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.

 

I'm guessing Snopes is going to label this False

page: 2
31
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan


Didn't the owner also hire one of his "escorts" to become SNOPES' head editor?




posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: contextual
The president uses hookers and his fanboys love him. Don't see why using hookers would be a problem unless your a hypocrite.

"Quick! Don't look over here, look over there!"

Any thoughts on the actual topic?



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:24 AM
link   


This is the guy who we are supposed to trust to tell us what rumors are true or false, according to our digital overlords.
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

And just how does using hookers affect the truth?
Isn't trump kind of fond of loose women? Even his wife posed naked.
He likes bad girls.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Snopes has a horrible reputation. I didn't think people still used it.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: MarioOnTheFly
a reply to: contextual

Well...it's about embezzlement, not using hookers. That's just a cherry on top.


Which is in itself an interesting story for what it is. But it seems like the OP is trying to use this news to invalidate the content of a website that he doesn't agree with which is evidenced by his ending sentence.




This is the guy who we are supposed to trust

etc...

So which issue should be addressed?
The embezzelment story and the guy frequenting ladies of the evening (those are related btw) or how that somehow alters the truth in the content of a website?



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:35 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

They have a horrible reputation with who?



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

What did he write that made you come to that conclusion?



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Snopes has a horrible reputation. I didn't think people still used it.


I agree. I read something on Snopes once that I could prove was wrong. When I contacted Snopes to inform them of the error they made, they let me know that my "opinion" didn't mean squat to them. Proof is proof. No opinion needed, but then again, Snopes has only it's own opinions to inject. I've even seen Snopes use materials and documents that contradicted their own conclusions as proof. What a joke!



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:52 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU2018

Why'd you have to bring Trump into this?

We aren't talking about Trump.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme



So which issue should be addressed? The embezzelment story and the guy frequenting ladies of the evening (those are related btw) or how that somehow alters the truth in the content of a website?


The business expenses are between him, his business and his wife. Altering the truth is a bigger problem between him and his viewers.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme



This is the guy who we are supposed to trust to tell us what rumors are true or false, according to our digital overlords.
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

And just how does using hookers affect the truth?
Isn't trump kind of fond of loose women? Even his wife posed naked.
He likes bad girls.

David Mikkelson stole a substantial amount of money from his company, to use on sneaking around behind his wife's back.

Some of us think this speaks poorly on his trustworthiness.
edit on 6-9-2019 by AndyFromMichigan because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: Deetermined

Ok so Allegations still.

We shall see if the court finds him guilty or not.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 11:44 AM
link   

originally posted by: grey580
a reply to: LSU2018

Why'd you have to bring Trump into this?

We aren't talking about Trump.

It usually falls into two categories:

1. Feeling threatened by the topic and thus wanting to keep people from talking about it.

2. Obsession with some other topic that is so strong it compels the afflicted to drag it into any discussion, no matter how unrelated.

Trump is the current poster boy for this sort of fixation, since politics tend to give people a false sense of empowerment that drives them to try to make the world think their way, regardless of how obnoxious that may be. Before that, and to some degree still, it was Obama, Bush, Clinton, etc., ad nauseam.

And of course, the stronger the obsession, the more obvious it is to everyone else and the less obvious it is to those trapped within its diabolical grip.

I'm pretty sure that if most people were aware of how incredibly transparent this sort of behavior really is to those not blinded by it, most (if decidedly not all) would stop.

But I digress.

Ministers Of Truth

Snopes is routinely used as an authority on what is true or false in a wide range of discussions, and is increasingly being given de facto powers of censorship on various social media sites.

Claims deemed false by Snopes may be labeled "fake news" and suppressed or removed altogether, depending on the platform.

In order for the authority of Snopes as an arbiter of truth to be credible -- and therefore relevant to efforts to combat "fake news" -- its reputation must be maintained and protected.

The source article poses a challenge to the perceived integrity of Snopes by attacking its founder regarding financial improprieties alleged in a divorce filing, and concludes that if its founder is untrustworthy, Snopes is also untrustworthy.

Ultimately, the premise is an ad hominem fallacy, but then, relying on Snopes as an authority on truth is also a fallacy.

Thus, as is all too often the case, taking one of those sides boils down to choosing one form of fallacy over another, and embracing folly either way.

Of course, for those who prefer not to be so easily manipulated, there's always Skepticism, but the price of that path is to be endlessly demonized by those who prefer soft lies over hard truths.

Whether that's too high a price is a personal decision, but I think it's worth it and, when all hidden costs are considered, is a price far lower than the alternatives.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 12:00 PM
link   
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Did you see the picture of Ebyssa Young compared to his wife...yeah well ok, maybe he did it for the "political favours"


Apparently Mr. Mikkelson, was attracted to a lady by the name of Ebyssa Young, a former Libertarian candidate for congress in Hawaii.





posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 01:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Majic
I disagree that this is an ad hominem fallacy. Snopes' trustworthiness
speaks directly to their credibility as an authority figure.

Imagine that David Mikkelson was a judge you were about to go before, and you learned this. Would you still consider him credible?



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 01:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: AndyFromMichigan

originally posted by: Sillyolme



This is the guy who we are supposed to trust to tell us what rumors are true or false, according to our digital overlords.
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

And just how does using hookers affect the truth?
Isn't trump kind of fond of loose women? Even his wife posed naked.
He likes bad girls.

David Mikkelson stole a substantial amount of money from his company, to use on sneaking around behind his wife's back.

Some of us think this speaks poorly on his trustworthiness.


LOL. You can't make this crap up.
How can you then vote and believe a guy who
has refused paying contractors, cheated on his wife countless times and has many shady business deals on his resume ? How?



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 01:51 PM
link   
a reply to: contextual

So the left only cares about prostitution when they are programmed to care?



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 02:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: contextual
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Why would they label it false?



This is the guy who we are supposed to trust to tell us what rumors are true or false, according to our digital overlords.


The president uses hookers and his fanboys love him. Don't see why using hookers would be a problem unless your a hypocrite.

Depends on where the money came from
Embezzlement is a crime

You didn't read the OP with comprehension , did you ?



Typical trump hater....emotions are their strength....comprehension not so much



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 02:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcalibur254
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

It's hilarious because your source is Gateway Pundit.


what's really funny is watching the slow folks cry buckets about the source, but aren't up to the mental challenge to refute the article.



posted on Sep, 6 2019 @ 02:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Guiltyguitarist

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: contextual
a reply to: AndyFromMichigan

Why would they label it false?



This is the guy who we are supposed to trust to tell us what rumors are true or false, according to our digital overlords.


The president uses hookers and his fanboys love him. Don't see why using hookers would be a problem unless your a hypocrite.

Depends on where the money came from
Embezzlement is a crime

You didn't read the OP with comprehension , did you ?



Typical trump hater....emotions are their strength....comprehension not so much

Like Neal Boortz , I am an equal opportunity offender.
Oh , wait , you were not speaking of me
I apologize.



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join