Off Topic Chat. (MOD NOTE post# 3949 and post#5279)

Cass

tudderone wrote: »

Its as good as in the bag, because hurt feeling, homophobia, sunshine and rainbow flags, and lets all be "progressive", big word that, you can hide a mountain behind it. .

Not to be dismissive or somehow coming across as a dick, but leave all that aside for the minute.

Look at hate speech laws. They're designed to stop the spread of hateful speech that leads to hate based crime. The repeal of the current legislation, as is being discussed, and replaced with a whole new batch of laws would make the act of talking a violent crime. IOW speech would be treated the same as a physical act of violence.

There are so many problems with this.

First off what is hate speech. You cannot say its speech you don't agree with because we have the right to disagree. That much is enshrined in the constitution.

So its to ban hateful speech, as in offensive speech. Well being offended has never been a criminal act and what is offensive? What one person/group finds offensive others would not. Look at the most divisive man in the last four years, Trump. People love him and others hate him. There were calls for his murder in public and by so called celebrities. Were they arrested? No, and they shouldn't be because they have free speech rights, however much anyone else disagrees with them.


That leads onto the issue of gauging it. If someone speaks in a derogatory/hateful manner about a particular group/segment of society then it must be measured. What percentage of people need to be offended for it to be classed as offensive enough to enough of the population to be banned? 10%, 30%, 75%, 90%, 100%.

How would you measure such offense? If not enough people are offended does any type of vitriol stay up (or wherever its written) until it reaches the "magic number" or is it a one time shot at having it listed.

Then onto the actual important stuff.

Who decides? Are people going to be polled on all issues from all time to create a list? Seeing as how people are being offended by statues from 100+ years ago, straight people, white people, Santa, Fairy tale of New York, etc. and the list is ever growing and seemingly never ending what way will the "new" offensive material be legislated for? Will it be covered in a "one size fits all" type legislation which is the most dangerous type.

What would stakeholders in such legislative discussion look like? Will people from all sects of life be included or only those directed involved in "woke" issues be included?

Now onto the dangerous parts of such legislation.

Banning certain types of speech will not get rid of it. What it will do is drive such speech "underground". It'll find dark corners of darker forums where it will fester, breed, grow and eventually explode in real life actions. I said this before and also warned of the danger such legislation for the same reasons.

The best antidote for any speech someone finds offensive is to either ignore it or highlight it for the absurdity of what it is.

Want to know the funny/stupid part of this.

The advert ran at Christmas, by RTE, where a Garda arrested God for rape/sexual assault. Under the proposed hate speech laws that would fall foul of it. Its offensive and derogatory towards Christians (Ireland is approx 95% Christian) and insults their faith and beliefs. So our sinkhole of a national propaganda machine using tax payer money (under threat of fine/prosecution by legislation) should be fined and people prosecuted for that.

Its a dangerous and slippery slope and once we start down it there will be no stopping.

Amen........................ oh yeah, and awoman.

Munsterlad102

Cass wrote: »

Free speech is a myth.

Take the Irish constitution. We have so called free speech, but its limited to exclude the discussion of certain topics. Hence its not free speech, but limited speech.

My hatred for hate speech laws stems from this already limited speech, but instead of limiting what i can discuss they want to actively police it. IOW thought police like in Canada and the UK where an offensive post leads to a knock on the door.

I said this some time back, if they introduce hate speech laws it'll be a disaster.

Exactly, not only are there clauses in the constitution about seditious and inciteful speech but all inalienable rights are subject to the “common good”. In other words, you can say what you want, unless the government says otherwise. So in effect, limited rights are worthless if they can be infringed on with the stroke of a pen.

tudderone

Cass wrote: »

Not to be dismissive or somehow coming across as a dick, but leave all that aside for the minute.

Look at hate speech laws. They're designed to stop the spread of hateful speech that leads to hate based crime. The repeal of the current legislation, as is being discussed, and replaced with a whole new batch of laws would make the act of talking a violent crime. IOW speech would be treated the same as a physical act of violence.

