after guilt is proven. I consider a society that conducts justice preferring to use guilty until proven innocent, a society that is going backward.Sharlee: “A bedrock principle of the American criminal justice system is that a defendant accused of a crime is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This protection comes from the due process guarantees in the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution."
However, this does not seem to apply to congressional hearings and investigations. It appears to be just the opposite on both sides of the aisle. In my view, a lot of tax payer money and time is spent trying to prove that the accused is guilty instead of starting with the presumption of innocents.I agree that our tax dollars are wasted on frivolous politically fueled investigations going the route of trying to prove a crime or build a case instead of having proof of a crime before going forward with a trial.
This is not fair in any situation, the criminal court, or Congressional hearings.That's because congress is not a court. There is no judge, there is no jury, there is only two groups both interested in furthering political power rather than justice or truth.
If it were different, if those "hearings" and "investigations" were about justice and truth we wouldn't see votes being made in near lockstep with a political party, particularly when the issues are seldom clear cut but gray in nature.
As a recent example, consider the vote concerning the constitutionality of the current impeachment effort. Scholars all over the country differ in their opinions as to whether the effort was constitutional, yet the vote was down party lines. Only a tiny handful voted their actual opinion, while the vast majority voted the party agenda.Wilderness; I agree with you totally. It is not about justice. It is about party agenda. In an impeachment, the house serves as the plaintiff and the senate serves as the jury. There is no judge, except for the Chief Justice serving as a tie breaker.
I wouldn't even call the Senate a jury...not when voting is so blatantly done along party lines. Juries are to be impartial, and are carefully selected for just that; the senate doesn't even come close to being impartial.
It may play the part of a jury, but it is far more in line with the hanging mobs of the old west. Verdicts are made, in the minds of the vast majority if not publicly, without any evidence being given; all that is necessary is knowledge of how the party wishes them to vote.Wilderness: You are right again. I can't believer this. I'm agreeing with you twice.
Trump's lawyer on Hannity.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppShare
Yet, however, the Senate can pronounce guilt in the case of impeachment. Which ultimately the accused will ask the Supreme Court to adjudicate the case against him, and seek to have his constitutional rights protected. Right's such as free speech, and unconstitutional impeachment due to he is no longer in office. So, ultimately Trump will have impartial Judges decide the case. Trump's second impeachment will most likely set a precedent either way. I have hopes it will progress to the SC, to clarify if a president can be impeached after he leaves office. This is a very ugly can of worms. And was uncalled for.
Yes, it was uncalled for...to those to whom the country is more important than political posturing or removing political opponents from the scene.
Others, of course, will disagree; the most important thing in the world is to prevent Trump from ever again being their opponent in the political field. It could, after all, be inextricably intertwined with the power of the Democrat party.I'm watching the manager's presentation today and I can't see how the GOP senators in good conscience could vote to have Trump not impeached. It is a forgone conclusion that they were not going to vote for impeachment. As a matter of fact, Lindsey Graham has already called Trump and told him he has nothing to worry about. That tells me this is strictly political with them. They want to connect to Trump's brainwashed base in order to get re-elected.
If Trump is not impeached, it sets the precedent that will allow others to do the same thing. He needs to be held accountable. I truly believe in his mind, he had no idea, his words and the constant Trump beat for months of the election being stolen from him would result in the violence that he caused. According to the manager's presentation, it was all planned and highly coordinated by Trump and his right wing extremists groups who violently attacked the capitol and it's people.
He held a match to start a small camp fire and it turned into a forest fire because he was in denial and hell bent on winning the election, no matter what it took to do it. But it failed because he was asking Pence to do something that could not be done. Instead, he was going to use Pence and Pelosi as collateral damage. But thank God, that didn't work either."I'm watching the manager's presentation today and I can't see how the GOP senators in good conscience could vote to have Trump not impeached. It is a forgone conclusion that they were not going to vote for impeachment."
Your second sentence says it all: it was foregone because it was a purely political vote. Not because there was a legal, or reasonable, reason to do so.
A very quick look at how the vote went down in the House says it all: 100% of Democrats voted for impeachment, an impeachment that was the very definition of gray, with no clear cut, black and white, answer. Given that it can be nothing but political; truth, honesty and fact need not apply. And then the vote on the legality of the question, again very, very gray with divergent opinions from scholars all over the country, produced 100% agreement from Democrats...once more a political vote rather than an honest one.
Now, you could complain that only Democrats have the legal knowledge and experience to produce that kind of vote...proving yet once again that it was political.Wilderness: So you don't believe the videos that were presented and Trump's tweets? Words and decorum have meanings. Then mean different things to different people based on their values and beliefs. Of course they are based on interpretation.
However what the managers did was brilliant. They kept everything in context by going back to when Trump first started his rants about voter fraud, rigging the election, and stealing the votes.
