What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Twittergate aka The Twitter Files

Delldude

Sheep Dipped Boy Scout
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2014
Messages
10,156
Reaction score
6,531
Points
938
Location
Plasticville U.S.A
Try thi

Try this again.

Is there any evidence that Twitter's witholding of Hunter's dick-pics swayed the 2020 election?

Embarrassed his entire family........like Joe Biden says 'That's ma boy'....... :biggrin:
 

Delldude

Sheep Dipped Boy Scout
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Dec 12, 2014
Messages
10,156
Reaction score
6,531
Points
938
Location
Plasticville U.S.A
And how is that relative to election interference?
Made his father stutter a lot on the campaign trail.

The election interference issue is when the government (FBI) runs around telling everybody on social media some Russian disinformation will be coming out regarding Hunter Biden.
 

Couchpotato

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2021
Messages
5,655
Reaction score
2,906
Points
938
Some of it, sure. I'll tell you what find me one single article or news item where any of the major outlets presented unverified information as true. Just one.

By the way, "Russian collusion" is one of my pet peeves. There has been plenty of evidence of the Trump campaign "colluding" with Russia. That has been established and confirmed, first by the Mueller report and then later by a congressional committee led by Ron Johnson. What there hasn't been is sufficient evidence to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that that "collusion" rose to the level of "conspiracy to defraud. "

Collusion has no meaning in law, only in a dictionary. So whenever I hear someone say there wasn't any collusion, it just tells me the person saying it is misinformed or dishonest

The "Russian Collusion" or "Trump is a Russian puppet" narrative was broadcast his entire Presidency. Rachael Maddow made a career with it for crying out loud. The fact that you and everyone on this site knows all about it is testament to that. The Hunter Laptop story was squashed before it ever got any scrutiny. They banned a newspaper from Twitter over it. If you're saying both stories were treated the same from a verification/vetting perspective, you have no credibility.
 
Last edited:

iceberg

Diamond Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
36,790
Reaction score
14,904
Points
1,600
It's just astounding that none of them ask questions about being
put in the position of trying to defend meeting with neo-nazis and terminating the Constitution.

You would think that cognitive dissonance has some limits.
so someone wanting to do this deserves being distanced from but the president, now actually doing it, is fine to support.

this is why we can't have nice things.
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
7,522
Reaction score
2,085
Points
195
The "Russian Collusion" or "Trump is a Russian puppet" narrative was broadcast his entire Presidency. Rachael Maddow made a career with it for crying out loud. The fact that you and everyone on this site knows all about it is testament to that. The Hunter Laptop story was squashed before it ever got any scrutiny. They banned a newspaper from Twitter over it. If you're saying both stories were treated the same from a verification/vetting perspective, you have no credibility.
It was squashed for an entire 2 days on Twitter. An action that prompted an apology. Specifically note the date, 2 weeks before the election.

So an unverified story in the New York post available to anybody even remotely capable of performing a Google search was held up for 2 days on twitter, an action that was reversed. And this somehow is a great scandal?

And yes they were treated the same from a verification/vetting perspective. The major outlets didn't run unverified news items. (I don't care about Rachel Maddow, any more than I care what Tucker Carlson says. Both have outright said in court that what they say shouldn't be considered reporting). In fact, the way I see it, Twitter ALLOWED the Hunter Biden story to run after a few days. When it came to "collusion" only VERIFIED stories were run. If the information wasn't verified no reporting of it was done.
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
7,522
Reaction score
2,085
Points
195
so someone wanting to do this deserves being distanced from but the president, now actually doing it, is fine to support.

this is why we can't have nice things.
Can you please rephrase this? I have a hard time understanding your premise.
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
105,951
Reaction score
28,305
Points
2,210
Here's the issue though. Did the media go to these lengths or any lengths for that matter to verify all the Russian collusion shit? The pee tape reporting etc. If they did that type of vetting of information that hurts political candidates they don't like, then people would accept their reasoning behind what went on with the Hunter laptop. Since they don't it appears and likely was purely a political decision on their part. Honestly if they admitted to that it would be less of an issue (at least for me). Just don't piss down my back and tell me it's raining.

