Man arrested outside Kavanaugh’s house charged with attempted murder

rjs330 said:

Nope.

Click to expand...

Well, only you know for sure, but you and I both kind of DO know, don't we?

Lol, you're the one that started the bridge metaphore.

Click to expand...

(sic)

rjs330 said:

Lol, apparently you haven't had any conversations with me regarding Jan 6? I can't believe you don't remember the myriad of times I mentioned the capitol and not the Whitehouse. But I shouldn't expect you to, cause I don't remember all your posts either.

The fact that I'm old and used the wrong word by mistake, by the way I'm glad you never make a verbal mistake, doesn't discount the fact that the hearings have shown no such thing.

Click to expand...

OK, with that mistake out of the way and fixed, any chance of substantiating all of the random claims that's I've been posting disinformation? Or are we just supposed to pretend that those should be accepted uncritically?

ThatRobGuy said:

Tone is everything, there's a difference between saying it as a "warning/assessment", and using a more hostile tone.

For instance, if I were to tell a guy drinking too much a bar "you're making a huge mistake, and you'll regret that decision" in an instructive, calm tone...one could realistically surmise I was warning him that he could hurt himself or others.

That's different than raising my voice, puffing up my chest, and in an "in your face" style, yelling "you'll regret that decision!!!"


Tack on "and you won't know what hit you!!!", and it definitely starts sounding more aggressive.


I'll concede that Trump's situation was worse...but I think you'd at least have to concede that Schumer's statements carried a tone that was more than just "a prediction of what will happen"

Schumer telling Brett Kavanaugh he'll "pay the price" for Roe resurfaces

It looks like the kinds of speech a GOP congressman would give if they were trying to convey a "tough guy" persona.

Click to expand...

Again, not sure of the point here. Yes, Donald's actions were were worse. And the media reported on them more frequently. What's the complaint again?

rjs330 said:

LOL, this is a a case where it's pretty obvious you bought the bridge. And you really believe you own it. Now you are trying to sell it to someone who sees right through the scam. Yet you cry "I own the bright, no I really do."

Sorry not buying it. You posts are classic gas lighting. Filled with lies. It's sad to see someone who was actually fooled into buying the bridge.

No, I'm not going to buy it from you.

Click to expand...

One would think that if those posts are so obviously filled with lies, there might be an attempt made to show one or two of them and the evidence leading to that conclusion. Rather, we get posts with a bunch of empty posturing. I wonder why.

KCfromNC said:

Again, not sure of the point here. Yes, Donald's actions were were worse. And the media reported on them more frequently. What's the complaint again?

Click to expand...

Because while one thing was worse, the two things weren't given the appropriate proportion of response.

The "severity" between the two wasn't so far apart that one deserves non-stop coverage for months on end, where the other only deserves a small mention buried in the business section.

On the scale of 0-10
If "Trump's thing" was a 10, and Schumer's thing was a 5 or a 6, then why are they correctly allocating time/effort to the former, but treating the latter like it's a 0.0001?

Much like rape is worse than stealing a car...however, if two different high profile politicians did those things, and outlets barely mentioned the latter (and there was a conspicuous political impetus behind that), "Well, rape is worse, what's your complaint?" would be a very disingenuous rebuttal.

Part of the free press's job is to "keep them honest" in Washington DC.

Engaging in "selective reporting" isn't the sign of a good media outlet.

It's even been noticed by others on the left. (if you don't want to hear the critique of a moderate)

Bill Maher (when talking about the Hunter Biden stories) in an interview said:
"This is why some people lose faith in the media. If Don Jr. did it, it would be all Rachel Maddow was talking about... if Don Jr. was caught on camera smoking crack with the hooker, you'd think it was a much bigger deal"

And we see that sort of "selective outrage" quite a bit on both sides...

ThatRobGuy said:

Bill Maher (when talking about the Hunter Biden stories) in an interview said:
"This is why some people lose faith in the media. If Don Jr. did it, it would be all Rachel Maddow was talking about... if Don Jr. was caught on camera smoking crack with the hooker, you'd think it was a much bigger deal"

And we see that sort of "selective outrage" quite a bit on both sides...

Click to expand...

Hunter’s been pretty open about his drug problems, no?
Has Don jr ever been known to admit doing drugs?

Though your point still stands, yes, “their sins” are always going to be worst than “our sins” because that’s how in-grouping works!

Pommer said:

Hunter’s been pretty open about his drug problems, no?
Has Don jr ever been known to admit doing drugs?

Though your point still stands, yes, “their sins” are always going to be worst than “our sins” because that’s how in-grouping works!

Click to expand...

The 2nd block of your post is what I was trying to highlight...

CNN/MSNBC will hold every republican under a microscope...and Fox will do the same to every democrat.

Partisan media is a problem. When the the institution that's supposed to have the job of "keeping the political institutions honest" has a "favorite", it waters down the purpose of their institution.

I want a world where CNN/MSNBC call out the Democrats when they do something stupid, and Fox calls out the GOP when they do something stupid.

I think people have the right to know the things their own political party is doing right, but more importantly, what their own political party is doing wrong.

ThatRobGuy said:

On the scale of 0-10
If "Trump's thing" was a 10, and Schumer's thing was a 5 or a 6, then why are they correctly allocating time/effort to the former, but treating the latter like it's a 0.0001?

Click to expand...

Probably because just putting random numbers on an opinion doesn't turn it into something objective that everyone would agree with. 10 out of 10 times, even.

ThatRobGuy said:

The 2nd block of your post is what I was trying to highlight...

CNN/MSNBC will hold every republican under a microscope...and Fox will do the same to every democrat.

Partisan media is a problem. When the the institution that's supposed to have the job of "keeping the political institutions honest" has a "favorite", it waters down the purpose of their institution.

I want a world where CNN/MSNBC call out the Democrats when they do something stupid, and Fox calls out the GOP when they do something stupid.

I think people have the right to know the things their own political party is doing right, but more importantly, what their own political party is doing wrong.

Click to expand...

Actually I'd say it doesn't water down the purpose....it defeats it.

I don't want to go into much detail about how we got to this point....but are you aware USA Today pulled 25 articles by the same journalist...for being fake.

That's to say the interviews, sources, and stories....didn't happen.

USA Today is a fact checker for multiple organizations and considered unbiased by 3rd party sources.

25 articles. I don't think for a moment they weren't aware of it.

These are just propaganda outlets now.

California man to plead guilty to attempted assassination of Brett Kavanaugh in 2022​

lawyers' letter