Biden Tracker (1 Viewer)

[Farb]

For all the things related to the Biden/Harris Administration and their latest hits and misses

https://www.dailywire.com/news/whit...gedly-sexually-harassing-threatening-reporter

Interesting story, looks like 'only the best people' didn't stop with the new administration.

 

[Farb]

If someone on this board were to independently fact check a claim and provide you with links to everything they researched and referenced in order to get to the truth in order for you to verify the check, would that suffice?

Or, I can watch the video myself and make my own interpretation?

The point was the 'fact checkers' sites are so biased as to make them worthless and predictable but they were really purposeful during the last administration.

 

[MT15]

You see bias only when it challenges your own biases, Farb. That is as plain as day. You were shown how some of your favorite websites have been making up stories to stoke outrage for years, yet you refuse to believe they are biased. When someone that is neutral and does not have a history of promoting conspiracy nonsense and false stories fact checks something you want to believe as false, you say fact checkers are biased.

You are just hopelessly biased yourself, like beyond the point of reason actually. You want to believe your little outrage stories so bad, you can’t stand the thought that they might be wrong.

 

[MT15]

If someone on this board were to independently fact check a claim and provide you with links to everything they researched and referenced in order to get to the truth in order for you to verify the check, would that suffice?

That has happened and no it did not suffice.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Or, I can watch the video myself and make my own interpretation?

The point was the 'fact checkers' sites are so biased as to make them worthless and predictable but they were really purposeful during the last administration.

Which is why I said, "provide you with links to everything they researched and referenced in order to get to the truth in order for you to verify". This is what fact-checkers do. You can disparage them all you want, but legit fact-checkers and fact-checking outfits do just that. Instead of articulating why they are wrong and offering up some sort of proof, you just crap all over them with baseless claims of bias. You refuse to see what others see and ignore whatever evidence they use to support their claims, then you brag about it like it's something to be proud of.

 

[MT15]

So, remember when Kamala Harris was being roasted for suggesting that people contribute to a bail fund? Remember when it was said that violent criminals were set free all because of her? Turns out this is one of the “criminals” who had his bail paid. He was just acquitted of all charges.

He was at a parking lot when an unmarked white van opened fire on him. He returned fire with a gun he was legally carrying. He aimed low and towards the front of the van because he wasn’t trying to actually hit anyone. He didn’t know it was police, how would he know? They only announced themselves after they fired at him with rubber bullets. How would he know they were rubber bullets for that matter? The police beat him up, and he was charged with attempted murder of a police officer. And he became internet famous as the supposed cop-killer who Kamala Harris bailed out of jail.



This is the kind of thing that had several people on this forum all fired up as I recall. It was all more police malfeasance than anything else. Oh, before the police shot at the guy in the parking lot, they fired on a group of men standing at a gas station. Turns out it was the owner and his friends who were trying to keep looters off the property. Great job, guys!

 

[Farb]

Which is why I said, "provide you with links to everything they researched and referenced in order to get to the truth in order for you to verify". This is what fact-checkers do. You can disparage them all you want, but legit fact-checkers and fact-checking outfits do just that. Instead of articulating why they are wrong and offering up some sort of proof, you just crap all over them with baseless claims of bias. You refuse to see what others see and ignore whatever evidence they use to support their claims, then you brag about it like it's something to be proud of.

Honestly, it isn't much, but it is honest work.
This was, as always a very productive and not over emotional conversation with you. Enjoy your holiday weekend!

 

[Farb]

So, remember when Kamala Harris was being roasted for suggesting that people contribute to a bail fund? Remember when it was said that violent criminals were set free all because of her? Turns out this is one of the “criminals” who had his bail paid. He was just acquitted of all charges.

He was at a parking lot when an unmarked white van opened fire on him. He returned fire with a gun he was legally carrying. He aimed low and towards the front of the van because he wasn’t trying to actually hit anyone. He didn’t know it was police, how would he know? They only announced themselves after they fired at him with rubber bullets. How would he know they were rubber bullets for that matter? The police beat him up, and he was charged with attempted murder of a police officer. And he became internet famous as the supposed cop-killer who Kamala Harris bailed out of jail.



This is the kind of thing that had several people on this forum all fired up as I recall. It was all more police malfeasance than anything else. Oh, before the police shot at the guy in the parking lot, they fired on a group of men standing at a gas station. Turns out it was the owner and his friends who were trying to keep looters off the property. Great job, guys!

Me! Me! I was fired up

And, my opinion hasn't changed on this one tick. I think I also remember hearing from folks on this board that this didn't happen. KH didn't support any fund, but now they are giving her credit for being a hero. Which one is it?

If this is true, then good for him. He should own a stake of city now for sure and those cops should be finding new jobs and facing criminal charges. I am also 100% for conceal carry (you should not even have to ask the state for permission) and to the God given right for self defense. I also have a sneaky feeling there are many more thugs that got out that plan more harm than the 1 instance that the media is going to run with.

If this is even kind of true, or even fact checked as partially false (my personal favorite) the media will run with this for at least a day, especially as old man Biden approval continue to tank. She might be the next the POTUS and they need to start painting her as something she is not, competent.