Are you saying you don't believe CBS's findings from the laptop drive?
 

iceberg

Diamond Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
36,790
Reaction score
14,904
Points
1,600
Can you please rephrase this? I have a hard time understanding your premise.
if we must pull away from someone who said the constitution needs to be suspended or the like is wrong and we must distance ourselves from such a person -

what do we do when someone is actually DOING it (vs talking about it above) as our current president is in fact, doing.
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
7,522
Reaction score
2,085
Points
195
if we must pull away from someone who said the constitution needs to be suspended or the like is wrong and we must distance ourselves from such a person -

what do we do when someone is actually DOING it (vs talking about it above) as our current president is in fact, doing.
Thank you for clarifying. Now I would like you to be a bit more specific. In what way do you feel Biden is "suspending the constitution?"
 

MagicMike

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2021
Messages
2,310
Reaction score
1,448
Points
938
Location
New Mexico
Made his father stutter a lot on the campaign trail.

The election interference issue is when the government (FBI) runs around telling everybody on social media some Russian disinformation will be coming out regarding Hunter Biden.
After the Russian disinformation campaign to get Donald Trump elected in 2016 the FBI began targeting such things.

If you want to blame soneone blame Trump for not only welcoming but inviting interference from one of the America's arch enemies in the 2016 election.
 

iceberg

Diamond Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
36,790
Reaction score
14,904
Points
1,600
Thank you for clarifying. Now I would like you to be a bit more specific. In what way do you feel Biden is "suspending the constitution?"
oh, telling twitter what to say and not to say is pretty huge, wouldn't you say? if you can find justification this, it only means we'll never find that common ground of right and wrong)

i can keep going where he will do what he wants and let the courts tell him to stop it and then he appeals and keeps going.

circumventing congress to do things like cancel debt. how did a president get this ability to unilaterally go around congress and start writing laws from the exec branch?

and like i said - there are many counts out there of him ignoring the constitution so it will go to court and he can do it as long as he can get away with it.

or simply tell me that screaming the constitution should be suspended is worse than all this.
 

Couchpotato

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2021
Messages
5,655
Reaction score
2,906
Points
938
Are you saying you don't believe CBS's findings from the laptop drive?
Nope. Only that they dont vet stories that cut the other way with this amount of ferocity. Did they vet the Steele dossier to determine whether it was true before reporting on it? Obviously not.
 

Couchpotato

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2021
Messages
5,655
Reaction score
2,906
Points
938
Thank you for clarifying. Now I would like you to be a bit more specific. In what way do you feel Biden is "suspending the constitution?"
Hasn't the Biden admin done a number of things knowing they were in violation of the Constitution, even when the SCOTUS told them what they were doing was unconstitutional, but did them anyway basically to get their way until the issue made it's way though the courts? The eviction moratorium through the CDC is a classic example of this. That's not the admin saying they want to suspend the Constitution but knowingly violating it is worse isnt it?
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
7,522
Reaction score
2,085
Points
195
oh, telling twitter what to say and not to say is pretty huge, wouldn't you say? if you can find justification this, it only means we'll never find that common ground of right and wrong)

i can keep going where he will do what he wants and let the courts tell him to stop it and then he appeals and keeps going.

circumventing congress to do things like cancel debt. how did a president get this ability to unilaterally go around congress and start writing laws from the exec branch?

and like i said - there are many counts out there of him ignoring the constitution so it will go to court and he can do it as long as he can get away with it.

or simply tell me that screaming the constitution should be suspended is worse than all this.
oh, telling twitter what to say and not to say is pretty huge, wouldn't you say?
I would if that is what happened. Fortunately, it didn't. The White House REQUESTED from Twitter to refrain from posting dick picks from Hunter Biden. Requests that the Trump White House did too on occasion. And something that by the way also goes against Twitter's policies. The government routinely requests the holding of material by news outlets. Requesting being the operative word. If they would order it you might have a point but they didn't.
circumventing congress to do things like cancel debt. how did a president get this ability to unilaterally go around congress and start writing laws from the exec branch?
The president has the power the unilaterally go around congress using EO. Just like Congress has the capability of challenging those EO if they feel it encroaches on their perogatives. The Supreme Court can (and in this case probably will) call it unconstitutional, but it only will be a problem if the executive branch would ignore that decision. Checks and balances and all that. Otherwise your in the position that every time a president gets shot down by the Supreme Court he's trying to subvert the Constitution. Want to play a game who gets shot down more by the Supremes, Biden or Trump? I'm willing to give you odds.

