Tucker Carlson’s Latest Bombshell About January 6 Might Make You Rethink Everything

[Skylar]

See, that's where I disagree. Take our friend Macho here. I consider him one of our more "limited" members.

He wants us to watch the interview, yet when I point out a glaring inconsistency of the person being interviewed he simply ignores it. That's not an intellectual problem, it's a phycological one. He refuses to even consider being wrong, so he ignores any argument that might challenge it's worldview. In other words, he chooses to do that.

That guys a complete dipshit. But you can't really hold against him. He doesn't know any better. Its like getting mad a puppy for shitting on the floor.

I think curiosity and intelligence play a significant role in this. MAGA tends to draw those that lack curiosity and aren't particularly bright like a load stone does iron filings.

 

[SweetSue92]

But Sue....I thought you loved that picture? I thought it never got old for you to look at him with his feet up on that desk.

Do you think he'll get old. In prison, where he belongs?

Do you think he's happy to trade half a decade of his life for that photo you just can't get enough of?

I'm guessing....no. Not so much.

You love an America where this guy gets half a decade for putting his feet on the desk of a woman who defrauded America and made herself rich using the most crooked means imaginable.

YOU do this. YOU. Because there's no boots of power you won't lick.

That's on you, it's not on me. You and yours absolutely DECIMATED my patriotism and love of this nation. We aren't even America with comrades like you slithering around. So when we crater, I do not care.

Happy?

Proud?

 

[Mac1958]

I think curiosity and intelligence play a significant role in this. MAGA tends to draw those that lack curiosity and aren't particularly bright like a load stone does iron filings.

That's what ideology -- and a cult, specifically -- does to people. It robs them of their fundamental human curiosity, because all answers are provided by the ideology/cult.

It's a goddamn shame.

 

[SeaMajor7]

It's that way for EVERY right winger... period.

That's the point I'm trying to make. If defending Trump almost by definition involves using fallacies. I'm suggesting that the only way to defend Trump IS using fallacies.

As if you're THE arbiter of "Truth".

 

[SweetSue92]

That's what ideology -- and a cult, specifically -- does to people. It robs them of their fundamental human curiosity, because all answers are provided by the ideology/cult.

It's a goddamn shame.

Explain how much media you consumed about Jan 6th on your High Holy Day Gigi and we'll talk about a cult

 

[Skylar]

You love an America where this guy gets half a decade for putting his feet on the desk of a woman who defrauded America and made herself rich using the most crooked means imaginable.

You kinda skipped the whole breaking into the Speaker's office, stealing from her, felony civil disorder and disrupting an official proceeding part, dincha? Threatening a police officer with electode spikes in his cane. Or his attempt to prevent the peaceful transition of power.

But hey, you got that photo you love so much. So all's well that ends well!

YOU do this. YOU. Because there's no boots of power you won't lick.

You mean I'm siding with the actual election results? Shocking, right?

You're siding with seditionists and men who beat police officers to try and overturn a lawful election and retain power for the guy that lost.

All because a game show host told you to. How's that working out for you and Dicky B?

 

[forkup]

As if you're THE arbiter of "Truth".

No, I'm not. I do however know when fallacies are used when defending a position.

While using fallacies by itself does not invalidate an argument, using fallacies every time you argue does show an inherent reliance on fallacies too argue.

And if you're reliant on fallacies to defend a position every time, the position itself can at a certain point be deemed weak.

 

[SweetSue92]

That guys a complete dipshit. But you can't really hold against him. He doesn't know any better. Its like getting mad a puppy for shitting on the floor.

I think curiosity and intelligence play a significant role in this. MAGA tends to draw those that lack curiosity and aren't particularly bright like a load stone does iron filings.

Just to be clear:

When we say the Pledge now, "...UNITED states, ONE nation, INDIVISIBLE..."

I know it's not true, and I don't believe it. And I know it's a matter of time before we irrevocably fracture. I know this because I have to read the disgusting vitriol of people who cheer on a dude getting five years of prison time for breaking into a PUBLIC BUILDING and putting his feet on the desk.

Really.

It's over.

I don't care.

 

[SweetSue92]

You kinda skipped the whole breaking into the Speaker's office, stealing from her, felony civil disorder and disrupting an official proceeding part, dincha? Threatening a police officer with electode spikes in his cane. Or his attempt to prevent the peaceful transition of power.

But hey, you got that photo you love so much. So all's well that ends well!




You mean I'm siding with the actual election results? Shocking, right?

You're siding with seditionists and men who beat police officers to try and overturn a lawful election and retain power for the guy that lost.

All because a game show host told you to. How's that working out for you and Dicky B?

Just words to excuse how much you LOVE to lick those boots.

 

[Skylar]

That's what ideology -- and a cult, specifically -- does to people. It robs them of their fundamental human curiosity, because all answers are provided by the ideology/cult.

It's a goddamn shame.

I dunno. The people that I've seen drawn to MAGA weren't that bright in 2015 either. I think those that lack curiosity are drawn to the 'movement'.

 

[SeaMajor7]

You kinda skipped the whole breaking into the Speaker's office, stealing from her, felony civil disorder and disrupting an official proceeding part, dincha? Threatening a police officer with electode spikes in his cane. Or his attempt to prevent the peaceful transition of power.

But hey, you got that photo you love so much. So all's well that ends well!




You mean I'm siding with the actual election results? Shocking, right?

You're siding with seditionists and men who beat police officers to try and overturn a lawful election and retain power for the guy that lost.

All because a game show host told you to. How's that working out for you and Dicky B?

The buffalo guy was ESCORTED into, and then OUT OF the fucking SENATE CHAMBER by the Capitol Police.

There's YOUR iNsUrReCtIoN!!!

 

[Skylar]

Just to be clear:

When we say the Pledge now, "...UNITED states, ONE nation, INDIVISIBLE..."

Is that what your ilk were saying while they beating those cops? Or when they were forging those fraudulent election documents? Maybe when your ilk were threatening election workers? Or when they were trying to overturn a lawful election.

Dicky B is not the brightest bulb on the tree. He's exactly the kind of hapless dipshit that MAGA draws. What kind of a moron commits those kinds of crimes, and then takes pictures and shares them on social media?

Stupid hurts. And frankly, should.

 

[SeaMajor7]

No, I'm not. I do however know when fallacies are used when defending a position.

While using fallacies by itself does not invalidate an argument, using fallacies every time you argue does show an inherent reliance on fallacies too argue.

And if you're reliant on fallacies to defend a position every time, the position itself can at a certain point be deemed weak.

The fucking Capitol Police ESCORTED the buffalo guy to the SENATE CHAMBER!!!
BOOM!!!!
The END!
That's YOUR INSURRECTION right there!!!
OVER!

 

[forkup]

That's what ideology -- and a cult, specifically -- does to people. It robs them of their fundamental human curiosity, because all answers are provided by the ideology/cult.

It's a goddamn shame.

I always use Maddow and Michael Moore as an example by stating I will never trust them as a source.

Michael Moore because his style is naked appeal to emotion most of the time.

Maddow because once while being sued for defamation her lawyers argued she wasn't to be considered a reporter but rather an opinion maker. This showed me a. Her lawyers didn't think they could beat the defamation suit on merit. And b. she doesn't hold herself to any journalistic standard. At that point I don't trust you.

That's the problem with most on the right. Not only aren't they willing to question themselves. They specifically look for those who confirm their biases.

 

[justoffal]

Nope. There's no such requirement in law or in the commonly used definition of the word.

You imagined it.


Its ludicrous that MAGA dipshits would try and prevent the peaceful transition of power and violently try to overturn the election results.

Yet, that's exactly what we saw. With the MAGAts insisting that they were storming the capitol and it was a revolution.

Who's talking about requirements? The word insurrection was sloppily applied to this situation at best.
I've already destroyed the rediculous notion that J6 would be capable of overthrowing anything.

Nope. There's no such requirement in law or in the commonly used definition of the word.

You imagined it.


Its ludicrous that MAGA dipshits would try and prevent the peaceful transition of power and violently try to overturn the election results.

Yet, that's exactly what we saw. With the MAGAts insisting that they were storming the capitol and it was a revolution.

Nah.... Just doesn't hold water....if That was the case in the word insurrection could be sloppily applied to almost any demonstration or protest like it is in third world countries and marxists regimes. In this case it's a convenient legal term that comes with a desired list of proscribed results sought after by the opposition party. So far nobody has demonstrated to me how it would be possible to overturn the results in 52 states from a single location in Washington DC. The argument that this was an attempt forcibly overthrow the election is simply retarded. As far as showing their displeasure with the results that is nothing more than the exercise of their first amendment right.
Trespassing on the other hand is definitely stupid and I have no sympathy for anyone who decided to trespass.
1.) There was no military action
2.) Protesters did not try to form their own government
3.) There's no evidence of multiple State collusion by elected officers

Calling it in an insurrection is an exercise in severe weak-mindedness and simply atypical totalitarianism.

