Can the MSM be punished for their "election tampering"?

a reply to: Greggers

DUDE I bookmarked and then linked in nearly every single Wikileaks related thread that was posted in the site that month up to election day. I wanted the whole history of it at the ready (as stuff gets buried in this site). About the only threads that didn't get posted in there were the ones involving the UFO emails.

I swear in all my years here your display today is the most desperately contrived I've ever seen (like No Planers level insanity). Please keep it up. I'll never forget.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greggers

DUDE I bookmarked and then linked in nearly every single Wikileaks related thread that was posted in the site that month up to election day.

Exactly, without any regard whatsoever for whether the thing you were linking to was based on anything factual. Hence, as I originally stated, your mega dump is a repository of fake news.

So, which is it? Is your repository NOT fake news? (meaning you can vouch for the integrity of every link?)

Or can you NOT vouch for the integrity of the information at the links, meaning they could very well be fake news?

You don't get to have it both ways.

I swear in all my years here your display today is the most desperately contrived I've ever seen (like No Planers level insanity)

Of course you'd say that. And of course, I don't care.

. Please keep it up.

I dunno, man. It's a lot of work arguing with someone who cares not about the truth.

I'll never forget.

You'll forget everything that matters. Of that I have no doubt. I'm quite sure you've already forgotten. You probably never understood it to begin with.

a reply to: Greggers

I posted links to everyone's work, which anyone can go and check, dispute, think for themselves. Along with screenshots of emails, and like 'everything'. The whole history of the Podesta affair up to election day is in there as a historical archive.

GET A GRIP!

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greggers

I posted links to everyone's work, which anyone can go and check, dispute, think for themselves. Along with. The whole history of the Podesta affair up to election day is in there as a historical archive.

So unvetted, then.

So fake news, then.

See how easy that was? You could have just said that about 10 pages ago and saved us both a lot of trouble.

a reply to: Greggers

Well the entirely pointless and ludicrous pieces I skipped (i.e UFO's), meanwhile your case study this public/private thing is a joke (and where is your analysis again). She even made herself look like a fool at the debate, and here you're following in her wake. Even if that quote was out of context, we ALL know its true even you. It's the very nature of politics. But if you actually believe otherwise, wow just WOW!!!!

Anyways, I already busted you and called you out for being a LIAR, which instead of backpeddle and say sorry you mis-remembered or whatever you doubled down on it. For perspective, pPeople posting something that turns out to be fake doesn't make them a liar, you, you're BUSTED.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greggers

Well the entirely pointless and ludicrous pieces I skipped (i.e UFO's), meanwhile you're case study this public/private thing is a joke. She even made herself look like a fool at the debate, and here you're following in her wake. Even if that quote was out of context, we ALL know its true even you. It's the very nature of politics. But if you actually believe outherwise, wow just WOW!!!!

So you've basically, at long last, admitted that you cannot vouch for the integrity of the links in your Master Dump, conceding the argument to me.

And now you're trying to save face with a straw man. I never claimed that Hillary wasn't a liar. I claimed that the public/private position story completely misconstrued what was in her speech. And a couple of pages ago, it sounded like you agreed with that.

Listen man, just take your lumps and move on. You've lost.

You've wasted a lot of time today. I have no doubt you'll continue to rage on, pretending you're not wrong. But it's fooling no one.

If you don't want to be accused of posting fake news, don't flood the internet with links without regard for whether the stories are true or false. Pretty simple.

a reply to: Greggers

The people around her all know the game:


Here Clinton staffers talking your hero David Brock:


This quote from the transcripts PROVES the point, which when Trump stumped her with it at the debate she flat out LIED about what this said:

a reply to: network dude

The Best Punishment for the MSM would be to Make them Tell The TRUTH.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greggers

The people around her all know the game:

Here Clinton staffers talking your hero David Brock:

This quote from the transcripts PROVES the point, which when Trump stumped her with it at the debate she flat out LIED about what this said:

Give it up, sunshine. You've been busted.

Changing the subject to something other than the public/private fake-news story isn't going to help you.

You've already admitted you cannot vouch for the integrity of the links in your huge dump.

a reply to: Greggers

The Repository Thread was going as a sort raw data dump. That was a BUSY month. You think you have me in some GOTCHA MOMENT and it's completely hilarious. I said in the thread that a lot of the stuff I was posting we wont necessarily be able to put into proper scope until the whole set had been released and gone thru.

Keep on CONflatin'!

a reply to: Greggers

You've gone all in on the public/private thing. That last email there PROVES it. You wont even show us your EXPERT analysis about that specific little thing. You are giving us great insight into how insane you guys are over what is "FAKE" news to you people. Fake to most people would mean HOAX, but to you guys its anything you can put spin and and twist into the world of hyperbole becomes "fake news".

GOOD GAME!!

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greggers

The Repository Thread was going as a sort raw data dump.

Yep. And it contained fake news.

You think you have me in some GOTCHA MOMENT

I've got you admitting that my ONLY claim in this thread is true. Your massive dump contains fake news, or at least that you're not sure if it does because you have not vetted them.

< and it's completely hilarious.

Finding the previous exchange humorous may be the result of mental illness.

