I don't use Google. Simple fix.

(11-16-2022 12:39 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  I don't use Google. Simple fix.

Yeah. But, most do.

(11-16-2022 10:30 AM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-16-2022 09:03 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  What they were found to be is not actionable.

(11-16-2022 10:24 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  [quote='Gamenole' pid='18589976' dateline='1668547854']

Quote:These lies were adjudicated at every level of our court system and found to be meritless.

not proven and meritless aren't the same thing.

Good point, both of you. Meritless is too strong to reflect what really happened. I think some of the 60+ cases used that or similar language, but I'm positive they all didn't. A better, more accurate phrasing is that Trump's fraud claims regarding the 2020 election were not upheld at any level.

But it's bigger than that, Nole...

Aliens either exist or they don't. Math says they must and there is all sorts of circumstantial evidence, but little concrete proof of it... yet still, it may absolutely be true. Same with God (not comparing the degrees of evidence etc, just the concept).

I also think the 1972 US-USSR basketball game was 'fixed'... lol

Bottom line is that not being able to prove something doesn't mean that you're crazy. You may or may not be... but not being able to prove it in a court of law is often just a lack of scope.... and claiming that 'the other party' is illegetimately in power has been going on for years.

Here's the problem with litigating elections after the fact:

Let's say hypothetically that you have video of someone stuffing stacks of ballots into drop boxes. Let's say you ID the perp, apprehend him/her, and he/she says hell yes they were fraudulent ballots, and all told there were 40,000 of them. That's about as clear-cut case of voter fraud as can be imagined.

So now you are in court arguing that there were 40,000 fraudulent ballots. The judge says, fine, but which ones? Without knowing exactly what ballots were fraudulent, there's nothing a court can do.

(11-16-2022 04:30 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Here's the problem with litigating elections after the fact:

Let's say hypothetically that you have video of someone stuffing stacks of ballots into drop boxes. Let's say you ID the perp, apprehend him/her, and he/she says hell yes they were fraudulent ballots, and all told there were 40,000 of them. That's about as clear-cut case of voter fraud as can be imagined.

So now you are in court arguing that there were 40,000 fraudulent ballots. The judge says, fine, but which ones? Without knowing exactly what ballots were fraudulent, there's nothing a court can do.

we know ... you're right about after the fact ... hence, mail-it-inns '20 and beyond...

there's a reason the gubernatorial races were more important than this year's senate races...

(11-15-2022 04:30 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-15-2022 03:55 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Every time someone on the MSM mentioned the election in Arizona they referred to the GOP candidate as "Election Denier" or "Right-Wing Extremist" Kari Lake. Her opponent was just called Katie Hobbs (maybe they would insert she was a Democrat or the incumbent).

They call her those things because that's exactly who and what she is. Kari Lake is a proud and unrepentant election denier who centered her gubernatorial campaign on lies about the 2020 election. These lies were adjudicated at every level of our court system and found to be meritless. Continuing to spout these lies after they were demonstrated to be meritless in their 60+ court hearings, multiple recounts and audits makes one a right-wing extremist.

And there you have it, right out of the gate.

/thread point proven

(11-16-2022 06:21 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(11-15-2022 04:30 PM)Gamenole Wrote:  

(11-15-2022 03:55 PM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Every time someone on the MSM mentioned the election in Arizona they referred to the GOP candidate as "Election Denier" or "Right-Wing Extremist" Kari Lake. Her opponent was just called Katie Hobbs (maybe they would insert she was a Democrat or the incumbent).

They call her those things because that's exactly who and what she is. Kari Lake is a proud and unrepentant election denier who centered her gubernatorial campaign on lies about the 2020 election. These lies were adjudicated at every level of our court system and found to be meritless. Continuing to spout these lies after they were demonstrated to be meritless in their 60+ court hearings, multiple recounts and audits makes one a right-wing extremist.

And there you have it, right out of the gate.

/thread point proven

yeah, he/she/ze/wtfe screwed the pooch on that one ... don't discount 'nole's ability ... it has 'game' beyond repair...

So...

Let me give a perfect example of issues with the media/social media. This one is on Google.

I did a google search on "Trump Announcement' because I knew he was announcing something on the 15th which I assumed to be a re-election bid, but I hadn't actually heard about it...

Top left story is from CNN. Fact Check. 20 False and Misleading claims by Trump

I read the first one.

“Perhaps the most embarrassing moment in the history of our country, where we lost lives, left Americans behind and surrendered $85 billion worth of the finest military equipment anywhere in the world,” Trump said.

The fact checkers came in and said that when we left, we ABANDONED just over 7 byn in equipment... and that the total amount allocated to the Afghan effort was closer to $83byn.

Now, we can parse the details and specifics of the wording, but to claim that we 'surrendered' $85byn in equipment (because we actually spent about that much and got nothing from it except the lost lives, Americans left behind and surrendered equipment)... this really comes down to a question of, is a claim of 85byn really misleading when the number is 'closer to' 83byn?

He then claims that he 'filled' the SPR, and they want to argue that he didn't COMPLETELY fill it.... and/or that because of legal mandates to draw it down, despite him enacting a EO to fill it above the projection/mandate that it was actually 'lower'. I find this one funny because if we decrease the size of a projected increase, but still increase it, it's called a cut.... but if we increase it above the size of a projected decrease, they decide that saying that he filled it would require that he actually TOP IT OFF??

They then even take issue with him saying Biden drew down the SPR because it was still a massively large reserve of almost 400byn barrels.

I didn't bother to do any more.

Now... do a google search of CNN Biden fact check... and again the top left (and top right) stories are about Trump. Only the 3rd is about Biden... and it was when he BOASTED that seniors were about to get the biggest social security increase they'd gotten in decades!! Ignoring of course that this only happened because it is a COLA adjustment because inflation is the biggest its been in decades.

I mean which 'misleading' statement is more important to you?? Whether Afghanistan cost if 83 vs 85 byn?? Or whether
Biden had ANYTHING positive (or if it is even a positive at all) to the increase in future debt that the nation owes to its seniors because of inflation??

(11-16-2022 07:03 PM)stinkfist Wrote:  yeah, he/she/ze/wtfe screwed the pooch on that one ...

Stink, I have to give you props... I'm actually adding that wtfe to my email signature... My pronouns are he/wtfe