MSNBC host cries over Jan 6th Anniversary

[LeftofLeft]

This is hilarious. Talk about drama queens... pitiful propaganda.

Cry hard for January 6th…. It’s an Election Year. How pathetic.

As for myself, I’ll continue to shed my tears for the lives and livelihoods impacted by riots, violence and flash mobs throughout the US.

 

[MisterBeale]

More people today believe the democrats stole the 2020 election than they did in 2020.

Well? Now we have definitive proof. . . so says this Hillary Clinton supporter. Google declared that they would manipulate information, and they have the proof, that election reminders to vote, were definitely, rigged.

No way, anyone going to challenge them, the empirical evidence is, folks minds, and the collective public information arena is being manipulated so that elections are no longer free and fair.

“Proof Google Is STEALING Elections!” Says Dr. Robert Epstein​

 

[forkup]

Well? Now we have definitive proof. . . so says this Hillary Clinton supporter. Google declared that they would manipulate information, and they have the proof, that election reminders to vote, were definitely, rigged.

No way, anyone going to challenge them, the empirical evidence is, folks minds, and the collective public information arena is being manipulated so that elections are no longer free and fair.

“Proof Google Is STEALING Elections!” Says Dr. Robert Epstein​

A person claiming "proof" is found by watching YouTube doesn't really understand what the word proof means. Someone claiming "proof" is found with a guy claiming google used "subliminal messages" to "ship" votes to Hillary Clinton, should have his own head checked.

These are the "facts." Following the elections, voter fraud was asserted by Trump.

Voter fraud was investigated by a DOJ led by people appointed by Trump. They told him they had no "empirical evidence" to support such an assertion.

The White House legal team said it wasn't true.

People in Trump's staff said it wasn't true.

Republican governors said it wasn't true.

Bipartisan election officials said it wasn't true.

Nevertheless some people tried to argue this in court. They were shot down by judges appointed by Republican and Democrat presidents. Later on, these lawyers themselves after some of them got sanctioned for asserting it acknowledged in court filings there was no "proof" in order to get out of defamation suits by the people they tried to implicate.

They tried to assert voter fraud by making a "documentary" only to have to fight desperately the discovery requirements in court when they were sued by the people they disparaged.

Fox news gave a platform to people trying to assert voter fraud. A decision resulting in a three quarters of a billion dollars settlement when they were sued.
.
But hey this person on YouTube has proof? It would be funny if it wasn't for so many people believing similar BS.

 

[the other mike]

A person claiming "proof" is found by watching YouTube doesn't really understand what the word proof means. Someone claiming "proof" is found with a guy claiming google used "subliminal messages" to "ship" votes to Hillary Clinton, should have his own head checked.

These are the "facts." Following the elections, voter fraud was asserted by Trump.

Voter fraud was investigated by a DOJ led by people appointed by Trump. They told him they had no "empirical evidence" to support such an assertion.

The White House legal team said it wasn't true.

People in Trump's staff said it wasn't true.

Republican governors said it wasn't true.

Bipartisan election officials said it wasn't true.

Nevertheless some people tried to argue this in court. They were shot down by judges appointed by Republican and Democrat presidents. Later on, these lawyers themselves after some of them got sanctioned for asserting it acknowledged in court filings there was no "proof" in order to get out of defamation suits by the people they tried to implicate.

They tried to assert voter fraud by making a "documentary" only to have to fight desperately the discovery requirements in court when they were sued by the people they disparaged.

Fox news gave a platform to people trying to assert voter fraud. A decision resulting in a three quarters of a billion dollars settlement when they were sued.
.
But hey this person on YouTube has proof? It would be funny if it wasn't for so many people believing similar BS.

Forky is confused by the propaganda understandably. It's all there is out there.

People like her are slowly coming around like my wife.

 

[MisterBeale]

A person claiming "proof" is found by watching YouTube doesn't really understand what the word proof means. Someone claiming "proof" is found with a guy claiming google used "subliminal messages" to "ship" votes to Hillary Clinton, should have his own head checked.

These are the "facts." Following the elections, voter fraud was asserted by Trump.

Voter fraud was investigated by a DOJ led by people appointed by Trump. They told him they had no "empirical evidence" to support such an assertion.

The White House legal team said it wasn't true.

People in Trump's staff said it wasn't true.

Republican governors said it wasn't true.

Bipartisan election officials said it wasn't true.

Nevertheless some people tried to argue this in court. They were shot down by judges appointed by Republican and Democrat presidents. Later on, these lawyers themselves after some of them got sanctioned for asserting it acknowledged in court filings there was no "proof" in order to get out of defamation suits by the people they tried to implicate.

They tried to assert voter fraud by making a "documentary" only to have to fight desperately the discovery requirements in court when they were sued by the people they disparaged.