There are so many problems with this.

First off what is hate speech. You cannot say its speech you don't agree with because we have the right to disagree. That much is enshrined in the constitution.

So its to ban hateful speech, as in offensive speech. Well being offended has never been a criminal act and what is offensive? What one person/group finds offensive others would not. Look at the most divisive man in the last four years, Trump. People love him and others hate him. There were calls for his murder in public and by so called celebrities. Were they arrested? No, and they shouldn't be because they have free speech rights, however much anyone else disagrees with them.


That leads onto the issue of gauging it. If someone speaks in a derogatory/hateful manner about a particular group/segment of society then it must be measured. What percentage of people need to be offended for it to be classed as offensive enough to enough of the population to be banned? 10%, 30%, 75%, 90%, 100%.

How would you measure such offense? If not enough people are offended does any type of vitriol stay up (or wherever its written) until it reaches the "magic number" or is it a one time shot at having it listed.

Then onto the actual important stuff.

Who decides? Are people going to be polled on all issues from all time to create a list? Seeing as how people are being offended by statues from 100+ years ago, straight people, white people, Santa, Fairy tale of New York, etc. and the list is ever growing and seemingly never ending what way will the "new" offensive material be legislated for? Will it be covered in a "one size fits all" type legislation which is the most dangerous type.

What would stakeholders in such legislative discussion look like? Will people from all sects of life be included or only those directed involved in "woke" issues be included?

Now onto the dangerous parts of such legislation.

Banning certain types of speech will not get rid of it. What it will do is drive such speech "underground". It'll find dark corners of darker forums where it will fester, breed, grow and eventually explode in real life actions. I said this before and also warned of the danger such legislation for the same reasons.

The best antidote for any speech someone finds offensive is to either ignore it or highlight it for the absurdity of what it is.

Want to know the funny/stupid part of this.

The advert ran at Christmas, by RTE, where a Garda arrested God for rape/sexual assault. Under the proposed hate speech laws that would fall foul of it. Its offensive and derogatory towards Christians (Ireland is approx 95% Christian) and insults their faith and beliefs. So our sinkhole of a national propaganda machine using tax payer money (under threat of fine/prosecution by legislation) should be fined and people prosecuted for that.

Its a dangerous and slippery slope and once we start down it there will be no stopping.

Amen........................ oh yeah, and awoman.

Agree 100%. I have read and heard things that offend me, do i have a hissy-fit or a meltdown or run around to the garda station to fill in a hurt feelings report ? No of course not, but this is now the new normal. Its not just here, its in all of the western world. Uk police ringing people to tell them to "check their thinking" if they post something on twitter, is imho very dangerous. But its in Europe and America too. Anyone who disagrees , Laurence Fox, Dr Starkey, Ben Shapiro, John Cleese, Jordan Peterson all get "cancelled" or labelled as a racist/facist if they basically tell the truth, and no tv station or newspaper will touch them.

Grizzly 45

Munsterlad102 wrote: »

Exactly, not only are there clauses in the constitution about seditious and inciteful speech but all inalienable rights are subject to the “common good”. In other words, you can say what you want, unless the government says otherwise. So in effect, limited rights are worthless if they can be infringed on with the stroke of a pen.

Yet it contradicts itself in so much as an open critique of public figures and the govt is allowed as constitutional? Possibly is it the way it is expressed.IE if I say Leo Vard a Homosexula who enjoys and performs gay sex? All of which, is a true statement?
Compared to saying he is a raving f...gott who enjoys..getting it... etc "The statement while also true,is expressing to shock and offend the public. So the nuance proably has to be taken into this "hate speech" as well. But then as Cass said;Whats "offensive" to you mightn't be offensive to me at all. Who decides?

