What's new
  • As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.

The 2020 Presidential Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
minds_I

minds_I

Active member
Veteran
Hello alll,
Speaking of tapes, how is it that an unsecured individual would be allowed to record Impotus the 3rd and discussing foreign policy?

Why is it?
Any suggestions?

Addendum
Parnas, Bolton, Sondland and Mulvaney have all said the same thing..there was indeed a QPQ. conald said he did not say this....whom to believe?

minds_I
 
M

Mr D

minds_I said:
Hello alll,
Speaking of tapes, how is it that an unsecured individual would be allowed to record Impotus the 3rd and discussing foreign policy?

Why is it?
Any suggestions?

Addendum
Parnas, Bolton, Sondland and Mulvaney have all said the same thing..there was indeed a QPQ. conald said he did not say this....whom to believe?

minds_I
Click to expand...

I believe Zelensky

you believe Adam no credibility Schiff
 
R

redlaser

Active member
Veteran
Pew research has done interesting polling in how people trust news sources. They are non partisan and take no policy positions. www.http//pewresearch.org./fact-tan...evaluated-anericans-trust-in-30-news-sources/

70% of Democrats identifying as liberal were trusting in CNN, while only 16% Republicans trusted it.

75% of Republicans identifying as conservative trusted Fox, while only 12% Democrats trusted it.

Pew research also did polling on whether or not people could tell the difference between opinion based news and fact based news stories.
They determined this by presenting people with 10 stories, and people decided which ones were opinion or fact based.

Don’t have that link handy, but this is from memory.

Only 14% of middle school aged children can identify all stories correctly as fact or opinion.

Only 50% of adults can get all 10 stories identified correctly.
 
M

Mr D

redlaser said:
Pew research has done interesting polling in how people trust news sources. They are non partisan and take no policy positions. www.http//pewresearch.org./fact-tan...evaluated-anericans-trust-in-30-news-sources/

70% of Democrats identifying as liberal were trusting in CNN, while only 16% Republicans trusted it.

75% of Republicans identifying as conservative trusted Fox, while only 12% Democrats trusted it.

Pew research also did polling on whether or not people could tell the difference between opinion based news and fact based news stories.
They determined this by presenting people with 10 stories, and people decided which ones were opinion or fact based.

Don’t have that link handy, but this is from memory.

Only 14% of middle school aged children can identify all stories correctly as fact or opinion.

Only 50% of adults can get all 10 stories identified correctly.
Click to expand...

Go look at the TV numbers for all of them then head over and check the census data on total population.

No one is watching CNN, Fox, MSNBC except for the 1/100 of the population who believe the BS they peddle.
 
C

Capra ibex

Mr D said:
Sorry I'm not limited to his choices. Thanks for stopping by.
Click to expand...

Ok :biglaugh:

He asked the question 'whom to believe' and listed 2 options, one side has to be telling the truth, but you listed different choices that are irrelevant to his question.... avoiding the subject.

So yes, you are limited to his choices if you are giving an answer to his question.
 
White Beard

White Beard

Active member
Mr D said:
Right now thousands of people are lining up in the wind and cold in one of the bluest states in the country to see Trump.

At Davos the consensus was get ready for a 2nd term.

Think of what you and Nancy will have created if Trump gets reelected with a majority or even a super majority.

After so many attempts that only end in failure it's hard to fathom your smugness about Nancy and the democrats. They really suck at this when you look at the sum total of it all.
Click to expand...

You’re all over the place, man - what the fuck are you ON?

Regarding your “Trump re-election super-majority”: in that event, we’ll see some second-amendment remedies, I’m thinking, ‘cause it’s not happening this side of a totally screwed-up vote.

May you live long enough to know how wrong you are...
 
ambertrichome

ambertrichome

Well-known member
Veteran
We all know FAUX won a lawsuit in 2004 claiming as their defense???

They have NO LEGAL OBLIGATION TO TELL THE TRUTH.

Fox News Has No Legal Obligation To Tell the Truth

Fox News Fired Investigative Reporters for Refusing to Lie to the Public

Fox News suppressed an investigative story on rBGH (recombinant bovine growth hormone) and rBST. Steve Wilson and Jane Akre were two award-winning investigative journalists who were fired for refusing to lie to the public and for refusing water down the cancer and other health risks posed by ingestion of milk products from cows injected with rBGH. Specifically, the piece focused on Monsanto's Posilac, a hormone product injected into dairy cows throughout U.S.. The court ruled that Fox News and the media have no legal obligation to tell the truth and can require their staff to omit, lie and/or falsify the news.

I wouldnt trust a fucking word that comes out of any of their mouths. How can they be trusted, when they won a case in court saying they have no obligation to tell the truth???

