Oprah Winfrey should apologize

Discussion in 'Politicians' started by TheGreatShoeScam, Nov 6, 2024.

  1. TrudginAcrossTheTundra

    TrudginAcrossTheTundra Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    3,900
    Likes Received:
    2,202
    Do I want a regime where officials bust into people's homes, take their pet squirrels, then euthanize them?

    Hmmm
     
  2. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    20,831
    Likes Received:
    15,003
    Can't come up with a rational counter argument?
     
  3. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    20,831
    Likes Received:
    15,003
    Does this make any sense?
     
  4. Tishomingo

    Tishomingo Members

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    6,196
    Yeah, it all makes sense (or nonsense), if you've read his other posts. Instead of Trudgin'across theTundra, he seems to be paddlin' up that long river in Africa! (DeNile)
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2024
  5. Tishomingo

    Tishomingo Members

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    6,196
    ...
     
    Last edited: Nov 25, 2024
  6. Tishomingo

    Tishomingo Members

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    6,196
    The trial and verdicts were nationally televised, and widely reported in respectable news sources all over the country. Transcripts of the proceeding, of course, were taken by the court reporter and duly filed with the court clerk in Manhattan. However, Trump's lawyers were twice successful in delaying sentencing on grounds that the impact, if any, on the recent SCOTUS opinion on presidential immunity could be assessed. The sentencing hearing has been scheduled for the 26th of this month. Is that what you mean by "not on the books"? We'll soon see ! (maybe.)
     
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2024
  7. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    20,831
    Likes Received:
    15,003
    I think what he means is:
    #1, the media made it all up and Trump was never convicted of anything,
    #2, any time Trump or any of his associates are indicted or found guilty of anything, the system is corrupt. Not when Hunter Biden is found guilty remember, that's perfectly legitimate.
    Or #3, Trump could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and his followers wouldn't care.

    I actually think it's a combination of all three and therefore I no longer feel his posts have any validity at all.
     
    Tishomingo likes this.
  8. TrudginAcrossTheTundra

    TrudginAcrossTheTundra Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    3,900
    Likes Received:
    2,202
    Is that the one where the partisan judge stated he was guilty before the arguments were made? The one where the Soros prosecutor campaigned on a promise to get this guy for something?

    Is that the kind of "justice" you are comfortable living under?

    One of the cases was that "he over-estimated the value of his assets".

    You want THAT to be a precedent?

    I mean, sure, I get that it's natural to be jealous of people who earn lots of wealth. It's not fair. But it's how things work in a free society. Fixing that will ultimately lead to oppression of ourselves. Let's be careful what we wish for.

    Yes, that's what I meant by not on the books - it's not on the books.

    In a better world as I see it, these crooks would be facing charges for trying to railroad a fellow citizen. As much as I think that would be beneficial to the rest of us, to send the message we can't tolerate the justice system being used to punish people we don't like, I'm expecting both sides to just drop it and move on.
     
  9. TrudginAcrossTheTundra

    TrudginAcrossTheTundra Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    3,900
    Likes Received:
    2,202
    Have you noticed, the first thing the bad guys go to is "Russia"? It's pretty funny, the level of ignorance and delusion. Some idiot even accused Tulsi Gabbard of some Russian asset or something lately. Of all the absurdities! They're gonna hafta get more creative with their lies before they can fool the people to swing back to their anti American power play agenda.
     
  10. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    20,831
    Likes Received:
    15,003
    #2, any time Trump or any of his associates are indicted or found guilty of anything, the system is corrupt.
    • The former president has claimed that the judge in this case — Justice Juan Merchan — is “corrupt” or “conflicted,” but one of Trump’s own lawyers last year said he had “no issue … whatsoever” with Merchan.
    • Trump wrongly has claimed a limited gag order — barring remarks about certain trial participants — prevented him from answering “simple questions” or criticizing the Biden administration.
    • He falsely claimed that Merchan “wouldn’t let” Trump’s defense team call campaign finance expert Bradley Smith as a witness. The judge did not say Smith couldn’t testify, although he limited what Smith could potentially discuss if he testified.
    • Trump wrongly said the judge wouldn’t allow an “advice of counsel” defense. Before the trial, Trump’s attorneys chose not to seek such a defense, and Merchan held them to that decision.
    • He has also claimed that all legal scholars said this case “shouldn’t be brought,” and that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg himself “didn’t want to bring the case.” Bragg said he didn’t want to pursue a broader financial crimes case until it was “ready,” and there were some law experts who said the hush money case against Trump was “strong.” ~ FactCheck
    But I believe old Tundra is confused and he's talking about Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg, not Justice Juan Merchan.
    And a partial #1, as I'm sure we will be told that FactCheck and PoitifFact are bias.
    Also notice the claim is made with no citation.
    So we have misinformation, confusion, and claims made without any creditable sources cited.
    Waste of time.
     
