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

Yes, they can be punished. Stop watching their channels, and don't engage in conversation or online posting of their coverage. If you don't accept their b.s. and spread it, advertising will plummet.

a reply to: Greggers

Riiiight. "Non-stories" like that other list of threads I just posted? "Non-stories" because everyday you screamed they were while derailing the daily wikileaks release threads? Just because you say it isn't a story, that total denial things you guys constantly do on every big story, didn't make them so. You guys were in the daily released threads each morning the release would be out not even an hour before it was even possible to see what was in them and you'd all say the same scripted line "more of a whole lot of nuthin". I wouldn't be surprised if you aren't in them doing exactly that, which is all on record by the way, easy to assess as I made sure the daily release list was in all of my megathreads there. Where you guys want to stymie discussion, censor topics, derail threads and deny stories... when truth isnt on your side that's how you do it. I worked overtime that month to keep the threads transparent and unforgotten... when truth is on your side there's no cause to even think like anti-transparency Obama/Hillary supporters.

Open my election day categorized threads there, DO IT, I have all the emails all together were the patterns can be seen, as well as I have all the bigger stories linked all in. In the release threads you guys sets about zooming in on individual emails out of context of everything else. In my wrapup threads that isn't possible, hence you wont dare tackle them. Your confirmation bias buddies in here already refuse to see truth like you do, but for people with half a brain or more they'll open and see for themselves. So quit embarrassing yourself already.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
So quit embarrassing yourself already.

You're the one who starts countless threads loaded with fake news (and yes, I have specifically pointed out in other theads WHY they were fake), and you claim I'm the one embarrassing myself.

First, it's pretty hard to embarrass one's self on an anonymous forum. Secondly, I would be far more ashamed of your behavior than mine.

As far as why no one "tackles" your threads, it's because you disregard argument and tell people to post somewhere else. Sort of like you're doing now.

a reply to: Greggers

Open any of my threads (there's currently 463 to choose from), and point out any and all FAKE news. PLEASE!!!!

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greggers

Open any of my threads (there's currently 463 to choose from), and point out any and all FAKE news. PLEASE!!!!

Telling me to post somewhere else again, I see. That's your standard operating procedure.

Desperate for bumps on threads no one is responding to?

What the right wing is doing now is called

dis·sem·ble
dəˈsembəl/
verb
gerund or present participle: dissembling
conceal one's true motives, feelings, or beliefs.
"an honest, sincere person with no need to dissemble"
synonyms: dissimulate, pretend, feign, act, masquerade, sham, fake, bluff, posture, hide one's feelings, put on a false front
"she's being honest and has no need to dissemble"
disguise or conceal (a feeling or intention).
"she smiled, dissembling her true emotion"

a reply to: Greggers

The only thing you've got is the megathread that had the veritas tape as a major element, which from the day that tape was released I openly cahalleged the entire site to open up a transcript of it and do an analysis for us to argue what percentage of the clips couldnt possibly speak for themselves. Not even Ante has taken me up on that challenge to this day. In my big thread I opened up by explaining yes the dude has a dubious history, and again repeated the challenge and even provide 2 seperate links to transcripts to make it easy for you. Nobody took me p on that.

From there there's something like 100 pieces of evidence I dug up which backs up all of the 'insinuations' made in the tape, and I numbered them all via courtroom evidence "Exhibit" style to make it EXTRA easy for you guys to challenge pieces of the evidence, to do your own cross examinations analysis' of the whole thing, and none of you did despite me challenging you guys across every page to actually tackle the evidence. Instead, it was just a sweeping angry dismissal again and again again like a broken record in there from the lot of you, which as funny it it kind of was, I was actually disappointed you guys were such flounders about the affair as I love a good challenge (as demonstrated by the project itself).

Entered Into Evidence - The case for the United States v. Hillary Clinton - Paid Riot Squads

All of which we just discussed in another thread the other day, your I post fake news claim, which I smacked down there, band now you're bringing it up again. I suppose in a couple more days in another thread you'll be doing the same , but worry not I'll be saving the link to here to save me this hassle all over again. So please do make your BS allegation some more do it every day!

a reply to: windword
whet media doth tho speakth because nbc, cbs, abc, and msnnbc, and cnn all for the last month up till election day were telling every one vote hillary or telling them that hillary has already won via early election results.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
So please do make your BS allegation some more do it every day!

My allegations aren't BS. You post fake news.

You posted that Hillary's public/private position was evidence that she was lying to the electorate. I accurately pointed out that, taken in context, she was referring to the difference between the sales brochure describing her high-level goals and the real-life implementation of specific tactics, and at no point did she indicate the two positions were conflicting. You ignored the argument, per usual.

You posted that Podesta had colluded with the MSM to fake polls. I pointed out that the Atlas document was clearly for internal DNC polls, had nothing to do with the MSM, and that the oversampling in question was about developing a messaging strategy for DNC talking points. Per usual, you ignored the argument and pretended like it never happened.

I mean, I could go on. But why?

We both know how this ends. You'll eventually stop posting and show up again in two or three days pretending like none of this ever happened. Oh, and you'll try to get me to post in one of your massive fake-news threads.

a reply to: Greggers

TOTAL BULL&#&#!

Stop acting like everyone you encountered in this site on the Podesta emails was me. Where you constantly display an ongoing amnesia, I constantly display a photographic memory, meaning you cant win this.

I bring in history, and I have a long one in this site, you bring in bogus allegations that amount to #&(@ (from your obvious election inspiring joining of the site)!

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss


Stop acting like everyone you encountered in this site on the Podesta emails was me.

It was you.

Where you constantly display an ongoing amnesia, I constantly display a photographic memory, meaning you cant win this.

You're the one with amnesia, as you clearly can't remember any arguments made by anyone at any time.

Also, NO ONE can win this. Just so we're clear. It's impossible to win when arguing with someone who doesn't care whether the hundreds of links they post are truthful.

a reply to: Greggers

Quote me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I provided you the gateway into ALL of those threads in this very thread.

But like her private/public position thing isn't reality!!! It is with NEARLY EVERY politician as long as we've been alive. But if you're that deluded, man, no one can help you.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greggers

Quote me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I provided you the gateway into ALL of those threads in this very thread.

But like her private/public position thing isn't reality!!! It is with NEARLY EVERY politician as long as we've been alive. But if you're that deluded, man, no one can help you.

Slow down. I have no idea what you're talking about, or what you're asking for. You're getting all worked up and failing to form complete, cogent thoughts.

originally posted by: Greggers
Slow down. I have no idea what you're talking about, or what you're asking for. You're getting all worked up and failing to form complete, cogent thoughts.

You just made two CLEAR alleged case studies of me pushing fake news, now you dont know what I'm talking about?

originally posted by: Greggers
You posted that Hillary's public/private position was evidence that she was lying to the electorate. I accurately pointed out that, taken in context, she was referring to the difference between the sales brochure describing her high-level goals and the real-life implementation of specific tactics, and at no point did she indicate the two positions were conflicting. You ignored the argument, per usual.

You posted that Podesta had colluded with the MSM to fake polls. I pointed out that the Atlas document was clearly for internal DNC polls, had nothing to do with the MSM, and that the oversampling in question was about developing a messaging strategy for DNC talking points. Per usual, you ignored the argument and pretended like it never happened.

I mean, I could go on. But why?

We both know how this ends. You'll eventually stop posting and show up again in two or three days pretending like none of this ever happened. Oh, and you'll try to get me to post in one of your massive fake-news threads.

Here goes the polls thread, which wasn't even mine:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
And what's that, I was the one that after reading the document took up your defense that the meaning of the document was being misinterpreted!

So are you going to LIE some more about me or what?????????

So for what some 2 weeks maybe now you've been across this site labeling me a fake news LAIR, trying to discredit my hundredss of threads I've poured thousand's of hours of my life into writing, and there it is, you're the LIAR.

a reply to: network dude

I wish.

originally posted by: network dude
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".

Knowing that is 100% factual, isn't that a much more direct influence to the public than Russia releasing leaked DNC e-mails? (If they really did)

Obama has already started down this slippery slope by making this such a yuge deal. I'm not a smart man, but I know what bull# is.

the MSM cuts through all the BS being put out by the right......can't wait for the MSM to start picking apart every little thing that goes wrong with this REPUBLICAN controlled government...every little thing possible, and keep putting it on air day after day, over and over.....

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

You just made two CLEAR alleged case studies of me pushing fake news, now you dont know what I'm talking about?

What I didn't know (and what still isn't clear) was what they heck you were asking for a quote of, or your point was when you basically said all politicians do it. Do what? Lie to their constituents? Yeah, but that's not really my point. My point was that the fake news article regarding the public/private position was being misrepresented.

And what's that, I was the one that after reading the document took up your defense that the meaning of the document was being misinterpreted!

So, you're saying you didn't post a link to the public/private thing in your Mega Thread? I'm pretty sure you did. Along with lots of other fake news. Why link to an article that is clearly a misrepresentation if your goal isn't to push fake news?

And why, when I bring it up IN your tread, do you tell me to post it somewhere else?

And why do you tell people that you don't want debates in your thread?

And now you link to someone else's post. Well, congratulations. You found one of the OTHER threads I posted in.

So are you going to LIE some more about me or what?????????

Oh, you don't need my help looking suspect.

So for what some 2 weeks maybe now you've been across this site labeling me a fake news LAIR, trying to discredit my hundredss of threads I've poured thousand's of hours of my life into writing, and there it is, you're the LIAR.

Your threads discredit themselves.

In your Mega DUMP, you linked to this (another member's post), where the poster you cited very clearly tries to map the public/private position thing to "being untruthful."

As far as I can see, you never posted in that thread to contradict what he said, but you thought nothing of including it in your MEGA DUMP.

Here's the link: www.abovetopsecret.com...

Here's what was written:


She is a fraud and will say whatever in order to get elected. Its evident by her comments that she has no intention of holding wallstreet accountable and considering the amount of money wallstreet has given her its no wonder why. A public and private policy goes back to the accusations a democratic candidate made against her in the 2008 elections where her campaign stated her position changed because she was moving from primaries mode into general election mode.

His response was "How about tell the truth mode".



..........

Do you really want me to walk through your Mega-dump line by line? I actually started to do that multiple times, but ran into so much fake news that it quickly became an exercise in futility. At this point (as then) it would be a massive waste of my time, especially when you won't acknowledge any of it.

a reply to: Greggers

WTF are you talking about? I didn't even post in that thread.

I dont see you and your 'expert analysis' in there either, which as said even if you can squirm her out of that one, as being the ultimate archetypal liar of a politician ever, the widely accepted meaning of it goes without saying IT IS true of nearly every politician during our lifetime.

BTW: I posted the links to lots of threads, the 'whole history' of the affair is linked in the Repository Thread, where everyone can go and see the discussions for themselves. If you're trying to assert that I'm responsible for any and every misinterpreted or whatever story related to the wikileaks in this site you're totally out of your mind while grossly overstating my importance around here.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: Greggers

WTF are you talking about? I didn't even post in that thread.

Exactly. You didn't, just like I said. But you DID link to it in your MEGA DUMP.

I very clearly said all of this. You should slow down and READ.

while grossly overstating my importance around here.

Oh, I'm pretty sure no one's doing that.