More worrisome would be like in the UK liking or agreeing with a FB comment or twitter getting a call from the thought police to "check your thinking!"

tudderone

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BiqDZlAZygU

Grizzly 45

tudderone

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

I can see a poo-storm hitting America, and i mean a lot more than we've seen already. Its been a polarised country for decades now and its getting worse. If the dem's make a serious attempt to push for socialism and gun control, there could be a civil war. You only have to look at Virginia with the dems controlling the cities and republicans the rural areas, the dems pushing for gun control causing friction, it could all kick off.

tudderone

The south African strain of Covid is now here. It is even more virulent than the UK strain, i can see this thing getting a lot worse before it gets any better.


https://www.dublinlive.ie/news/health/covid19-ireland-south-africa-tonyholohan-19592009

Mellor

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Except for t he was right. It did and has happened.

There are likely a small amount of fraudulent votes in every election.
Since the election Trump has tried to claim he won states that he clearly lost. He has told outright lies. This is not of a democratic leader behaves. (Par for the course for certain parts of the world obviously).

.No! it was in a discussion with Gen Flynn who suggested it where ideas were being thrown about, and it was apparently a nonstarter...

Obvious it’s a non-starter. The military is not getting involved.
The fact it was even thrown about as an idea is the insanity.

Yes he could have as there is historical precedent for such to be done from Jefferson and I believe it has been done twice before.

No he couldn’t. Pence has confirmed that, as have constitutional law experts as Harvard and other law schools. His role is largely ceremonial. No such power exists in the constitution. Nor the Electoral Count Act 1887.

Jefferson didn’t reject any votes. He didn’t have the power then either. In his case an envelope containing votes for Georgia, was not sign as required. Some claimed this made them technically invalid, but Jefferson counted the votes anyway as they were the will of the people.
None of that in anyway gives Pence the power to reject the election.
They would only fly in a dictatorship.

The social media suspension is just plain nastiness on Zuckerberg's part,and the fact that he is looking at an investigation into his monopoly of social media and sharp business practises by a Republican commission is telling.

I don’t think Facebook or Twitter is obligated to give anyone a platform. Spreading lies seems to be the fastest way to get kicked off. As Alex Jones found out.

Briefly your point why is Hunter Biden such a big deal? He is what the Russians call "Kompromat"[Compromised] This has to do with his lost laptops and all the dirt that is in them. dirt literally from his sexual exploits with underage family relatives on his Pornhub account to the entire dirty deal with Ukraine,

The pornhub claim sounds like a stretch.
Literally anyone would be able to see it. They wouldn’t need his laptop or to be a Russian spy.

Sounds a little like a re-hash of the “Trump Pee-tape in the hands of the Russians” story.

yubabill

Been following events in the US and keeping really busy in an effort to stay sane.

Looks like a powder keg over there right now and hysteria is setting in.

And the Twitter ban was a bit much, IMHO.

Somebody needs to calm things down - but WHO can?

Munsterlad102

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Yet it contradicts itself in so much as an open critique of public figures and the govt is allowed as constitutional? Possibly is it the way it is expressed.IE if I say Leo Vard a Homosexula who enjoys and performs gay sex? All of which, is a true statement?
Compared to saying he is a raving f...gott who enjoys..getting it... etc "The statement while also true,is expressing to shock and offend the public. So the nuance proably has to be taken into this "hate speech" as well. But then as Cass said;Whats "offensive" to you mightn't be offensive to me at all. Who decides?

More worrisome would be like in the UK liking or agreeing with a FB comment or twitter getting a call from the thought police to "check your thinking!"

Yeah, that's a very good point. Even disputing historical events or their accuracy or commonly held beliefs could be classed as hate speech, like saying 500 years ago that the Earth was not the center of the universe could be classed as hate speech.

Also let's not forget how this law will impact of people's freedom of religion. Most religions have a group of people who are viewed as "reprobate". Would a Christian saying gays are going to hell be hate speech? Would a Muslim saying anyone who eats pork should be killed and is going to hell be hate speech? Would a Jew saying Gentiles are animals and can be treated as such be hate speech? All examples just float an idea, rather than directly threaten anyone.

