It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Donald Trump thinks SNL is rigging the election and should be canceled

page: 8
113
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

ADL is so stupid. In the world of trolls this made Pepe even more powerful. Everything that works against normal groups works in reverse against trolls.




posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It is just as absurd as using the word "attack" to describe the association of pepe to white-supremacists, even if incorrect.
edit on 16-10-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It is just as absurd as using the word "attack" to describe the association of pepe to white-supremacists, even if incorrect.


Big deal.



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

No bigger or smaller than what you were pointing out.



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik


I was pointing out that one of the articles it cited in regards to the Pepe/white supremacist connection was perpetrated by twitter trolls. She got it completely wrong, and it still remains on her website. I think you were pointing out that one cannot physically attack a cartoon frog.



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The original post said that Clinton attacked Pepe and you even said that deeming the cartoon a hate-symbol is how it was attacked so, there is a point to be made about what constitutes an attack and if one can be carried out on a non-physical character.

Whether Clinton got it right or wrong makes no difference to the claim so that is, in fact, no big deal.

ETA: What is an attack and whether the non-physical (words) can even be part of an attack seems to be something you make a big deal about in many of the threads where you defend unpopular causes.



edit on 16-10-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 05:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The original post said that Clinton attacked Pepe and you even said that deeming the cartoon a hate-symbol is how it was attacked so, there is a point to be made about what constitutes an attack and if one can be carried out on a non-physical character.

Whether Clinton got it right or wrong makes no difference to the claim so that is, in fact, no big deal.

ETA: What is an attack and whether the non-physical (words) can even be part of an attack seems to be something you make a big deal about in many of the threads where you defend unpopular causes.


There is nothing wrong with using the word "attack" to describe what happened. I'm not sure why you'd automatically think of Hillary beating up a cartoon frog. It's a metaphor.

Of course words cannot physically harm things. But words and imagery can be censored by force and coercion.



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 05:10 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

You seem to have a problem when people say that Trump attacks people by proposing the use of force and coercion.


edit on 16-10-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 05:12 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

I don't understand your point.



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 05:21 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

The logic you use to excuse Trumps words applies in the same way to Clinton's "attack" on pepe.

ETA: Also, it was never an attack but an association with white-supremacists, there has also not been any censorship.
edit on 16-10-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: daskakik

I don't care if Hillary attacks Pepe. In fact, I think it is hilarious. I was never arguing that at all. I was only pointing out that she did attack Pepe. Pepe is a cartoon, remember.



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 05:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: daskakik

I don't care if Hillary attacks Pepe. In fact, I think it is hilarious. I was never arguing that at all. I was only pointing out that she did attack Pepe. Pepe is a cartoon, remember.


Pepe has declared support for Hillary.

Just an FYI



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 05:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
I don't care if Hillary attacks Pepe.

You cared enough to reply to a post not directed at you.


I was only pointing out that she did attack Pepe. Pepe is a cartoon, remember.

And I'm pointing out that you like to say that words by Trump are not "attacks" (not exact words) but somehow words by Clinton are, even if directed at a cartoon frog.
edit on 16-10-2016 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

I wouldn't doubt it. He is a fickle frog.



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 06:34 PM
link   
SNL was funny a long time ago.

When they stole everyone from 2nd city.

But everybody died and it's lame now.

Trump is correct!

Alec actually was funny in 30 rock but I give the writers more credit for that than him.





posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 10:36 PM
link   
I hope SNL goes after that nest of vipers he calls "his children".If anyone deserves to have their face shoved into the fact that they are simply waiting for him to die it's DT.



posted on Oct, 16 2016 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: Annee

I wouldn't doubt it. He is a fickle frog.


His creator is a Hillary supporter.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: crazyewok
Yeah.....there is a little thing called the 1st Amendment


Maybe Trump should read the constitution before he opens his big fat stupid orange mouth.




The first amendment does not protect a person from being sued for smearing with false accusations. Maybe you should read it.

here is some help for you:

Statements made about a public person (political candidates, governmental officeholder, movie star, author, celebrity, sports hero, etc.) are usually exempt, even if they are untrue and harmful. However, if they were made with malice – with hate, dislike, intent and/or desire to harm and with reckless disregard for the truth – the public person may have a cause of action. This was determined by the U.S. Supreme Court and has been re-interpreted various times.


Politicians have always been far game for Comedy and satire unless its North korea.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Are some of you curious about what a Donald presidency would be like? I am.

State addresses about how unfair SNL, media, congress is to him. Constantly hearing how the constitution needs to be revised because his EOs are unconstitutional. The hell he will be faced with from his supporters when nothing gets done.

Comedic gold all the way up to his impeachment.



posted on Oct, 17 2016 @ 06:54 AM
link   
True or False:

Sarah Palin once said "I can see Russia from my house!" (ver batim)

In the 2008 election, 75% of Democratic voters who were questioned answered wrong.



new topics

top topics



 
113
<< 5  6  7    9  10 >>

log in

join