 

[Farb]

You see bias only when it challenges your own biases, Farb. That is as plain as day. You were shown how some of your favorite websites have been making up stories to stoke outrage for years, yet you refuse to believe they are biased. When someone that is neutral and does not have a history of promoting conspiracy nonsense and false stories fact checks something you want to believe as false, you say fact checkers are biased.

You are just hopelessly biased yourself, like beyond the point of reason actually. You want to believe your little outrage stories so bad, you can’t stand the thought that they might be wrong.

I don't deny nor have I ever denied my bias. I wear it on sleeve and I will gladly discuss it with anyone that asks, sometime, after a couple beers, even if they don't ask.
What I am not is easy influenced or closed minded. My opinions and beliefs are an on going and evolving process (yes, I can hear the eyes rolling as you all read this). Just because someone that you respect and cherish tells me something, I don't take it as fact. I do do research (more on that next) but mainly my opinions are what I see, smell, taste and hear right in front of me. I don't consider myself a renaissance man by any stretch of the imagination but compared to some I appear to be by just the people I keep close to me, even the ones that we are complete opposites. People talk about echo chamber, it is all the new rage right now, but I have found my echo chamber includes a lot of different thoughts and opinions that I disagree with on all levels. I have also noticed that those that mirror me are actually in a much much smaller echo chamber. Again, that has been my personal, I think the new term is 'lived', experience from having close friends and family whose views are polar opposite of mine

Now about the website thingy. I have never read GP not once until I clicked the link of that story. Believe it if you want, I don't care. I googled and it was one of the first stories that popped up when I was searching for a story I had recently heard about. I didn't research which way GP leaned (if you notice, I generally try and link from CNN if possible so yall will feel better.

All that to be said, until you can prove the article was false, sensationalized or whatever, it does not matter one bit what article I posted. If you can only attack the website and not the facts, then what are you really arguing about?

It should actually bother you a bit more that if this story is true, why is not on CNN or or other left leaning 'news' sites.
That whole kettle and black pot, you know, the thing. -Joe Biden

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I don't deny nor have I ever denied my bias. I wear it on sleeve and I will gladly discuss it with anyone that asks, sometime, after a couple beers, even if they don't ask.
What I am not is easy influenced or closed minded. My opinions and beliefs are an on going and evolving process (yes, I can hear the eyes rolling as you all read this). Just because someone that you respect and cherish tells me something, I don't take it as fact. I do do research (more on that next) but mainly my opinions are what I see, smell, taste and hear right in front of me. I don't consider myself a renaissance man by any stretch of the imagination but compared to some I appear to be by just the people I keep close to me, even the ones that we are complete opposites. People talk about echo chamber, it is all the new rage right now, but I have found my echo chamber includes a lot of different thoughts and opinions that I disagree with on all levels. I have also noticed that those that mirror me are actually in a much much smaller echo chamber. Again, that has been my personal, I think the new term is 'lived', experience from having close friends and family whose views are polar opposite of mine

Now about the website thingy. I have never read GP not once until I clicked the link of that story. Believe it if you want, I don't care. I googled and it was one of the first stories that popped up when I was searching for a story I had recently heard about. I didn't research which way GP leaned (if you notice, I generally try and link from CNN if possible so yall will feel better.

All that to be said, until you can prove the article was false, sensationalized or whatever, it does not matter one bit what article I posted. If you can only attack the website and not the facts, then what are you really arguing about?

It should actually bother you a bit more that if this story is true, why is not on CNN or or other left leaning 'news' sites.
That whole kettle and black pot, you know, the thing. -Joe Biden

Let's take this to be true. Let's say you don't know a thing about them. If someone provides information that claims this website is extremely biased with very low credibility and factual reporting, why doesn't that spur you to research the situation like you claim to do?

 

[Farb]

Let's take this to be true. Let's say you don't know a thing about them. If someone provides information that claims this website is extremely biased with very low credibility and factual reporting, why doesn't that spur you to research the situation like you claim to do?

I have and I can't find anything that shows the article is incorrect in anyway maybe even though it is on a shady website it is still true? A broken watch is still correct 2x a day.
I don't think dismissing it over the source is very prudent, but obviously we disagree.

 

[DaveXA]

I have and I can't find anything that shows the article is incorrect in anyway maybe even though it is on a shady website it is still true? A broken watch is still correct 2x a day.
I don't think dismissing it over the source is very prudent, but obviously we disagree.

I don't read TGP. And any article I happen to see posted by them here, I typically would go and use other sources to vet what's been claimed by them. They're mostly trash, so even if it's a broken watch type of article, I don't really care what they have to say. My suggestion would be to post sources here that people would be open to looking at. Most wouldn't ever want to give them clicks, which sort of defeats the point of posting the article.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

I have and I can't find anything that shows the article is incorrect in anyway maybe even though it is on a shady website it is still true? A broken watch is still correct 2x a day.
I don't think dismissing it over the source is very prudent, but obviously we disagree.