If the government is going to ban certain speech, then are they going to listen to ordinary people in their own homes and swoop in if they say a no-no word? That's more of a severe, dystopian scenario but possible nonetheless.

Ultimately is restricting people's speech worth it or should we ignore any such notion, I think the latter is the only viable path.

Cass

yubabill wrote: »

Been following events in the US and keeping really busy in an effort to stay sane.

Its hard to not get involved but i know what you mean.

Frankly i'm glad Trump is gone, for one reason. Hopefully no more endless news cycles on him. Its tiring.

Looks like a powder keg over there right now and hysteria is setting in.

Could get four years of payback now biden is in office.

And the Twitter ban was a bit much, IMHO.

They have gone to town, banning a lot o conservative pages.

Somebody needs to calm things down - but WHO can?

Well the Dems fake cries for unity didn't last long with the calls for his [Trump] arrest, impeachment, removal from office, etc. Less than two weeks before the inauguration.

So won't come from that side.

As for conservatives, doubt it. They won't want to flame their base any more than they already have.

yubabill

Cass wrote: »

They have gone to town, banning a lot o conservative pages.

Twitter has permanently banned Donald Trump, deleted all his tweets and activity. He's also blocked on FB and Instagram.

Trump moved to Parler and Google immediately removed it from their app store for Android phones, apple is threatening to remove Parler from their app store unless they agree to moderate it per Apple (so it'll be gone there soon).

It's being called The Purge, that many were anticipating, Tim Pool reckons he'll be gone from Youtube soon and he's centre-left politically, but supported Trump because of troop withdrawals.

Cass

yubabill wrote: »

It's being called The Purge, that many were anticipating, .

They have their Democrat buddies in the white house, congress and now senate to support any action they take. So why not!.

Cass

Had to laugh when someone stuck up a picture of the guys that raided capital building and said:

"We [America] spend $750 Billion per year on defense and the capital was taken in two hours by the cast of Duck Dynasty and some guy wearing a Chewbacca onesie".

Grizzly 45

Getting scary over there now. I lived over there thru the Clinton dictatorship and the crime bill of 1994,Waco and Ruby ridge, with trepidation,but at least there was a viable block in Congress on the Republican side

What is happening now over there is starting to fill me with dread,as there really is now ZERO forms of opposition in the system to the Democrats for at least another two years, with both houses Blue and the White house the same and already people are talking about a night of the long knives being pulled on those Republicans who supported Trump, with them being suspended and blocked on social media. Removing Parler from Google and Apple is just showing how much intimidation is going on by big tech
Invoking the 25th will now only aggravate this even further if they insist on removing Trump, and I can really see something kick off if they push this further.

tudderone

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

Getting scary over there now. I lived over there thru the Clinton dictatorship and the crime bill of 1994,Waco and Ruby ridge, with trepidation,but at least there was a viable block in Congress on the Republican side

What is happening now over there is starting to fill me with dread,as there really is now ZERO forms of opposition in the system to the Democrats for at least another two years, with both houses Blue and the White house the same and already people are talking about a night of the long knives being pulled on those Republicans who supported Trump, with them being suspended and blocked on social media. Removing Parler from Google and Apple is just showing how much intimidation is going on by big tech
Invoking the 25th will now only aggravate this even further if they insist on removing Trump, and I can really see something kick off if they push this further.

I would tend to agree, especially with a lot of people literally armed to the teeth and being told the commies are coming for your guns and money. Both sides have gone to the extremes now the left with BLM and Antifa, and the right storming the white house etc.

Cass

yubabill wrote: »

Twitter has permanently banned Donald Trump, ..........

Cass

This is more of the same ould shi*e.

The Irish, in their never ending pitch to be seen as Democrats, latch onto any semblance of being an extension of that party. Irish news media are telling the story of an Irish guy who works at CNN and was on scene during the capital incident. The self ingratiating comments make the story about the reporter and not the actual story which most reporters, at least those few with integrity, would have told you is not actual reporting.

The other part of this is his previous experience was fact checking and researching background information, including on social media, for CNN. Might not want to give up the day job son.

Cass

On a side note, try search for ANY video, and there were hundreds if not thousands, of when cnn lied, manipulated and edited footage over the past 30 years. All the videos, and i've watched a good many of them over the years, are now gone.

There is a serious "clean up" being done.

tudderone

CNN ? Clinton news network/communist news network. The right-on lot here think the Irish-Americans vote exclusively for the dem's, i believe this isn't true anymore and hasn't been for some years.

Grizzly 45

Mellor wrote: »

There are likely a small amount of fraudulent votes in every election.
Since the election Trump has tried to claim he won states that he clearly lost. He has told outright lies. This is not of a democratic leader behaves. (Par for the course for certain parts of the world obviously).

I'm sorry but on that point, we will have to disagree. There is now too much circumstantial,to hardening evidence that there was more than just minor vote tampering going on. Strange for a candidate to improve his vote by double of what he got in his initial election and win 17 of 18 of the Bell weather states as to who will win an election to lose?

Obvious it’s a non-starter. The military is not getting involved.
The fact it was even thrown about as an idea is the insanity.

Brainstorming sessions do bring up weird and wonderful,and the fact that both Trump and Gulliani vetoed it outright.But of course, it is the fact that it was mentioned and used by the MSM is now part of the course.

Funny that the same MSM have downplayed crazy cat lady Pelosi, writing to the JSOC demanding to know that the nuke launch codes are safe from Trump,just in case he decides to touch off Armageddon before leaving office This Thursday last.
The fact that Pelosi is actually the 3rd in line to access the launch code should both POTUS and VP be out of action, and should know how this entire system works is even more alarming. but maybe she forgot, the same way Hillary "misplaced" those said same launch codes during her term as Sec of state?Trivial really.

No he couldn’t. Pence has confirmed that, as have constitutional law experts as Harvard and other law schools. His role is largely ceremonial. No such power exists in the constitution. Nor the Electoral Count Act 1887

.

The electoral count act of 1887 is described as the most incomprehensible act in the entire US law system,and people are still battering their much smarter legal heads about how this one works.Be they Harvard trained or otherwise. It's where this whole thing of the TV drama "designated survivor"in a simplified format comes from.The fact that in certain scenarios the person in charge of the dept of Agriculture could out rank the speaker of the House in a national crisis or times of war speaks for itself:eek:, it's that convoluted. So I think what happened was Pence was trying to be all things to all people,as he said they would listen to the evidence of fraud,but did also have the power to say to refer the counts back to the states in any doubt.

Jefferson didn’t reject any votes. He didn’t have the power then either. In his case an envelope containing votes for Georgia, was not sign as required. Some claimed this made them technically invalid, but Jefferson counted the votes anyway as they were the will of the people.
None of that in anyway gives Pence the power to reject the election.
They would only fly in a dictatorship.

I'll leave that one up to smarter constitutional heads. However, I still maintain there is precedent. If anyone is smarter after reading this and can give an opinion...lets have it.
http://hnn.us/articles/36528.html
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/thomas-jefferson-aaron-burr-and-the-election-of-1800-131082359/

I don’t think Facebook or Twitter is obligated to give anyone a platform. Spreading lies seems to be the fastest way to get kicked off. As Alex Jones found out.

As both claim to be the free market place of ideas, they need to decide whether they are publishers or proponents of freedom of expression? Also,it is a double standard in extremis, if they are censoring the conservatives accounts, but have left people like Maxine walters, Kamela Harris, Nancy Pelosi, Omar Atlib, et all totally alone to incite violence all Summer.As well as now putting pressure on companies like Apple and Google to drop off their app stores apps for Me We and Parler. We have now got to the point that CNN wants Fox news taken off the air!

The pornhub claim sounds like a stretch.
Literally anyone would be able to see it. They wouldn’t need his laptop or to be a Russian spy.

No the fact is that Hunter was sloppy as a crack head with extremely damaging information when his ol man was VP and that the Russians and Chinese have this info to be able to be used as blackmail is the more damaging to the incoming administration.The pornhub acc is Hunter's own stupidity of him having it off with a minor and putting it on the account.

Sounds a little like a re-hash of the “Trump Pee-tape in the hands of the Russians” story.

err...If tHAT story had been true...Dont you think it would have been smeared all over the net and MSM by now?

yubabill

Slick Willie lost the nuke codes, Hillary lost the emails.

Grizzly 45

tudderone wrote: »

CNN ? Clinton news network/communist news network. The right-on lot here think the Irish-Americans vote exclusively for the dem's, i believe this isn't true anymore and hasn't been for some years.

Even African Americans were beginning to see sense under Trump, that they were being played for fools and are getting off the Democrat plantation...Wonder how long it will be for us Irish to get over our inferiority complexes, realise the Dem party is NOT the same one JFK belonged to 60 years ago, and that every American plastic paddy that comes along looking for his "Irish roots and family "is playing us for fools back in the American Irish" [mostly Dem] voting block,and has no intention whatsoever to make it easier for our "narrow backs" to get visas and work permits.
Its long past time we Irish get of the Democrat plantation as well:mad:

yubabill

Cass wrote: »

On a side note, try search for ANY video, and there were hundreds if not thousands, of when cnn lied, manipulated and edited footage over the past 30 years. All the videos, and i've watched a good many of them over the years, are now gone.

There is a serious "clean up" being done.

The Purge is on, alright - since yesterday I can see thumbnails of new vids on Youtube, but if they're even tangentially "controversial" I can't open them on my TV. It gets locked-up and the only thing I can do is the IT Crowd thing.
Probably only a "mistake" or a software "glitch" or "human error".

Heard that Twitter signed its own death warrant by banning Trump; with 88.7million followers, apparently most activity was either praise or criticism of him and given that Twitter has only ballpark 300million users.......

tudderone

Zuckerberg spent something like $400 million during the election to get minority voters out to vote in marginals. He is and was always in the Biden camp.

tudderone

Mean while back at the eu :rolleyes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A17H9IoSTr4

Mellor

Grizzly 45 wrote: »

I'm sorry but on that point, we will have to disagree. There is now too much circumstantial,to hardening evidence that there was more than just minor vote tampering going on. Strange for a candidate to improve his vote by double of what he got in his initial election and win 17 of 18 of the Bell weather states as to who will win an election to lose?

What I initial election? There was only one election.

Prior to the election, Biden was a huge favourite. It’s hardly shocking that a favourite wins battleground states.
He would have been a bigger favourite if it wasn’t for delusional money on trump. People were still betting 100s of millions against Biden for weeks after the election. That’s insane.

Funny that the same MSM have downplayed crazy cat lady Pelosi, writing to the JSOC demanding to know that the nuke launch codes are safe from Trump,just in case he decides to touch off Armageddon before leaving office This Thursday last.
The fact that Pelosi is actually the 3rd in line to access the launch code should both POTUS and VP be out of action, and should know how this entire system works is even more alarming. but maybe she forgot, the same way Hillary "misplaced" those said same launch codes during her term as Sec of state?Trivial really.

This is just more finger pointing in an attempt to deflect. Stupidity on one side doesn’t excuse stupidity on another. This is largely the problem with polarised politics. It’s worse than football fans.

The electoral count act of 1887 is described as the most incomprehensible act in the entire US law system,and people are still battering their much smarter legal heads about how this one works.Be they Harvard trained or otherwise. It's where this whole thing of the TV drama "designated survivor"in a simplified format comes from.The fact that in certain scenarios the person in charge of the dept of Agriculture could out rank the speaker of the House in a national crisis or times of war speaks for itself:eek:, it's that convoluted. So I think what happened was Pence was trying to be all things to all people,as he said they would listen to the evidence of fraud,but did also have the power to say to refer the counts back to the states in any doubt.

Regardless of his convoluted it is, it doesn’t give him these powers. Can you point to any source that says it does?
The VP’s role comes from the constitution. Which previously you described as a very clear document in plain English. In simple terms it doesn’t give him these powers. And as far as I know, the VP has never sent it back - open to correct on that, but should be well documented if it happened.

As both claim to be the free market place of ideas, they need to decide whether they are publishers or proponents of freedom of expression?

I don’t think either claims that. They are social media websites, and ultimately private companies.
No different to boards.ie and the fact they choose to disallow certain content.

Freedom of expression means I can write a book on the virtues of grave robbing and voodoo, if I wished. But it doesn’t mean that I can walk into Harper Colins and demand they publish it.

Also,it is a double standard in extremis, if they are censoring the conservatives accounts, but have left people like Maxine walters, Kamela Harris, Nancy Pelosi, Omar Atlib, et all totally alone to incite violence all Summer.As well as now putting pressure on companies like Apple and Google to drop off their app stores apps for Me We and Parler. We have now got to the point that CNN wants Fox news taken off the air!

Of course it’s a double standard. Almost every single opinion is bias. Personal or corporate.
CNN have double standards to the left.
Fox’s have double standards to the right.

I personally try to be centrist. But that increasingly difficult to know the line.

The pornhub acc is Hunter's own stupidity of him having it off with a minor and putting it on the account.

Nobody could be that idiotic.
If that were true, then the link to the video would be all over the net by now. Anyone could view it. He’d not escape a conviction.
And if it is true, should be trivial to link to his account.

err...If tHAT story had been true...Dont you think it would have been smeared all over the net and MSM by now?

How would it?
The story was that the FSB/KGB had the hotel under surveillance. It’s the exact same as the Hunter compromised scenario. IF they have that video, they would have used it to squeeze Trump. Giving it away to the media means they lose that leverage. I shouldn’t have to point that out, everyone gets that’s the implication.

Cass

Fixed this for you

Mellor wrote: »

CNN, MSNBC, NBS, CBS, ABC, NBC, Twitter, Facebook Google, Bloomberg, NY Times, Huff Post, TMZ, Time Mag, etc. have double standards to the left.

Fox's have double standards to the right and now the left.

Recent tweet from the director of political affairs for ABC news media;

Rick Klein wrote:

"Even aside from impeachment and 25th Amendment talk, Trump will be an ex-president in 13 days. The fact is that getting rid of Trump is the easy part. Cleansing the movement he commands, or getting rid of what he represents to so many Americans, is going to be something else."

Klein first edited the post then removed it. However he is not the only one to now use the incoming administration as a tool to get their way and speak their mind.

Jeff Zucker, President of CNN, has made calls to have Fox news and Newsmax banned for allowing and reporting on Trump, iow being n opposing voice.

Another side aspect of this is the video Tucker Carlson, of Fox news, made reporting on this (as well as mocking it) cannot be found on Youtube.

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6221445313001?playlist_id=5198073478001#sp=show-clips

So more unity and coming together speak from the tolerant left. :rolleyes:

Cass

By the way i'm not getting into a pissing match as to who is more bias because frankly i don't trust any news media with an agenda, and they all have one.

Look at SKY news. Last night they allowed Killary Clinton to go on an unedited rant about how Trump has failed people which included her still moaning and whining about loosing 4 years ago. She focused in on black people and how Trump failed them specifically with his white supremacist attitude/actions. This from a woman that called black youths Superpredators and whos' husband signed the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act, which is widely accepted as being responsible for a disproportionate rate of black incarceration.

We have the same with RTE here. They purposely do not report on topics that the Government do not want broadcast. Ranging from racial tensions (the black attacks on white youths last year), to Government actions (denial of bank bailout, waste of taxpayer monies, etc) and of course the best one being the relentless attacks on opposition at a disproportionate rate to the two main parties.