I said in the thread that a lot of the stuff I was posting we wont necessarily be able to put into proper scope until the whole set had been released and gone thru.

So you agreed with me ALL ALONG, then?

Then why are you still typing?

Keep on CONflatin'!

Keep on posting garbage!

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greggers

You've gone all in on the public/private thing. That last email there PROVES it. You wont even show us your EXPERT analysis about that specific little thing. You are giving us great insight into how insane you guys are over what is "FAKE" news to you people. Fake to most people would mean HOAX, but to you guys its anything you can put spin and and twist into the world of hyperbole becomes "fake news".

GOOD GAME!!

The public/private thing is one example that I used because it was one that I could clearly remember. My ONLY claim regarding that has been that, taken in context, her comments have NOTHING to do with being dishonest. And they don't.

And as I've said multiple times, I've never claimed Hillary is honest.

You're trying desperately to move the goalposts because you've been seriously faced in this thread and you're desperately trying to save face.

Dude, no one cares.

Just take your lumps and move on.

You can always pretend this never happened once tomorrow rolls around, which I have no doubt you will do.

a reply to: Greggers

Define FAKE news.

So far what you have done is insinuated that political spin is FAKE news. Or is is misinterpretations are FAKE? That's a real bitch for your 'lets censor the internet agenda'.

As if I'd ever insist the the mere existence of a forums thread is PROOF for a conspiracy / whatever. This is you conflating, literally moving the goalposts, and then turning around and telling me I'm moving the goalposts!

Your "ONLY claim in this thread"? On the last page you exclaimed that I went around promoting the misinterpreted poll, and I do believe the insinuating was that I went around doing it even after finding out it wasn't. That was FALSE, it was LIE. BUSTED. Now on the next page it never happened though, right? You're doing precisely what you're declaring I was doing when I was not.

And then your second example you made it out like I've been marching across the site arguing that public/private thing, as if it's even something.

Keep it coming I cant wait to hold you to all of this for as long as you're around.

Hillary's private position:

*Hillary Clinton Said Her Dream Is A Hemispheric Common Market, With Open Trade And Open Markets. *“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.” [05162013 Remarks to Banco Itau.doc, p. 28] https://__._/podesta-emails/emailid/927

This line: "Hillary Clinton Said Her Dream Is A Hemispheric Common Market, With Open Trade And Open Markets." That was written preceding her actual quote. That is the CONTEXT as described by her own people.

Public position:


She's FLAT OUT lying. And that's how the public/private positions work.

dissemble dissemble dissemble

American conservatism in a nutshell...

Now what makes them sad or upset is fake

wahhh

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greggers

Define FAKE news.

So far what you have done is insinuated that political spin is FAKE news. Or is is misinterpretations are FAKE? That's a real bitch for your 'lets censor the internet agenda'.

As if I'd ever insist the the mere existence of a forums thread is PROOF for a conspiracy / whatever. This is you conflating, literally moving the goalposts, and then turning around and telling me I'm moving the goalposts!

Your "ONLY claim in this thread"? On the last page you exclaimed that I went around promoting the misinterpreted poll, and I do believe the insinuating was that I went around doing it even after finding out it wasn't. That was FALSE, it was LIE. BUSTED. Now on the next page it never happened though, right? You're doing precisely what you're declaring I was doing when I was not.

And then your second example you made it out like I've been marching across the site arguing that public/private thing, as if it's even something.

Keep it coming I cant wait to hold you to all of this for as long as you're around.

This thread is fake news.

It is dissembling the truth and pretending something is valid until it become the truth for many.

Like Obama was born in Kenya

originally posted by: buster2010
Yes they should be. Because they gave him over three billion dollars worth of free air time. Equal airtime should be given to both candidates.

There is no way to deny the MSM was full on for Hillary and the only thing the did that was pro Trump was to give him airtime when he did or said something they deemed "stupid".

Yeah right and I have some oceanfront property for sale in Nevada real cheap.

u seem to be forgetting to account for the time Hillary was given from the liberal media. if u want to add that up youll find she had far more airtime then the Donald.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greggers

Define FAKE news.

News which is demonstrably false with merely a modicum of research.

So far what you have done is insinuated that political spin is FAKE news.

The example I gave isn't political spin. It's BS lies.

That's a real bitch for your 'lets censor the internet agenda'.

You're making stuff up again.

This is you conflating, literally moving the goalposts, and then turning around and telling me I'm moving the goalposts!

Whatever you need to tell yourself to get through the night.

Your "ONLY claim in this thread"? On the last page you exclaimed that I went around promoting the misinterpreted poll, and I do believe the insinuating was that I went around doing it even after finding out it wasn't. That was FALSE, it was LIE. BUSTED. Now on the next page it never happened though, right? You're doing precisely what you're declaring I was doing when I was not.

You've busted nothing.

And yeah, you had heard the public/private policy thing debunked long before you linked to it in your thread. You keep on spinning though.

And then your second example you made it out like I've been marching across the site arguing that public/private thing, as if it's even something.

If you have to use the word "insinuate," it probably didn't happen.

Keep it coming

Why? Seems like a waste of time.

I cant wait to hold you to all of this for as long as you're around.

Who cares?

Perhaps you should go start another massive dump thread and post there instead.