Everything George Santos (1 Viewer)

[MT15]

I think we need a new thread just about this guy. It seems like every day brings new awfulness.

 

[MT15]

Plot Twist: Santos was totally a government informant - not a 2-bit crook, lol:

 

[SystemShock]

Someone recently said....

Members of the media need to stop this nonsense where they get a republican on for an interview and they try to shame them by pointing out their lies and hypocrisy. The majority of the current republican party does not care if they lie, and do not care if they are hypocritical. They simply have no shame.

Shame or not, the lies and hypocrisy need to be broadcast.

 

[FullMonte]

Shame or not, the lies and hypocrisy need to be broadcast.

No, I agree it should be broadcast.

I’m referring to having Gym Jordan on , and trying to point out to him that he is running a hearing about ignoring subpoenas when he himself did that, as if that’s going to embarrass or shame him; for example.

 

[SystemShock]

No, I agree it should be broadcast.

I’m referring to having Gym Jordan on , and trying to point out to him that he is running a hearing about ignoring subpoenas when he himself did that, as if that’s going to embarrass or shame him; for example.

What better way to broadcast the hypocrisy? He's not going to feel shame, the true believers are not going to feel shame, but still, you have to broadcast it.

 

[FullMonte]

What better way to broadcast the hypocrisy? He's not going to feel shame, the true believers are not going to feel shame, but still, you have to broadcast it.

They can broadcast articles showing his refusal to comply and him running the committee. They don’t need him to be there to do that.

 

[SystemShock]

They can broadcast articles showing his refusal to comply and him running the committee. They don’t need him to be there to do that.

He saying it is better than "he said".

 

[FullMonte]

He saying it is better than "he said".

I get that...but it's still "he said," because it's not like he'll admit it. He'll simply deflect to something else.

 

[SystemShock]

I get that...but it's still "he said," because it's not like he'll admit it. He'll simply deflect to something else.

I am really trying to get the point of your argument... it is one thing to accuse someone of something, another to prove it. The way you put it, may as well don't report anything and just let it go.

 

[FullMonte]

I am really trying to get the point of your argument... it is one thing to accuse someone of something, another to prove it. The way you put it, may as well don't report anything and just let it go.

Ok...let me give you an example:

Scenario A:
CNN broadcasts an article talking about Jim Jordan, during that segment, they show copies of the letters he sent stating that he would not comply with a congressional subpoena in relation to the January 6 committee and speak with individuals who can validate that he was referred to the DOJ for his refusal to comply with a congressional subpoena. Then, they move on, and cover the recent (ongoing?) hearings about subpoena compliance, where Eric Swallwell points out the hypocrisy of Jim Jordan chairing a committee about subpoena compliance while he is in non-compliance.

Scenario B:
Jim Jordan is on the show, they show the exact same footage, and then ask him "How is it not hypocritical of you to chair a committee about subpoena compliance, when you yourself are not in compliance," and he responds, "We need to have this hearing to ensure that everyone complies with our subpoenas so that we can get the information we need to do our jobs."

Yes, in scenario B, those of us who can see things for what they are can laugh at how foolish he looks, but it doesn't somehow make him self-aware enough to change, and it doesn't do anything to help prove how big of a hypocrite he is.

 

[SystemShock]

Ok...let me give you an example:

Scenario A:
CNN broadcasts an article talking about Jim Jordan, during that segment, they show copies of the letters he sent stating that he would not comply with a congressional subpoena in relation to the January 6 committee and speak with individuals who can validate that he was referred to the DOJ for his refusal to comply with a congressional subpoena. Then, they move on, and cover the recent (ongoing?) hearings about subpoena compliance, where Eric Swallwell points out the hypocrisy of Jim Jordan chairing a committee about subpoena compliance while he is in non-compliance.

Scenario B:
Jim Jordan is on the show, they show the exact same footage, and then ask him "How is it not hypocritical of you to chair a committee about subpoena compliance, when you yourself are not in compliance," and he responds, "We need to have this hearing to ensure that everyone complies with our subpoenas so that we can get the information we need to do our jobs."

Yes, in scenario B, those of us who can see things for what they are can laugh at how foolish he looks, but it doesn't somehow make him self-aware enough to change, and it doesn't do anything to help prove how big of a hypocrite he is.

But it's not about making him change his mind, though, and it does help, or rather, proves how big a hypocrite he is.