You don't believe those who admitted that they attacked the Capitol based on what Trump wanted them to do? You think they operated on their own volition? Let's take Trump out of the equation, do you think they still would have done that?If people, including you, "interpret" words to mean something other than what Webster says it means then it is on you, not the speaker.
People have, for thousands of years, "interpreted" differently than what was said, acting on their interpretation. And that is on them, just as it is on you, not on the speaker.
We all "read between the lines" when people speak...but when that "reading" results in activity such as was seen it is not the speakers fault. And, IMO, no amount of your "interpretation" can change that. Were you an unbiased observer it might be different, but you aren't. You have, for years, indicated a deep seated resentment, dislike and even hatred of Trump - it makes anything you say suspect. And doubly so for your interpretation of what Trump meant when it does not agree with his words. IMO.Wilderness: So then by your own logic, you are as biased as I am, because you have supported Trump all the way. And you also didn't answer my questions at all. Welcome back Wilderness. You are up to your old tricks.
I watched the entire trial today and after the first break, I switched to Fox to see what their reaction was to the trial. It was a program called The Five and they were not even covering the trial. Instead they were covering some thing about Mark Cuban and the NBA. After the trial was over I switched back to Fox and Tucker Carlson was on with more NBA news.
This is what's wrong with this country and its two realities. Millions of people who were watching Fox were not even aware of the compelling evidence that was provided by the trial managers. They were not even aware of Trump's drum beats for months about election rigging and Trump's planning and coordination with extremists groups to attack the Capitol.
As they say ignorance can be bliss. This is the way Fox wants it, so they keep their audience dummied down to the truth. This shows how they support the right wing and Trump's base so that GOP senators can use it to get re-elected. Sometimes, to do nothing is to do everything and in Fox's case it works. Covering the NBA while the trial is going on is like putting up a smoke screen so it protects their audience from the truth and the facts about Trump.I think 'The Five' is one of the worst possible examples of Fox coverage. It ranks right up there with Hannity in my mind.
Fox's 3 - 5 pm and 6 - 7 pm are much better programs.
GAYour thread inspired me to watch Carlson. I have tuned in a couple of times. I think his style of reporting is to go right to the ugly part of a problem, and he certainly seemed non-bias in most respects just putting a spotlight on the problem. This may be hard for some. he does not mince words and really does make one uncomfortable due to his very straightforward way of tackling a subject. He is a matter of fact and uses common sense in a hyperbolic way. In my view, a liberal might want to stay away from the Trucker Carlson show. I would think he would be popular with conservatives, that like straight forward common sense kind of reporting with a huge helping of sarcasm. I actually like his show, but it did key me up a bit. Sometimes it just better to not be hit square in the between of the eyes with straight-up logic.
I do not watch Ingraham.Sharlee: This is not straight up logic as you say. It is straight up lying.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/tucke … InAppShare
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/tucke … InAppShareThat is a fair assessment. It could be criticized because I have seen Tucker go off the deep end, but I think it is generally accurate, relative to the other names mentioned.. I don't watch any of Fox after 7 pm, (except Tucker, sometimes he gets my attention). So I too have only caught blips of Ingraham, (but enough to form my opinion).
GA
I think Ingraham is a Hannity-clone mouthpiece. Tucker . . . I can't put him in the same category. He will very definitely slant every topic with a conservative anti-Democrat presentation, but not as badly as the others mentioned. Sometimes he is worth the watch and sometimes not.
However, all of that is no different from any other cable news outlet. They will have relatively reasonable and reliable daytime segments. and then come the pundits. Just pick your flavor.
For instance; I would compare CNN's Tapper to Tucker, and Lemon and Cuomo to Ingraham and Hannity.
GATucker Carlson used to be on MSNBC many years ago and I used to watch him to get a conservative view. He was tolerable and fairly reasonable back then.
Yep, in the context of this discussion "fairly reasonable" works. When he is right, (or at least when I think he is right), he is worth the watch. But, he can also go too far and sound a bit like Ingraham and Hannity.
GA
GA: Not even close. Hannity influenced Trump and Trump influenced Hannity and they in turn influenced the country to create a deeper division than what was already there.
Rupert Murdoch owns Fox and his mission is to embolden the conservative republican apparatus while denigrating the liberal democratic apparatus. You can say the same thing about MSM, but I don't believe to the same degree and extent as Fox.
Fox is a result of Reagan removing the fairness doctrine. Before that we had fair and balanced news. Granted, that opened the door for cable news as well.
In the final analysis, it is all about ratings on both sides that gets converted to money. But in my view, Trump was successful in dividing the country and conquering the GOP via Fox News and its cohorts. That is why Trump is going to be acquitted.
That is also why making comparisons about BLM damage to the Capitol attack is a false equivalence, because BLM was not encouraged and embolden by a president and Fox News.