And yes I will tell you that outright screaming you want the Constitution being suspended is worse. Biden at the very worst wants to test the limits of executive power. Trump simply states he doesn't accpet that there are limits on it. That is fundamentally different.
 

iceberg

Diamond Member
Joined
May 15, 2017
Messages
36,790
Reaction score
14,904
Points
1,600
I would if that is what happened. Fortunately, it didn't. The White House REQUESTED from Twitter to refrain from posting dick picks from Hunter Biden. Requests that the Trump White House did too on occasion. And something that by the way also goes against Twitter's policies. The government routinely requests the holding of material by news outlets. Requesting being the operative word. If they would order it you might have a point but they didn't.
of which the gov has zero right to do. it breaks the first amendment.

i'll stop here cause frankly, you're excusing the actions of one so you can demonize the voice of the other.

The president has the power the unilaterally go around congress using EO. Just like Congress has the capability of challenging those EO if they feel it encroaches on their perogatives. The Supreme Court can (and in this case probably will) call it unconstitutional, but it only will be a problem if the executive branch would ignore that decision. Checks and balances and all that. Otherwise your in the position that every time a president gets shot down by the Supreme Court he's trying to subvert the Constitution. Want to play a game who gets shot down more by the Supremes, Biden or Trump? I'm willing to give you odds.

And yes I will tell you that outright screaming you want the Constitution being suspended is worse. Biden at the very worst wants to test the limits of executive power. Trump simply states he doesn't accpet that there are limits on it. That is fundamentally different.
yea ok. didn't read.
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
7,522
Reaction score
2,085
Points
195
Hasn't the Biden admin done a number of things knowing they were in violation of the Constitution, even when the SCOTUS told them what they were doing was unconstitutional, but did them anyway basically to get their way until the issue made it's way though the courts? The eviction moratorium through the CDC is a classic example of this. That's not the admin saying they want to suspend the Constitution but knowingly violating it is worse isnt it?
 

forkup

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2016
Messages
7,522
Reaction score
2,085
Points
195
of which the gov has zero right to do. it breaks the first amendment.

i'll stop here cause frankly, you're excusing the actions of one so you can demonize the voice of the other.


yea ok. didn't read.
The first amendment handles the government restricting speech by establishing laws. The government is free to request whatever they want.

That's ok, if you are unwilling to read 2 paragraphs I will simply form a conclusion about your intellectual honesty.
 

Couchpotato

Platinum Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2021
Messages
5,655
Reaction score
2,906
Points
938
Yeah they allowed it to expire because it was going to expire soon but said it was clearly unconstitutional. Biden then tried to extend it after being told by the court that the action was unconstitutional.

"As he often does, Kavanaugh wrote to explain why he voted to allow the moratorium to remain in place. On the one hand, he said he agreed with the District Court that the CDC exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a nationwide moratorium.

But, he said, because the CDC has said it will end the moratorium in a few weeks he would allow it to remain in place. He said the extra weeks will “allow for additional and more orderly distribution of the congressionally appropriated rental assistance funds.”"

Do you even read your own links?


What's worse saying you want to suspend the Constitution or knowingly violating it?
 

Faun

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2011
Messages
105,951
Reaction score
28,305
Points
2,210
Nope. Only that they dont vet stories that cut the other way with this amount of ferocity. Did they vet the Steele dossier to determine whether it was true before reporting on it? Obviously not.

LOLOL

Too funny.

They skewered Joe and Hunter Biden, ya moron. You should have loved what they found and reported on.

But I get it ... they're "MSM," i.e., da debbil.

:lmao:
 

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

Forum List

Top