They lost me when they used the NO LEGAL OBLIGATION TO TELL THE TRUTH DEFENSE.:woohoo::woohoo::moon::wtf:
 
M

Mr D

ambertrichome said:
We all know FAUX won a lawsuit in 2004 claiming as their defense???

They have NO LEGAL OBLIGATION TO TELL THE TRUTH.

Fox News Has No Legal Obligation To Tell the Truth

Fox News Fired Investigative Reporters for Refusing to Lie to the Public

Fox News suppressed an investigative story on rBGH (recombinant bovine growth hormone) and rBST. Steve Wilson and Jane Akre were two award-winning investigative journalists who were fired for refusing to lie to the public and for refusing water down the cancer and other health risks posed by ingestion of milk products from cows injected with rBGH. Specifically, the piece focused on Monsanto's Posilac, a hormone product injected into dairy cows throughout U.S.. The court ruled that Fox News and the media have no legal obligation to tell the truth and can require their staff to omit, lie and/or falsify the news.

I wouldnt trust a fucking word that comes out of any of their mouths. How can they be trusted, when they won a case in court saying they have no obligation to tell the truth???

They lost me when they used the NO LEGAL OBLIGATION TO TELL THE TRUTH DEFENSE.:woohoo::woohoo::moon::wtf:
Click to expand...

I remember that and more recently, Maddow's use of the Alex Jones defense in a lawsuit.

Personally I was more bothered by all of the MSM lies about Iraq WMD's and other lies to get us involved in wars after I switched to organic dairy products...:biggrin:
 
h.h.

h.h.

Active member
Veteran
After 9/11 it was the public that demanded revenge. It wasn’t the msm, not even Chaney, it was us. Flags on all the cars. Flags at all the bars. Flags in the gutters from all the fake patriots.
Many did guess that the WMD’s didn’t exist. The MSM talked about them being fake. You must have been on a different channel or maybe wearing flag goggles.
 
Gypsy Nirvana

Gypsy Nirvana

Recalcitrant Reprobate -
Administrator
Veteran
People love to hear the sound of the bugle - the rallying call to battle - time to circle the waggons boys! - but the injuns are not outside the door any more - they are thousands of miles away - in some far off foreign land - so to get to them they have to invade that country - destroy all and take prisoners - for what exactly?

Maybe they are looking for another battle of the Little Big Horn - somewhere in Africa or the Middle East? - need to find a new Custer - I suppose - one without bone spurs -
 
h.h.

h.h.

Active member
Veteran
I can’t believe the Indians rode around the wagons like ducks in a shooting gallery...

Nationalism has no respect for tribalism. In protecting our nations from each other, we attempt to control the tribes with a system that has always been foreign to them. The allies and Germany both had a great need for oil. Neither really considered collateral damage.

That era has passed us by with no repatriations. As oil looses its importance, we’re down to the tit for tat of the Hatfields and McCoys. It’s all ego at this point.
 
X

xavier7995

Bud Green said:
:laughing:

Sorry, but that's not true....Even Snopes says so...

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fox-skews/

Me; I have a hard fuckin' time trusting what anyone says these days...Seems like everyone is lying..

Hmm, maybe Snopes is lying on this one...

..
Click to expand...


Tbh...several posters here have called snopes MSM propaganda or whatever.

Edit: I think swapping biden for Bolton makes sense. If biden gets the nomination he is going to have to address this stuff anyway, it isnt going away and trump will just ring that bell daily.
 
armedoldhippy

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
xavier7995 said:
Tbh...several posters here have called snopes MSM propaganda or whatever.

Edit: I think swapping biden for Bolton makes sense. If biden gets the nomination he is going to have to address this stuff anyway, it isnt going away and trump will just ring that bell daily.
Click to expand...

i think each side should get to call 8 (or pick your own number. fewer might be better, more might be needed. follow the trail) witnesses, and those called required to show the fuck up & testify under oath on live tv. no ifs, ands, nor buts, no refusal. don't want to testify? no sweat. show up & plead the 5th while the world watches, & we will judge for ourselves what we think about your performance. i m out of rep, xavier, but you are on the right path, i think. good point...
 
X

xavier7995

Oh I certainly think more is better, that biden/Bolton swap seems most likely to draw people in though. Biden trying to stay above the fray will get him similar results to Hillary, "what about burisima/Ukraine" will be the new "but her emails." A good chunk of the dems are not fans of biden so have little interest in protecting him.

Edit: I would pick Mulvaney as well. Lev parnas would be a mistake, guy doesnt seem that credible. A ballsy move that may sway some senators would be to put Nunes up there, along with Barr and Pompeo.
 
h.h.

h.h.

Active member
Veteran
The Senate won’t make a swap. The witnesses will be individually voted in.

They don’t want Biden testifying anyway. What would they do? Charge him criminally? That would give him opportunity to call his own witnesses. They would loose the narrative.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top