Wow! I covered a lot of ground there in just a few paragraphs.How Fox News hosts started attacking COVID-19 vaccines after Biden took over the rollout from Trump
https://www.businessinsider.com/fox-new … ump-2021-2At this point, I don't think it is prudent for any media to bad mouth the vaccine. We need people to be vaccinated to rid ourselves of COVID. We need to build a herd. The vaccine may very well show some side effects as some vaccines do. But this is a crisis, we need to weigh the cost if we do not build a herd we will continue to live under a very dark cloud.
This is how Laura Ingraham convolutes what is actually being said to turn her viewers against reality.
https://a.msn.com/r/2/BB1dXwVS?m=en-us& … InAppShare
Tucker Carlson spent all day trying to locate a Qanon website. This is why Trump supporters are so misinformed and the country is still deeply divided.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/tucke … InAppShareI don't know his internet skill level, but using Bing and searching 'Qanon' the second item was ' TheQanon.com'. A website that had article after article regarding its objectives and conspiracy info. I did the same thing on Google and that site does not come up even putting it between quotation marks. Maybe Google is censoring it. So, maybe he has an excuse. However searching it using them both Wikipedia is the first item followed by page after page of articles concerning it.
tsmog: Most of his audience won't even question him. Thanks for your input.
I'm back and so is Tucker Carlson:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/tucke … InAppShareOk --- I know you are not going to be pleased with my take on the latest Tucker opinion you have a problem with
First Tucker is a self-described American conservative television host. So, he is giving nothing but his opinion when he speaks. Is he a typical conservative, no? He is controversial and very outspoken, Much of the time it's hard to argue with his hard-line common-sense view. He bases his opinions on common sense. Is he hard to agree with, yes he can be?
"He then roped in other women for good measure, claiming Michelle Obama, Hillary Clinton and Meghan Markle had all faked victimhood. Lorenz, Carlson added, is “far younger” and “much less talented” than other Times reporters, yet – according to Carlson – she has a place “at the top of journalism’s repulsive little food chain”.
This was his opinion, not sure by the article if he gave examples of his reasoning on why he felt the mentioned women fake victimhood. I would hope he explained his reasoning. Otherwise, his opinion would be very unfair. I would need to have listened to the full context of the segment to really give an opinion.
I am not one that thinks anyone should be discriminated against due to gender, I also don't think they should be given a break due to tom gender. Just saying, ya want to run with big dogs, better be able to get growled at.
When it comes to free speech I support it with vigor. I think suppressing it could become dangerous, a world we would truly dislike.Sharlee: It may be his opinion, but he has a a huge audience who not only believe what he says, but they act on his misinformation. Fox News has created an alternate reality that in most cases has nothing to do with the Truth.
Rupert Murdoch and his sons have admitted, their mission is to destroy the democratic party, because its all about money. You can say the same thing about the MSM, but in my view, they present more of the news instead of having a vendetta against the other side.
The Fox News pundits misinform their audience with their propaganda. I believe this country would not be as divided as it is if Fox News told the truth. It's all about trust and his audience trust his lies. My job in this forum is to expose those lies by Carlson, Ingraham, and Hannity.
There are still 74 million people out there who believe the election was stolen from Trump. Fox News and the GOP senators have a lot to do with that. They have also tried to downplay the attack on the Capitol. That in my estimation is very dangerous for this country because their audience believes them and it has been shown they will act on it
When those pundits are called on for their misinformation, they just say, we are entertainers just voicing our opinion...which is a bunch of B.S.Asa a rule Fox go the extra mile to back up their reports with names, and actually live video. One only needs to realize the other two networks do not follow that type of format. They use pundits. And frequently are caught using content out of context. One must realize the news networks(all of them) do have political agendas. Prove of this is the pundits are of the persuasion of the network. I think it almost irresponsible to watch these nightly more or less "talk shows" and not look at them for what they represent---Propaganda.
I look at Carlson, Ingraham, and Hannity as antagonists. They smack one in the fact with unfortunate realities. They don't report the news without delving into the ugly roots of problems. It's unpleasant to hear and realize they are pointing out the ugliness we don't want to hear or deal with.
I watch them here and there, can't say I don't come away feeling the country is a mess, and hopeless.
Yes, I realize there are many that believe something was off with the election, and are already disappointed in Biden and his agenda. In my long life, I have never seen the country so divided, politically, and somewhat more racial. Very sad situation. I can only give an opinion. I think in 2016 many came to the point they were done with the Government as is. And voted for a disrupture. They got and liked Trump's ways of making them feel included. I don't think those that
support Trump or his way of governing will ever return to the status quo.
I also realize so many voted to return to the status quo, which Biden offered. So, I would think we may be in store for a Hot meets cold storm.
Perhaps it's time for just that.Sharlee: It's obvious that you and I have different values and belief systems. You look at Fox and for the most part see truth, while when you look at CNN, you mainly see lies. I see and hear just the opposite. I'm not an avid watcher of Fox, but when I do go there, I do see in your face news, but they are mainly half truths or lies. They use crawl strips, memes and shills as guests to present what they are not saying but still reaching their audience with their propaganda.
Tucker Carlson says he searched all day to see if Qanon had a web site and he could not find one, therefore they must not exists. Therefore his viewers believe him because they think he is telling the truth when in fact he is presenting a phony investigation. But they buy it. That is just one example. Hannity created the idea of a deep state and Trump ran with it and now all his viewers believe there is a deep state. When if fact they can't prove it because it is conspiracy, just like most of their stuff.
I don't think Trump included anybody except himself. He made people think they were part of his team because he was and still is a master con man. And if you didn't agree with him, you were out of there.
You see Biden as being boring and returning to the status quo. I see Biden as being inclusive. Trump always uses "I" and hyperbole to make his points while shifting his blame to others. In Biden's speech, he says I need you and I'm asking you to work with me as a team to come out of this crisis and if I fail, it is my fault not yours. Trump left it up to the states to come up with a distribution plan for the vaccine, so if they failed he could blame them. It would leave him in the clear. Biden is doing it from the Top down which is the way it should be run and it is working. I don't call that status quo.
I think the mission of Fox News, Trump, and the GOP congress is to block and obstruct every move that Biden makes, just like they did to Obama. After all these years of trying to replace Obama care, all they can come up with is a 19 page document that is used as a stage prop.
We all have expectations for who is running the show. Some of us have positive expectations while others have negative expectations. It all depends on our value and belief systems. I'm going to try and continue my expose of Fox and company, because it makes me feel good to expose them...Have a great day.
MikeI hope to address your thoughts on How you believe Trump's Administration handled the COVID vaccine rollout and the fallacy that the Trump ad. left it all up to the states. Biden is clearly taking credit for much of what was set in place many months before Trump left office.
Fact's it was the Trump administration's Operation Warp Speed that set up a partnership with the vast majority of Vaccine distribution sites that are being used now. OWS also set up a program that requested retired Dr. and Nurses to come out of retirement to help administer the vaccine. They set up partnerships with large hospitals, and clinics to administer the injections. I have several times posted the contracts that OWS had with 8 Pharma companies for research and development and contracted vaccine doses in the millions. (Pfizer is the only company out of the 8 that did not take funds for research and development, but a contract to provide millions of doses of vaccine, and the option to order millions of more doses. As Biden did recently thanks to that contract clause .) Biden has done little to nothing but depend on the contracts and partnerships, and programs Trump's OWS provided. And they did it long before Biden walked into the White House. I have added several links to confirm my facts.
HHS.gov
U.S. Department of Health & Human Services
https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2020/11/ … istration-
partners-chain-independent-community-pharmacies-increase-access-future-covid-19-vaccines.html
https://www.healthcarefinancenews.com/n … evelopment
I am not sure why you feel Fox is out to demean all that Biden does. It would almost seem they report more on what Biden is doing or not doing.
The other networks are clearly not reporting much of what he has been doing or saying. Yes, Fox is reporting thongs some just do not want to hear, but they do appear to dot their I's and cross their T's.
And yes, we all have different values and look at things diffrently. We have different coping mechanisms, and different ways how we decipher things and come to conclusions. That is just human nature.
I think you should continue your investigation of Fox news, and yes, if you see something you feel needs exposing you should proceed to do so. I would have liked to see a video or even a date the show was
aired that you spoke of in this latest report you pointed out. I would have liked to have been able to make a more detailed opinion, due to having the full content of Tucker's remarks.
I always enjoy our conversations. SharI did some research this morning and watched some of the footage from Tucker's show where he went after social media's technology reporter Taylor Lorenz.
I felt he was very overly opinionated in his description of Lorenz and it was unnecessary to go after her person. She had a right to say what she said in her tweet, it was her feelings about what she claims to have experienced in regard to being harassed for over a year.
Tucker gave his opinion, which is what his show is all about. But he was harsh, and IMO could have at least respected her right to voice her opinion without insulting her personally.
Did he make a point about her tweet and what he felt it conveyed? Yes, he made a point, and was that point viable? To some. Was it fair play? No... He took a tweet and read too much into it. He should have kept to the content, the context of her words. He took a privilege to read in something that may not have been there. He ultimately attracts her feelings, which is just not fair.
SharSharlee: I really appreciate your research in the Tucker Carlson footage. What you witnessed is the difference between implication and inference. Tucker Carlson implies certain points and his followers inferred from what he said what they think is the truth. They accept it in blind faith because it fits what they expect him to say and what they think about people and situations he attacks. It is confirmation bias.
He has done the same thing with women serving in the military. He says they are making a mockery of our military by serving. The pentagon has called him on that and he calls them "woke generals." The irony is he has never served in the military. Now he is going after uniforms for pregnant women in the Air Force.
I believe what he and his cohorts (Ingraham, and Hannity) are doing is very dangerous for our country. Ingraham says that Fauci and other scientist are just control freaks who want to control everybody. The virus is virtually gone and there is no reason to follow CDC guidelines anymore. Hannity says he is confused and doesn't know what to believe.
To set the record straight, I give credit for Trump to implement OWS to develop the vaccine. But as soon as Biden was nominated, Trump was missing in action as far as the virus goes. He concentrated his efforts on if Biden wins the election it is rigged and Biden stole the election from him because of fraud.
He and Kushner left the distribution of the vaccine up to the states causing the states to go into chaos. Biden picked up the pieces and ran the distribution from the top-down which in my estimation has been a success.
MikeI agree once Trump lost he became a no-show. Sort of saying --- your on your own. I give OWS great credit, and I give Biden credit for keeping most that headed it up on after he became president. I think the team is great and deserves the largest part of the credit.
Tucker does most likely have many that follow him, and are on his "wavelength". It does seem like we have two camps. I try to stay in a third camp, keep an open mind, look at any situation carefully before making an opinion. I think due to nightly news being followed in more numbers these days, it's hard to find any non-bias reporting.
Tucker certainly is outspoken and can be very obnoxious with his cutting opinions.This is what Fox News is really about. I couldn't have said it better.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/news/seth- … InAppShareI located theTucker Carlson show that Seth Myers does his comedy skit.
I watched it in full it was not solely about anti vaccines, I found it more pertinent to the phenomenon "cancel culture and censorship of our right to free speech. He made perfectly valid points to support his opinion.
Unfortunately one does not need to look far to find some people who have had reactions to the COVID Vaccines. Very minute reactions were serious. However, citizens should be allowed to openly discuss the subject on this I agree with Tucker. I also agree some "elites should not promote the vaccines as "problem-free".
I have noted problems on Facebook with friends complaining their comments were removed with complaints of slight side effects after getting their Vaccine. That prompted me to post a thread here on HP, just to ask users about their own Vaccine experiences. The thread was allowed, and I was very pleased to see there was no problem with users leaving comments on the Vaccine.
Tucker is very much about freedoms, and he does not at all use soft filters when communicating.
Seth twisted Tucker's opinion out of context totally. Tucker was not promoting anyone to take the vaccine, but the fact some that who hoped to share their experiences with the vaccine or ask questions about the vaccine have the right to do so. Without Twitter, Facebook, or media to censors their opinion or concerns in regard to the Vaccine. I have added a link to Tucker's show, the segment that Seth referred to. I would be interested in your thoughts after you view the clip. ---- Shar
https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker- … id-vaccineSharlee:
M- I watched the entire video and I started commenting on his every line that he spoke, but that is too laborious. So, I decided to comment on your post instead.
S = I located theTucker Carlson show that Seth Myers does his comedy skit.
S- I watched it in full it was not solely about anti vaccines, I found it more pertinent to the phenomenon "cancel culture and censorship of our right to free speech. He made perfectly valid points to support his opinion.
M- He uses rhetorical questions that can’t be answered by his audience to create doubt and fear of the other side.
S- Unfortunately one does not need to look far to find some people who have had reactions to the COVID Vaccines. Very minute reactions were serious. However, citizens should be allowed to openly discuss the subject on this I agree with Tucker. I also agree some "elites should not promote the vaccines as "problem-free".
M – Who said citizens can’t openly discuss this. Has anybody stopped you from discussing this? They haven’t stopped me. Do you know of anybody who has been stopped from discussing this?
S-I have noted problems on Facebook with friends complaining their comments were removed with complaints of slight side effects after getting their Vaccine. That prompted me to post a thread here on HP, just to ask users about their own Vaccine experiences. The thread was allowed, and I was very pleased to see there was no problem with users leaving comments on the Vaccine.
M- That’s a facebook issue not an administration policy.
S-Tucker is very much about freedoms, and he does not at all use soft filters when communicating.
M- Tucker’s job is to create doubt and fear for his audience and to promote the GOP, so they can stay in power and get re-elected.
S- Seth twisted Tucker's opinion out of context totally. Tucker was not promoting anyone to take the vaccine, but the fact some that who hoped to share their experiences with the vaccine or ask questions about the vaccine have the right to do so. Without Twitter, Facebook, or media to censors their opinion or concerns in regard to the Vaccine. I have added a link to Tucker's show, the segment that Seth referred to. I would be interested in your thoughts after you view the clip. ---- Shar
M—Tuckers last line says it all, “If they can stop you from commenting on the vaccine, what else can they stop you from doing?” “They” is facebook and twitter, if that is even true.
He uses a technique about searching for something like Qanon and tells his audience it doesn’t exists because he can’t find their website. When in fact it does exists, but he creates the doubt that it doesn’t in his audience. Because he knows full well they are not going to search for anything. “What else are they going to do?” If they can do A then surely they can do B. Therefore, we will lose our freedom to even discuss the vaccine or anything else for that matter.I am so glad you took the time to watch the clip. That way I can really understand your view.
M- He uses rhetorical questions that can’t be answered by his audience to create doubt and fear of the other side.
S - He did use rhetorical questions. He was promoting his audience to consider a view that yes could leave one fearful unnecessarily. His show is based fully on opinion, backed with "what if". He promotes different scenarios. However, don't most of the nightly talk jocks and their pundits do this? He does give his reasoning to most of what he says. But it should be taken as being his reasoning, with a grain of salt. He promotes one to think, and yes to perhaps come out afraid and even confused.
M – Who said citizens can’t openly discuss this. Has anybody stopped you from discussing this? They haven’t stopped me. Do you know of anybody who has been stopped from discussing this?
S --- People are being ridiculed and talked down to on social media for disagreeing with for instance Dr. Fauci, Gates wife, etc...for their opinion in regard to the vaccine. Many have become leary of the vaccine due to many people sharing their side effects from the vaccine, and having their posts taken down if their comment is negative. Tucker was pointing out this is a form of canceling one out and preventing free speech. I respect free speech, and no one should have a comment removed due to someone else just not caring to hear it. So, I am sorry to say some people have been stopped cold from talking about the vaccine on Twitter and Facebook. As I mentioned not here on HPs.
M--M—Tuckers last line says it all, “If they can stop you from commenting on the vaccine, what else can they stop you from doing?” “They” is Facebook and Twitter, if that is even true.
This statement rings true, and yes scary... But perhaps you don't use Twitter, Facebook or AOL comment section. They delete any and all negative comments on the vaccine. At least they had been as of last week. They delete almost anything derogatory about Biden. This is not free speech. They certainly let us all rip on Trump. Try to call Biden a clown or a Nazi....
I have made every attempt to learn more about Qanon and can find little. Most say it's not actually a group but an internet phenomenon. I have tried "how does one become a member". "Is there a Facebook page on the group". And Tucker is correct they have no real presence.
If they are a group, they certainly don't recruit.I would compare them to ANTIFA.
I will trust if this group is truly a group or a threat the FBI has it on the radar. Hopefully anyway.Today we have media that constantly battle for viewers. We have show hosts like Tucker, that really do promote one to delve into darker roots of problems, and yes pointing out a side of a problem in a bombastic way. CNN and MSNBC present a more appetizing form of news. They spin as a rule one side of a story and conflate much out of context to slant the story to at this point give their viewers what they want to hear. They sort of do their thinking for them. This is a very comfortable experience for a viewer. It is what they want to hear, and need not bother themselves with digesting anything that could make them feel uncomfortable.
I watch little nightly news shows. I really find them disturbing. Can be upsetting. Life is too short for these discomforts. Plus can I change anything beyond my vote? No
I totally agree with you that Tucker does instill fear, anger, and even confusion. But, he does make his point and backs up his points pretty well. I learned this from watching a couple of the segments you have had a problem with. You certainly have a point.Sharlee: Qanon has gone underground since Jan. 6th. All one has to do is look at the videos of that day and see them in full force as they attacked the Capitol. They were wearing their MAGA hats and clothes emblazoned with their emblems and mantras. When interviewed they would say their mantras, “Where we go one, we all go and Trust the plan.” Trump claims he doesn’t know them, “But I know they like me.” They are a cult and religious like movement. They don’t need a website. They communicate on radical venues like Chan4 and Chan8.
You should do yourself a favor and watch some of the shows on CNN. I switch between CNN and Fox News and they are worlds apart in their agenda. Fox is all about creating doubt and fear on the other side by discrediting them. I don’t think CNN uses rhetorical questions the way Fox “Talk Jocks” do.
Yesterday, I watched Fareed Zakaria’s show. He is an Indian-American journalist, political commentator, and author. He is the host of CNN's Fareed Zakaria GPS and writes a weekly paid column for The Washington Post. He has been a columnist for Newsweek, editor of Newsweek International, and an editor at large of Time magazine.
He always has notable people on his show. Yesterday, He had Richard Hasss and Zanny Minton Bedoes on his show.
Richard Hass is an American diplomat. He has been president of the Council on Foreign Relations since July 2003, prior to which he was Director of Policy Planning for the United States Department of State and a close advisor to Secretary of State Colin Powel.
Zanny Minton Beddoes is a British journalist. She is the editor-in-chief of The Economist, the first woman to hold the position. She began working for the newspaper in 1994 as its emerging markets correspondent. They talked about the good and the bad of Biden’s foreign policy.
Then I watched Brian Stelter’s show. Brian Stelter is an American television anchor who is the chief media correspondent for CNN and host of the CNN program Reliable Sources. Stelter is a former media reporter for The New York Times and the editor of TVNewser.
I compared their qualifications for journalism with Carlson, Ingraham, and Hannity and they can’t hold a journalistic candle to them. I could list the journalistic comparisons here, but it would be too lengthy. Don’t take my word for it. If you are curious, just look up the names of the hosts on CNN and compare them to the nightly line-up on Fox. I think you would be surprised.
By his own admission, Trump started this fake news mantra to discredit the MSM, if they ever criticized him and he still continues to do it. In my estimation, he and Fox are creating a great disservice to the country by fear mongering and misinformation with the goal of keeping the country divided. A divided country is much easier to manipulate than one that is united.
Mike
“Congratulations to future Republican Star Marjorie Taylor Greene on a big Congressional primary win in Georgia against a very tough and smart opponent,” Trump wrote on Twitter. “Marjorie is strong on everything and never gives up — a real WINNER!”
Because some here want to ignore it. (NOW)
"Very clever calling it a reading. When in fact it is your interpretation."
Why is it "clever?" I watched the video and then literally read the word transcript of it that was printed below. Once again you are "interpreting." I simply meant what I literally typed. No hidden meaning and no reading between the lines intended, and no interpretation needed.
However, I wonder if "clever" might be a fair description of your promotion of the "fact" that Ms. Greene ran "unopposed," implying it wasn't a real majority vote win.
Ms. Greene did win against a Republican primary opponent—with a majority vote count.
Her Democrat General election opponent was running against her in an overwhelmingly Republican district. His chances were described as "a longshot" before he withdrew. He was described as an IT Specialist with no political experience, and even his experienced newly-hired campaign manager said, "But winning this race is a tall order even for an experienced politico.”
The last Republican to win that same seat beat a Democrat opponent with over 75% of the votes.
I think those details of 'the rest of the story' diminish the message of your repeated implication that her victory wasn't real because she ran "unopposed." Don't you?
*(ain't Google great, we can all use it)
GA
I expect there will be considerable effort put forth in the next few months to do as PP73 says, I think his views are a good barometer for how those making such decisions and those who will be in control of such efforts view it.
The problem, however, is that trying to shut down dissent and label it as "hate crimes" or "racism" or "terrorism" to squelch the "opposition" during a time when millions are losing homes and jobs and hope means the backlash to those efforts will not be able to be put in check.
I think the message Tucker put out in that clip that was linked was missed by PP73... without Trump, they have no-one to focus on, they have no one to point to and claim that person is the reason for all the problems... now that they have full power and control again, they have to act.Ken: This is what I told GA. It applies to your comment as well.
GA: As I told Sharlee, it's interesting how two people can look at the same video and hear and see the same thing but come to different conclusions.
Here it is again:
https://www.mediamatters.org/tucker-car … er-beliefs
If you notice the banner at the bottom of the screen says "freedom of thought is no longer allowed." That implies that democrats are saying this and it is just another way of saying they don't want freedom of speech.
And then at about half way through the video there is a popup that says "freedom of speech" as he continues to defend her. Then he says she has bad opinions and implies democrats are chastising her for her "bad opinion."
When in fact, she belongs to a cult. The only reason she was elected as the representative of the 14th district of Georgia is because all the opposition dropped out. Carlson doesn't tell you that. He just says she won 75% of the vote.
She is a member of Q Anon. Whether you realize it or not, they were the major force in storming the Capitol. They claim they received coded messages from Trump's speech. I don't know how you feel about it, but when a cult infiltrates our government and Fox news pundits defend them I see that as being a danger to our country.
Here is what Mitch McConnel thinks about her.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics … InAppShareA cult, by definition, is a system of religious veneration and devotion directed toward a particular figure or object.
Saying a person is part of a cult, or a racist group, or or any derogatory title such as that, categorizes them, and their position or the people who support such a position in the worst light possible... in essence their opinion is invalid, perhaps even they should be considered a serious threat to be dealt with in whatever way is necessitated.
Whether you realize it or not, this is what you are advocating and this is the point we have reached, I am sure you would point to those who invaded the Capitol as those who are willing to do whatever they felt was necessary as well.
A very disconcerting place for rational people to be finding themselves, be it yourself, or the teachers, nurses, officers and firemen that were the ones in open "insurrection" against their government.Ken: You may find it a "disconcerting place for rational people", but please read these links.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2101.08750
https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/ … on-n900531I don't suppose you realize how ludicrous that whole nonsense is... as if that nonsense is what has brought us to the point where pillar-of-the-community types are invading the Capitol building.
If there weren't REAL disconcerting and corrupt issues with the system, this would no be happening.
If there weren't signs that the system was in disrepair, from the homeless that cover the streets and highways of California, to the tens of millions made unemployed the past year, to businesses forced to shut down and go bankrupt while major chains like Target and Walmart stay open with no issues...
Go ahead, focus on Qanon... the only ones more clueless than the people who pay attention to it, are the ones who are actually buying in to the BS the media is peddling about it.
An example of a REAL problem that is impacting how people view their government, is unemployment... the figure of 3.9% in 2019 vs 6.9% in 2020 doesn't tell the real story...there were 131 million people employed in December 2019 and there were only 124 million people employed in December 2020 while the total number of adults in America of employable age grew almost 2 million... for a total of 9 million employable adults without income, added to all those who have no employment, in one year.Ken: Nice distraction. Let me remind you. I started this forum and the purpose of it is to expose Fox and MAGA news for what it really is.
Probably your statistics are correct and they are important to the country. But so is exposing propaganda that is dividing this country. We will not be able to accomplish what you want with a divided country.
What I'm doing is curating the BS coming from those outlets on a daily basis and trying to expose them for what they really are.
I find it very interesting that people on this forum can view a video by Tucker Carlson and read the same transcript about Marjorie Taylor Green and miss the most important part of what he is broadcasting which is the banner at the bottom of the entire video which says "Thought Control." That is intended for his audience.
I don't know how old you are but in the 60's advertisers used something called subliminal projection. They found they could flash messages on movies screens at rate that could not be discerned by the audience but caused the audience to go to the lobby and buy what they were flashing subliminally.
That's what Tucker Carlson was doing. He never mentioned "Thought Control." and it was not in the transcript, but it was certainly on the screen the whole time to make his audience think that the left was using thought control to curtail her from freedom of speech.
As it turns out, she apologized to congress about all her Q Anon BS. Because now she knows what side of the toast her butter is on, if you get my drift. But the apology is an admission of guilt.
Nah. Not interested.
That high horse is all yours.yee haw! I am in the saddle now!
But wait, what if they won't listen to me?
Ga
Here is Trump's speech transcript of Jan. 6. I highlighted the language that I thought motivated his audience to attack the Capitol
https://sway.office.com/f0zVNBtZTX1ohKBP?ref=Link
The right does for the right what the left does for the left. They just do it with truth and less hypocrisy.
Benoitsmidget: Thank you for your reply. That's one of the most realistic statements I have heard in a long time.
So, which just do it with truth and less hypocrisy? Sort of left it up to the individual to assume.
I noted only a small part of Tucker's opinion was showed on the link you provided. I would like to know a bit more about what he said leading up to the statement that Seth used to dispatch Tucker.
I will try to locate the show where Tucker made the comment. I can't really give an opinion on part of the context of Tuckers view.
Related Discussions
- 175
Jan 6th Tape Brian Sicknick Was The Root Of A Big Lie.
by Sharlee 6 months ago
It shows Sicknick walking through the building “after he was supposedly murdered by the mob outside.” Yet the Jan 6th committee did not reveal this fact or show this video. Time to ask why. Tucker Carlson releases exclusive Jan. 6 footage, says politicians, media lied about Sicknick ...
- 28
Is The Confederate Flag A Symbol Of White Supremacy And Racism?
by VC L Veasey 7 years ago
Is The Confederate Flag A Symbol Of White Supremacy And Racism?
- 77
Very Confused Somewhat Confused Or One Flew Over ----
by Sharlee 12 days ago
Biden's cognitive problem is not indearing, it's dangerous."President Biden raised eyebrows on social media this week after appearing to reveal plans to build a railroad from the Pacific Ocean "across" the Indian Ocean."We have plans to build a railroad from the Pacific all the...
- 171
Has Donald Trump Killed the So-Called Republican Party?
by Scott Belford 9 months ago
In my opinion, yes - the Republican Party no-longer exists today even though Trump followers incorrectly refer to themselves as Republicans.Let me open this discussion with a short tutorial of the Republican Party (now keep in mind, the Party title has no bearing on the Party philosophy and any...
- 140
So, what now Democrats? Think it will now be easy. Think again.
by Readmikenow 2 years ago
Do Democrats believe all their problems are over now that they've successfully gotten an illegitimate president and vice president in office?I think they have no idea of the problems that are going to be coming their way.Millions of Americans, and myself included, believe harris and Beijing biden...
- 127
Trump leaves a wake of turbulence behind him and is still campaigning
by Mike Russo 7 days ago
More than 1,100 people have been arrested on charges related to the Capitol assault. Of those, more than 630 have pleaded guilty and at least 110 have been convicted at trial.Five people including a police officer died during or shortly after the riot and more than 140 police officers were injured....