Fox news gave a platform to people trying to assert voter fraud. A decision resulting in a three quarters of a billion dollars settlement when they were sued.
.
But hey this person on YouTube has proof? It would be funny if it wasn't for so many people believing similar BS.

Dr. Robert Epstein’s testimony to Judiciary Subcommittee SD 226​

 

[forkup]

Forky is confused by the propaganda understandably. It's all there is out there.

People like her are slowly coming around like my wife.

I get my "propaganda" by watching testimony under oath by Republicans. I get my "propaganda" by reading court filings.

Where do you get yours?

 

[the other mike]

6 million votes were shifted from Trump to Biden in 2020.

DJT should have arrested Pence, gone police state and started confiscating Dominion voting machines immediately.

 

[the other mike]

I get my "propaganda" by watching testimony under oath by Republicans. I get my "propaganda" by reading court filings.

Where do you get yours?

YouTube.

 

[the other mike]

They messed with the wrong ex cop this time.

 

[SweetSue92]

This is hilarious. Talk about drama queens... pitiful propaganda.

Even the guy sitting with him was like "What the heck"

 

[MisterBeale]

Bipartisan election officials said it wasn't true.

. . this effect is, as the good doctor said. . . is "ephemeral."

Definition of EPHEMERAL

lasting a very short time; lasting one day only; devoted to what is of temporary interest… See the full definition

www.merriam-webster.com

Get your partisan head out' your ass. The fascists don't give a shit about party, or about YOU.

They only care about their money and their power.

If it suits them to put a republican in office, they will. If it suits them to put a democrat in office, they will do that too.

 

[SweetSue92]

I love my country but hate my government. Do you think this impossible?

I love my country as founded. I don't love it anymore. I cannot when half of us is happy enough to have unelected eggheads take candidates off the ballot because they said so. At that point, the nation's over.

 

[forkup]

A testimony about "subliminal messages" picked up by the Daily Mail doesn't make the claim more credible. It's still crazy.

Let me tell you what was proven in court about the 2016 election.

Russian bot farms had a social media campaign, those same "monopolies" that this guy is decrying. Specifically targeted at swing voters. Voters identified by the Trump campaign and disseminated to the Russians by Paul Manafort. People were indicted and convicted for these actions. Something you can read by a report by a committee led by Ron Johnson and Mueller. This to help Trump.

These are facts.

You can rely on the testimony of a guy talking about subliminal messages and treat it like it's gospel.

I'll rely on the conclusions of a criminal court.

 

[forkup]

YouTube.

Lol obviously.

 

[the other mike]

Lol obviously.

While your underestimation YouTube is cute and all, it doesn't win debates.

 

[the other mike]

 

[forkup]

While your underestimation YouTube is cute and all, it doesn't win debates.

I don't mind YouTube I just don't think a clip posted there necessarily means it's true.

Take for instance your "cop" and Tucker Carlson interview.

This cop claims that the FBI planted the "seeds for a more radical occupation of the Capitol" months in advance. The problem is the actual rally was called for 2 weeks before. Seems kind of problematic to me, unless of course you believe that the FBI could see in the future. Come to think of it it's only slightly more out there than subliminal messages.

If you, or anyone wants to use YouTube to support an assertion you are welcome to do so. I sometimes do so myself. But when you do and you don't see something as GLARING as not recognizing linear time as a concept one has to question why your bias blinds you so.

 

[the other mike]

I don't mind YouTube I just don't think a clip posted there necessarily means it's true.

Take for instance your "cop" and Tucker Carlson interview.

This cop claims that the FBI planted the "seeds for a more radical occupation of the Capitol" months in advance. The problem is the actual rally was called for 2 weeks before. Seems kind of problematic to me, unless of course you believe that the FBI could see in the future. Come to think of it it's only slightly more out there than subliminal messages.

If you, or anyone wants to use YouTube to support an assertion you are welcome to do so. I sometimes do so myself. But when you do and you don't see something as GLARING as not recognizing linear time as a concept one has to question why your bias blinds you so.

I'm blind ....right .
This is part of the psyop. So you're either ignorant, which I'm doubting , or attempting to be disingenuous with me, in which case , I'd suggest you save it for your little home-schooled rug rats.

 

[the other mike]

 

[forkup]

I'm blind ....right .
This is part of the psyop. So you're either ignorant, which I'm doubting , or attempting to be disingenuous with me, in which case , I'd suggest you save it for your little home-schooled rug rats.

I'm not being disingenuous at all. You posted an interview by Tucker Carlson. I simply listened to the first few minutes of it to find a glaring problem with the claims made by the guy being interviewed.

He claimed the FBI suggested and I'm directly quoting. " A more radical occupation of the Capitol" months in advance. While the actual rally that led to the occupation was called only 2 weeks before it happened. That's not a psyop. As I said that's simply not how time works.

You were saying that complaining about a source isn't a valid argument. You are right it isn't. Pointing out faults in the argument is. I just did so.