ABC News Moderators Blasted For Extreme Bias, Fact Checking Trump But Not Harris

[BPPLEE]

Which makes your statements unproven assertions which is why I said --->
childeye 2 said:
large letters won't make them true words.

Nothing will make lies true words

 

[childeye 2]

You say that as if Left/Right is simply opinion and does not contain right/wrong values.

Not exactly. Objective and subjective is not a true dichotomy in linguistics because they are not mutually exclusive. An objective view would take all subjective views into account, which is also why opinions can be formed from some limited factual basis. So. in a left/right dichotomy there are two opposing subjective views of right/wrong that are equally valid as in both having some equal moral/immoral value. The point being that to go too far left or too far right would be unjust.

Alright, then instead of an "anti- killing jews/pro-killing jews" example, let's use something else.
If you own a home and the title is in your name, and then a Left wing politician advocates taking your home and giving it to a group of 6 illegal aliens to live in, and Right wing politician defends the homeowner that the home belongs solely to the homeowner who's name is on the title, do you think the objective thing to do is kick the homeowner out of his home and allow only 3 of the illegals to live there?

Again, you have to have two subjective opposing points of view that are equally valid to reason upon in a true left/right dichotomy. I gave you perfectly good examples, buyer/seller and employee/employer. You should be able to discern that they are both subjective opposing equally valid views.

What you're doing is filling in the blanks with anti-stealing property/pro-stealing property. Obviously, it's wrong to steal someone's property so this issue obviously belongs in a positive/negative dichotomy of right/wrong.

 

[childeye 2]

Nothing will make lies true words

Of course nothing will make lies true. But asserting that Harris is lying about those things is not proof.

 

[rjs330]

Of course nothing will make lies true. But asserting that Harris is lying about those things is not proof.

Proof has been provided. Ones bias may refuse to accept it.

 

[variant]

As far as I recall, they only fact checked some real whoppers like claiming Haitians were eating Dogs and Cats in Springfield OH, that Democrats wanted to execute babies, and took issue with Trump that he said he lost the 2020 election, which he then said was sarcasm.

 

[Aldebaran]

Of course nothing will make lies true. But asserting that Harris is lying about those things is not proof.

Direct quotes in context showing exactly what Trump said (and even video evidence), in contrast to Harris's narrative of using quotes out of context indicates a deliberate misrepresentation on Harris's part about what Trump said. Another way of putting that is that she lied, and continues lying after shown the facts.

 

[BPPLEE]

Direct quotes in context showing exactly what Trump said (and even video evidence), in contrast to Harris's narrative of using quotes out of context indicates a deliberate misrepresentation on Harris's part about what Trump said. Another way of putting that is that she lied, and continues lying after shown the facts.

ABC has effectively ended all future presidential debates on mainstream ( liberal) networks.
No ones going to agree to something like this again

 

[Aldebaran]

ABC has effectively ended all future presidential debates on mainstream ( liberal) networks.
No ones going to agree to something like this again

If K wins, there may not be a future election requiring a debate. She'll probably have an "information czar" silence any information as being "misinformation" if it doesn't come from her admin.

 

[childeye 2]

Proof has been provided. Ones bias may refuse to accept it.

Then people shouldn't rely on bias.

 

[Aldebaran]

Then people shouldn't rely on bias.

That's what we've been trying to get you to understand.

 

[childeye 2]

Direct quotes in context showing exactly what Trump said (and even video evidence), in contrast to Harris's narrative of using quotes out of context indicates a deliberate misrepresentation on Harris's part about what Trump said. Another way of putting that is that she lied, and continues lying after shown the facts.

I have no idea to what you're referring. Give an example.

 

[childeye 2]

Dude, she either said she was going to ban fracking or she didn't. Quit trying to wordsmith her out of her flip-flopping positions that are only meant to please whoever she's talking to.

I've personally witnessed her saying both. I've seen her position that she was against fracking because of the issue with water, and I've seen her say she would stand with Biden's current policy, and that policy is in place because we presently need to produce the natural gas.

 

[childeye 2]

That's what we've been trying to get you to understand.

I'm not the one calling Harris a liar without any factual evidence. I told you, that you have to prove an INTENT to deceive. Righteousness is by grace through faith and that's what I practice.

 

[Aldebaran]

I'm not the one calling Harris a liar without any factual evidence. I told you, that you have to prove an INTENT to deceive.

By spreading misinformation and taking words of Trump out of context to win a debate is plenty of intent.

Righteousness is by faith through grace and that's what I practice.

The phrase is "grace through faith".
But either way doesn't have anything to do with what we're discussing here.

 

[childeye 2]

By spreading misinformation and taking words of Trump out of context to win a debate is plenty of intent.

This is a blank assertion. I don't know to what you're referring. I've stated on record why the so-called lies don't actually prove she lied. No one except rjs330 has actually addressed any of my responses to point out a flaw in my reasoning, which does earn my respect, by the way.

The phrase is "grace through faith".
But either way doesn't have anything to do with what we're discussing here.

When people take things out of context I don't call them liars. I figure they didn't apply the context and that's what I say. That's practicing grace through faith which is contrary to projecting distrust through cynicism. And thank you by the way for the heads up about grace through faith. I imagine some cynics could have called me a liar rather than seeing a mistake.

 

[Aldebaran]

This is a blank assertion.

I thought you'd realize the topic hasn't changed.

When people take things out of context I don't call them liars. I figure they didn't apply the context and that's what I say. That's practicing grace through faith which is contrary to projecting distrust through cynicism.

When they take the same things out of context on a regular basis even after they've been shown the actual context is, and they have easy access to the accurate information, and they still quote the person out of context, then they've proven themselves to be a practicing liar.
Does that surprise you that a former prosecutor who takes pride in that profession and said she was going to prosecute Trump on the debate stage would lie to get what she wants, especially since she's legally allowed to do so?

 

[childeye 2]

I thought you'd realize the topic hasn't changed.

The topic is not the issue. The issue is you don't say which so called lie you're referring to.

When they take the same things out of context on a regular basis even after they've been shown the actual context is, and they have easy access to the accurate information, and they still quote the person out of context, then they've proven themselves to be a practicing liar.

Show me the case where this happened, otherwise it's a blank assertion.

Does that surprise you that a former prosecutor who takes pride in that profession and said she was going to prosecute Trump on the debate stage would lie to get what she wants, especially since she's legally allowed to do so?

I told you, I practice grace through faith. And because I do, I can see your question is a loaded question.

 

[loveofourlord]

The moderators corrected trump on blatant stupid lies, but ignored the hundreds of others, remind me or what lie harris said was equal to the cats and dogs lie?

 

[loveofourlord]

You mean like repeating the long debunked "good people on both sides" claim?
Or how about the Democratic boogeyman Project 2025 that has also been long debunked.

Shall we start with those two glaring lies?-

By debunked you mean trump lying about being involved with it, when the people behind it say he was involved, many of the people working with trump were behind it and such? But your right it's impossible for trump to be involved.

 

[Aldebaran]

The topic is not the issue. The issue is you don't say which so called lie you're referring to.

The same one we've been talking about all along. That's why I said the topic hasn't changed.

I told you, I practice grace through faith. And because I do, I can see your question is a loaded question.

That's called projecting distrust through cynicism, remember?