    Tishomingo likes this.
  11. Tishomingo

    Tishomingo Members

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    6,196
    Yes! Don't feed the troll!
     
  12. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    20,831
    Likes Received:
    15,003
    Again Tundra throws out meaningless nonsense without giving us any idea who the "bad guys" are. Who the "idiot" is, what this "idiot" accused Gabbard of in relation to Russia, or where he got this information.
    So, typically we have to fact check him, a typical MAGA ploy to waste our time.

    He's probably referring to this:
    Which she did say.

    More confusion and unsupported drivel.
     
    scratcho likes this.
  13. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    20,831
    Likes Received:
    15,003
    Yes, well I'm bored!
     
    Piney, scratcho and Tishomingo like this.
  14. TrudginAcrossTheTundra

    TrudginAcrossTheTundra Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    3,900
    Likes Received:
    2,202
    "Falsely claimed" - there it is again.

    I think you meant credible sources? (Not creditable)
    I don't believe those exist.
    Name one credible source.
     
  15. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    20,831
    Likes Received:
    15,003
    I think you are referring to this line: "He falsely claimed that Merchan “wouldn’t let” Trump’s defense team call campaign finance expert Bradley Smith as a witness." That's a polite way of saying he lied.
    Now all you have to do is provide a credible source of an instance when Merchan “wouldn’t let” Trump’s defense team call campaign finance expert Bradley Smith as a witness.
    I'll wait.
    Well that's just dandy.
    That means we can just make up any old story we want as no one or no source has any merit at all.
    Not even you or Trump.
    There is no truth, there are no facts.
    That explains it all.
    I'm glad you brought this up becasue many people don't seem to know how to identify a credible source.
    One handy method of determining credible sources is the CRAAP test.
    Is the information Current?
    Is the information Relevant?
    Who is the Author?
    Is the information Accurate?
    What is the Purpose of disseminating the information?

    With all that in mind, here are some credible sources:
    ABC News, The Age, Al Jazeera, Amnesty International, Aon, Ars Technica, Associated Press, The Atlantic, Axios, BBC, Bloomberg News, CBS News, The Christian Science Monitor, Climate Feedback, CNN, The Economist, Forbes, The Hill, MSNBC, Mother Jones, NBC News, The New Republic, The New York Times, NPR, PBS, Pew Research Center, Politico, PolitiFact, Reuters, Scientific American, Sky News, Snopes, Time, U.S. News & World Report,: are all generally reliable.

    Here are some listed as bias or unreliable: Breitbart News, BuzzFeed, Cato Institute, Center for Economic and Policy Research, China Daily, China Global Television Network, Cosmopolitan, The Daily Beast, Daily Kos, Democracy Now!, Examiner.com, Facebook, The Federalist, Forbes.com, Fox News, InfoWars, New York Post, Newsmax, Occupy Democrats, Raw Story, RedState, TASS, The Truth About Guns.

    Of course this is only a partial list and any one can make unintended mistakes. But the generally reliable ones don't make intentional mistakes and when they do make a mistake they admit it and correct it.
    If I see something, like on FaceBook for example.
    I check multiple sources such as the AP, Reuters, BBC etc. to see if they all agree.
    If so then the information is reliable.
     
    Tishomingo likes this.
  16. Piney

    Piney Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    5,064
    Likes Received:
    668
    Looks like Jack Smith's request to drop the J-6 & Retained Classified Docs charges against Trump has been granted. The Special Counsel then resigned his position.
    The charges against the co-defendents remain and will go to trial.
     
  17. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    20,831
    Likes Received:
    15,003
    Of course, Trump gets away again as he throws everyone else under the bus.
    This is a result of Trump's Supreme Court ruling that presidents are immune from prosecution.
     
  18. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    20,831
    Likes Received:
    15,003
  19. TrudginAcrossTheTundra

    TrudginAcrossTheTundra Lifetime Supporter Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    3,900
    Likes Received:
    2,202
    "That's a polite way of saying he lied."
    It's pretending to be polite, and it's literally flagging the opposite.