I don't know about you, but I can't find it mentioned anywhere outside of GP and websites that make GP look like USA Today. Hell, all it takes is a single read-through to see that the only people quoted are the mother and her boyfriend. A cursory attempt to reach the school with no update on a statement, not even a note saying "Hey, we tried again and they told us to get bent before hanging up". There is absolutely nothing from the court proceedings or any quotes from the record at all. The entire thing is uncorroborated.

Also, this was posted back in March. Right around this time, she lost a wrongful termination case because the defendant had proof that she voluntarily quit her job, despite suing said employer for terminating her employment illegally. We can see that she's not above stretching the truth in legal proceedings and the only press she talked to was a website known for publishing heavily biased stories and outright lies.

 

[MT15]

Thanks, Farb. I thought you had said you pay money to read GP, I must have them confused with another website. To be honest you post this type of “outrage” story quite a bit. I believe you if you say you never read that website though.

Yeah, asking me to prove that it’s false is just asking me to go run an errand for you, kind of. I know enough about that website by reading what I posted to discount what they said. I also apply the common sense reasoning of, if this was true it would be all over lots of media outlets. But it’s not anywhere else to be found. So, most likely there are big issues with the story and I did notice right away that the story was entirely one-sided.

As for the bail fund case, if you are talking about me, I never said she didn’t recommend that people donate to the fund, it’s easily verified that she did. What I said, going from memory, is that it’s not a big deal. And I did a little reading and found out that when she recommended the fund they had restricted themselves to misdemeanor charges coming from the protests. Things like curfew, unlawful assembly, stuff like that. Once the money started coming in after she recommended them they tried to branch out a bit, and they did have some errors in judgement. They are a very small organization of only a few people. They quickly decided to go back to only doing misdemeanors, and released a statement saying such.

All that context, however, was gleefully ignored by folks you like to read, and they convinced you, evidently, that Democrats love criminals and want violent criminals to roam freely. That’s patently ridiculous. I promise you democrats are actually just regular Americans. Honest, no horns or cloven hooves, lol.

 

[JRad]

THE LEFT!!!! worshipping CNN as gospel is just another fairy tale of right wing media.

 

[JLL]

Umm 12:53 EAT, fact checkers,made corrections. Sad it took 5 days for truth to come out.

Fact check: Biden honored service members killed in Kabul, checked watch during ceremony

Footage shows Biden bowing and putting his hand over his heart as 11 caskets are carried into gray vans. Photos also show him looking at his watch.

www.usatoday.com

While Biden did pay his respects to the fallen service members, photos and video show he also checked his watch during the ceremony.

Associated Press photos taken 10 minutes apartshow Biden checking his watch during the ceremony. Another photo from the Agence France-Presse, distributed by Getty Images, also shows Biden glancing at his watch, although it's unclear what time the image was taken.

 

[bdb13]

Umm 12:53 EAT, fact checkers,made corrections. Sad it took 5 days for truth to come out.

Fact check: Biden honored service members killed in Kabul, checked watch during ceremony

Footage shows Biden bowing and putting his hand over his heart as 11 caskets are carried into gray vans. Photos also show him looking at his watch.

www.usatoday.com

While Biden did pay his respects to the fallen service members, photos and video show he also checked his watch during the ceremony.

Associated Press photos taken 10 minutes apartshow Biden checking his watch during the ceremony. Another photo from the Agence France-Presse, distributed by Getty Images, also shows Biden glancing at his watch, although it's unclear what time the image was taken.

As I posted earlier, was pretty obvious to me that the fact check wasn't necessarily accurate as it was based upon a video that didn't keep Biden in frame.

 

[MT15]

I thought Joni Ernst was supposed to be relatively sane?

 

[Farb]

Thanks, Farb. I thought you had said you pay money to read GP, I must have them confused with another website. To be honest you post this type of “outrage” story quite a bit. I believe you if you say you never read that website though.

Yeah, asking me to prove that it’s false is just asking me to go run an errand for you, kind of. I know enough about that website by reading what I posted to discount what they said. I also apply the common sense reasoning of, if this was true it would be all over lots of media outlets. But it’s not anywhere else to be found. So, most likely there are big issues with the story and I did notice right away that the story was entirely one-sided.

As for the bail fund case, if you are talking about me, I never said she didn’t recommend that people donate to the fund, it’s easily verified that she did. What I said, going from memory, is that it’s not a big deal. And I did a little reading and found out that when she recommended the fund they had restricted themselves to misdemeanor charges coming from the protests. Things like curfew, unlawful assembly, stuff like that. Once the money started coming in after she recommended them they tried to branch out a bit, and they did have some errors in judgement. They are a very small organization of only a few people. They quickly decided to go back to only doing misdemeanors, and released a statement saying such.

All that context, however, was gleefully ignored by folks you like to read, and they convinced you, evidently, that Democrats love criminals and want violent criminals to roam freely. That’s patently ridiculous. I promise you democrats are actually just regular Americans. Honest, no horns or cloven hooves, lol.

You know what convinced me that Dems are ok with violence to get their way? I was on this board having discussion with you guys during the BLM summer of love.