Jo

 

[SweetSue92]

Is that what your ilk were saying while they beating those cops? Or when they were forging those fraudulent election documents? Maybe when your ilk were threatening election workers? Or when they were trying to overturn a lawful election.

Dicky B is not the brightest bulb on the tree. What kind of a dipshit commits those kinds of crimes, and then takes pictures and shares them on social media?

Stupid hurts. And frankly, should.

The man whose imprisonment YOU are cheering put his feet on the Queen's desk. The crooked, thieving queen whose heels you would love to lick, let's face it. And it doesn't even bother you in the slightest that this is what we have come to. No part of your American heart is like gee, maybe we shouldn't punish our political enemies like this. Nope, you're all on board, to the point where it delights you.

Understand this. Some of us don't take pleasure in injustice, even for our enemies.

I know you don't get it. Have the day you deserve.

 

[Mac1958]

I always use Maddow and Michael Moore as an example by stating I will never trust them as a source.

Michael Moore because his style is naked appeal to emotion most of the time.

Maddow because once while being sued for defamation her lawyers argued she wasn't to be considered a reporter but rather an opinion maker. This showed me a. Her lawyers didn't think they could be the defamation suit on merit. And b. she doesn't hold herself to any journalistic standard. At that point I don't trust you.

That's the problem with most on the right. Not only aren't they willing to question themselves. They specifically look for those who confirm their biases.

Agreed, exactly.

These pundits (tribe irrelevant) are there to present one side of the story, and that usually involves either ignoring or downplaying or distorting the opposing side. I guess that's how advocacy works. I'm not a fan of it, but it sure as hell is popular.

The Trumpsters don't seem to understand this. I think this goes back to Limbaugh, and the way he made it clear that HE was the only person they could trust, and that all major media is their enemy. It certainly worked, and it's GQP gospel now. They look at what their pundits tell them as "the truth", and have no interest in an honest and accurate analysis of the other side of a story.

 

[Skylar]

Who's talking about requirements? The word insurrection was sloppily applied to this situation at best.

That would be you when you said this; "Insurrections to be actually valid in that category would require some form of attempt to take military action."

No. There's no such requirement. Not in the law, not in the common usage of the word. You made that up.

I've already destroyed the rediculous notion that J6 would be capable of overthrowing anything.

The ability to overthrow is not a requirement either. Merely the attempt.

So way to knock the stuffing out of that strawman.

Nah.... Just doesn't hold water....if That was the case in the word insurrection could be sloppily applied to almost any demonstration or protest like it is in third world countries and marxists regimes.

Nope. Only those that attacked the capitol while they were actively counting the votes as the last stage of the election.

There's a reason MAGA picked that day to attack the capitol and call for the hanging of Mike Pence.

It wasn't a coincidence. It was an intentional attempt to overturn the election.

 

[Skylar]

The man whose imprisonment YOU are cheering put his feet on the Queen's desk.

And broke into her office, and threatened police officers with spiked electrodes, and stole from the Speaker of the House, and tried to overturn a lawful election and engaged in felony civil disorder.

A little bit more than just putting your feet up on the desk, wouldn't you say?
But hey....at least that picture never gets old, ammirite?

The crooked, thieving queen whose heels you would love to lick, let's face it. And it doesn't even bother you in the slightest that this is what we have come to. No part of your American heart is like gee, maybe we shouldn't punish our political enemies like this. Nope, you're all on board, to the point where it delights you.

Understand this. Some of us don't take pleasure in injustice, even for our enemies.

I know you don't get it. Have the day you deserve.

The actual election results don't bother me in the slightest.

And punishing those who tried to overthrow that election and disenfranchise millions of Americans doesn't bother me either.

What they did was deadly serious.

 

[SeaMajor7]

Anecdotal - Definition & Examples | LF

Explanation and examples about the Anecdotal fallacy.

www.logicalfallacies.org

Also factually wrong.

It's on VIDEO!!!!!!
It HAPPENED!!!!!
You are DISMISSED!!!!!!!