    How hard does one have to think about it to realize that there is no way in hell to be sure that there is, or is not, cheating in an election??? I can't know, you can't know, your favorite opinion people masquerading as news can't know, elected officials can't know, poll workers can't know, court personal can't know... Who can know? Nobody can know.

    So when you see a source deemed credible by other opinion people saying a person "falsely claimed" an election was rigged, then they are effectively claiming to know the unknowable. You're smart enough to realize that destroys their credibility. They're just feeding us a line.

    You're very good at listing sources to show that your opinion has come from sources, gotta give credit where credit is due, you're not pulling stuff from thin air. However, you're taking these sources as if they were factual. But they're not factual, they're opinionated. How do you know they're not factual? The example above shows it.

    Now let's say you're listening to a report on mayhem that occurred at a protest against a proposal to remove a statue of a confederate leader, where counter protestors showed up and clashed, it got out of hand including one crazy person going off and killing someone -- and the news network put the president of the country on, he's making remarks and he says there are very fine people on both sides of the issue, and adds, by the way, I'm not talking about the neo Nazis etc. Straight up reporting.

    The next day the news is telling you that the president called neo Nazis fine people. Is that lying? Of course! It's no mistake. I just heard the president the night before. But they're motivated to forward a narrative. And they expect their target audience to buy into it without question. They even play back part of what the president said while leaving off the clarification, in order to cement their distortion. The same network which aired the full statement on the night of!!! One on your list of credible sources!

    It goes on and on. Masks help contain the blast of the wearer's cough or sneeze, but won't filter out viruses in the air. Then later, wear a mask to reduce your chance of acquiring the virus. Later, wear two masks.

    Safe and effective. Get it and you won't get SARS-CoV-2.

    The president suggested drinking bleach.

    The president is colluding with Putin. And other enemy leaders.

    It has all the hallmarks of Russian disinformation.

    Twitter hate speech got worse under Musk.

    Govt spending to subsidize green products reduced inflation.

    Jan 6 was an insurrection to overthrow the govt.

    Border patrol agents on horses whipped immigrants as they crossed the border illegally.

    We are all going to die soon from acid rain, the new ice age, hole in the ozone layer, sea level rise, excess co2, increasing weather severity, bla,bla bla... But give us money and do as we say and we'll fix it for you!


    It just goes on and on, and on and on. It's right there in your face. Take a partial truth, twist it around into something different to suit your purpose, and make it should plausible to a gullible target audience. It works, and it's effective, but it's dishonest. Not credible. Something they say might be true, might be false, but we don't know which.

    I don't know if that helps you see the truth. It's really hard to grapple with the concept that we've been duped so hard for so long and we haven't seen it. There's no need to let it drive us crazy though -- just look into it and see it for what it is -- don't take any of it seriously, and even laugh at their attempts to get people to believe nonsense. They've gotten the better of all of us at one time. It's just the reality of the world we live in.
     
    Last edited: Nov 26, 2024
  20. MeAgain

    MeAgain Dazed & Confused Lifetime Supporter Super Moderator

    Messages:
    20,831
    Likes Received:
    15,003
    Come on, nobody can know? Then why have elections?
    In 248 years we have never known who won an election!
    What you do is count the votes. If there are more votes for one person than the other, that person wins.
    Not opinion, data.
    It's called research.
    My opinions are based on facts that you can check anytime you wish.
    Now if you don't understand what a fact is or choose to debate what facts are, then take it over to the philosophy section and we'll get into that.
    So let's do some research.
    So here we have an unbiased report from a creditable source. Does every source get it right? No. That's why you check multiple sources.
    I don't know what outlet you are claiming misreported this incident or what they said, or if they corrected it as you list no source, so your claim has little merit until you back it up.
    Now you're getting into science and what science considers a fact. A fact in science is only a fact until it is no longer a fact. As science investigated COVID, it presented the facts about it as it knew therm at the time. But being science they learned more as time went on and so the facts changed...that is what distinguishes science from dogma and religion. It is willing to change to fit present knowledge.
    Again, check multiple sources.
    Hyperbola abounds.
    So what? That doesn't mean there isn't anything that's true, or we can't believe anything.
    Alvin Toffler summarized the problem long ago:
     
    scratcho and Tishomingo like this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice