|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
|
|
On February 09 2023 10:30 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:
How that conversation should have gone:
BlackJack and oBlade: Hey DPB, do you believe that when DeSantis was a teacher, he actually partied with his school's seniors who were drinking underage?
Me: Well, I did a quick Google search, and it seems that several of those students corroborated the story and the New York Times wrote about it, so there might be something to it. I don't know for sure though, and while I personally think that a teacher doing that is irresponsible, I don't think it'll seriously affect DeSantis's image, even if it's true.
BlackJack and oBlade: That's really interesting to learn! It's a good thing I didn't preemptively make fun of you!! Have a wonderful day!!!
Me: Thanks, you too! I always look forward to our productive discussions!
That's asking for good faith on the internet. A bold move.
|
On February 09 2023 22:56 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2023 21:00 Acrofales wrote:On February 09 2023 19:54 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2023 16:31 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I mean, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence while claims that elicit a ..so? reaction do not. DeSantis having been present at a couple parties for high school seniors when he was a 23 year old teacher is pretty believable.
But more than anything the whole 'let's rehash this tired argument in this thread too' is pretty silly. It's probably preferable if you take any issues you have with dpbs hypocrisy through PM or even more preferable if you don't bother at all. It is the type of argument nobody else really gives a shit about and most likely it doesn't really make life more interesting for you nor him either. DPB was just an example but the argument was directed at multiple people, I was actually going to post more in my response to ChristianS but I had to go. I can recall the time I brought up how I thought it was wrong for Facebook and Twitter to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story and everyone would rant at me about how nothing incriminating was found on the laptop and it's a nothingburger of a story. Last week Acrofales said the social media companies were right to censor the story because it was a nothingburger. I'm sure not "nothing" as in the laptop wasn't real, since nobody disputes that, but "nothing" in that nothing on the laptop was incriminating. So is that the bar now for the stories that should be suppressed on social media? Does Acrofales, or anyone else want to go on record and say that facebook/twitter should suppress this story on Ron DeSantis because we all agree it's a nothingburger and not incriminating? Or is the dividing line for whether a story should be suppressed whether or not it embarrasses someone on the left vs the right? @ChristianS maybe you can weigh in on everyone's inability to grasp my arguments regarding this topic of censorship/selective media coverage. You seem to understand my posts quite clearly, writing in the COVID thread, "As usual BlackJack isn’t particularly interested in the thing itself, as much as what the thing can tell us about wokeness, censorship, etc. in our society." Why do you think everyone else that reads my posts responds by ranting about the details of the Hunter Biden laptop or ranting about how PV isn't trustworthy and insisting that I'm taking them at their word when I shouldn't? Do you think I'm not making my posts clear? Anyway, I think it's great that I can go on google now and easily find a story from maybe 100 different publications talking about Trump's retweet (re-truth?) of a Truth Social post by a guy with a Pepe the Frog avatar that shows DeSantis at a party with high schoolers 20 years ago when he was a teacher. I think it's even better that the NYT took the effort to track down and interview some of the girls at that party 20 years ago. My complaint was that the mainstream media should have been doing more of this by corroborating/debunking the PV video instead of largely ignoring it. But I can understand if they don't have the time for that if they have to focus on huge stories like this one. I will happily go on the record to say that Twitter and Facebook should suppress posts that claim "De Santis is a groomer" unless someone actually finds some actual evidence (and I will also happily agree with you that a photo posted by an idiot with a pepe avatar on truth social does not constitute evidence). I would agree, it looks like the photo has been comfirmed but that is long stretch from groomer. edit: the same way "hunter biden owns a laptop" should not be taken down, but "hunter bidens laptop contains incriminating evidence of joe's corruption should. Show nested quote +On February 09 2023 21:57 gobbledydook wrote:On February 09 2023 11:06 JimmiC wrote:
I think it is going actually effect him a lot. Groomer is a huge insult as bad as it gets and to MAGA culture wars are massive, the most important issue and desantis has leaned into it harder than anyone in the country. Which is the big reason why he is so well known.
Now people who believe that Truth social was an accurate name, think Trump is the savior and brining of the storm.
Had this come from anyone else on planet I think you are right. I think trump made it so people have to pick sides. Either trump is a liar or desantis is a groomer.
Does anyone know if conservative media is covering it? I would assume they are since Trump gets big airtime. What direction are they leaning or just completely ignoring the landmine for fear of losing viewership. Like no way Trump calls anyone else a groomer and its not lead story with lots of inuendos that its true.
No matter what the media say they are gauranteed to anger people at someone other than dems or the left! Are they going to be balanced? Do they know how to be? Will like fox support desantis and OAN support Trump and those viewers will split accordingly? Just leaving it alone would be good for the reps but Im not sure the networks care, especially the ones not on top.
This is exactly what I think the republicans like mccarthy are worried about. Trump only cares about him, he is only going to do more. And hes telling the kochs of the world who are saying they are going to put money behind other reps that if they do that they will lose to the dems because he is willing to burn it all down if its not him. Trump is selling him or no one. I would be shocked if desantis entered the race and this type of attack was not regular.
I had a quick check on right wing news media like Fox, Breitbart, New York Post, etc. This story doesn't seem to appear anywhere. Looks like it has been buried. That is not surprising but a little disappointing. They have been railing about suppression of stories with less evidence and this comes from a person they have been saying is a source of Truth for over 6 years now. @blackjack the other side of the coin from your attack is how do you feel about conservative media suppressing this news? Does it make you think there is a lot more to it because they are? Edit: And to quote you Show nested quote +There must be something to the story as Pfizer felt the need to release a statement saying they don't do gain-of-function research in response although they didn't directly address the allegations in the video of the guy working for them. So since Ron responded there must be something to the story? And he did not say he did not do it.... therefore??? What are your thoughts? Also this story of the picture was very easy for reporters to confirm because it was not a negative. That is why they did it and so quickly. You notice they have not confirmed the "grooming" part because that is a much bigger question. Where as with PV they couldn't even confirm that the high up executive existed and given the history of the source it was pretty obvious that if that key piece was a lie there was nothing more to it. The gotcha's and conspiracies you are looking for just don't exist. Show nested quote +On February 09 2023 22:15 Velr wrote:
It's biggish on /r conservative.
Fun read, would recommend. Ive never been their but I have to admit it is tempting. Those two have similar popularity and similar shticks, so who is winning or is it a pretty even bloodbath?
You would think that it's very easy for the MSM to confirm and track down girls that attended a party with Ron DeSantis 20 years ago but near impossible for the MSM to track down whoever the guy is in the PV video that was released last month.
|
On February 09 2023 21:00 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2023 19:54 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2023 16:31 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I mean, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence while claims that elicit a ..so? reaction do not. DeSantis having been present at a couple parties for high school seniors when he was a 23 year old teacher is pretty believable.
But more than anything the whole 'let's rehash this tired argument in this thread too' is pretty silly. It's probably preferable if you take any issues you have with dpbs hypocrisy through PM or even more preferable if you don't bother at all. It is the type of argument nobody else really gives a shit about and most likely it doesn't really make life more interesting for you nor him either. DPB was just an example but the argument was directed at multiple people, I was actually going to post more in my response to ChristianS but I had to go. I can recall the time I brought up how I thought it was wrong for Facebook and Twitter to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story and everyone would rant at me about how nothing incriminating was found on the laptop and it's a nothingburger of a story. Last week Acrofales said the social media companies were right to censor the story because it was a nothingburger. I'm sure not "nothing" as in the laptop wasn't real, since nobody disputes that, but "nothing" in that nothing on the laptop was incriminating. So is that the bar now for the stories that should be suppressed on social media? Does Acrofales, or anyone else want to go on record and say that facebook/twitter should suppress this story on Ron DeSantis because we all agree it's a nothingburger and not incriminating? Or is the dividing line for whether a story should be suppressed whether or not it embarrasses someone on the left vs the right? @ChristianS maybe you can weigh in on everyone's inability to grasp my arguments regarding this topic of censorship/selective media coverage. You seem to understand my posts quite clearly, writing in the COVID thread, "As usual BlackJack isn’t particularly interested in the thing itself, as much as what the thing can tell us about wokeness, censorship, etc. in our society." Why do you think everyone else that reads my posts responds by ranting about the details of the Hunter Biden laptop or ranting about how PV isn't trustworthy and insisting that I'm taking them at their word when I shouldn't? Do you think I'm not making my posts clear? Anyway, I think it's great that I can go on google now and easily find a story from maybe 100 different publications talking about Trump's retweet (re-truth?) of a Truth Social post by a guy with a Pepe the Frog avatar that shows DeSantis at a party with high schoolers 20 years ago when he was a teacher. I think it's even better that the NYT took the effort to track down and interview some of the girls at that party 20 years ago. My complaint was that the mainstream media should have been doing more of this by corroborating/debunking the PV video instead of largely ignoring it. But I can understand if they don't have the time for that if they have to focus on huge stories like this one. I will happily go on the record to say that Twitter and Facebook should suppress posts that claim "De Santis is a groomer" unless someone actually finds some actual evidence (and I will also happily agree with you that a photo posted by an idiot with a pepe avatar on truth social does not constitute evidence).
That's basically all the stories on this since the main theme of the coverage is Trump calling DeSantis a groomer. So you basically want the entire thing suppressed. I just don't understand that opinion. Clearly you seem to not put much stock in "DeSantis is a groomer," so suppressing it is not for your benefit because your opinion wouldn't change either way. So it seems you just don't trust other people to apply to same level of skepticism as yourself.
|
|
|
On February 10 2023 07:32 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On February 09 2023 21:00 Acrofales wrote:On February 09 2023 19:54 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2023 16:31 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I mean, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence while claims that elicit a ..so? reaction do not. DeSantis having been present at a couple parties for high school seniors when he was a 23 year old teacher is pretty believable.
But more than anything the whole 'let's rehash this tired argument in this thread too' is pretty silly. It's probably preferable if you take any issues you have with dpbs hypocrisy through PM or even more preferable if you don't bother at all. It is the type of argument nobody else really gives a shit about and most likely it doesn't really make life more interesting for you nor him either. DPB was just an example but the argument was directed at multiple people, I was actually going to post more in my response to ChristianS but I had to go. I can recall the time I brought up how I thought it was wrong for Facebook and Twitter to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story and everyone would rant at me about how nothing incriminating was found on the laptop and it's a nothingburger of a story. Last week Acrofales said the social media companies were right to censor the story because it was a nothingburger. I'm sure not "nothing" as in the laptop wasn't real, since nobody disputes that, but "nothing" in that nothing on the laptop was incriminating. So is that the bar now for the stories that should be suppressed on social media? Does Acrofales, or anyone else want to go on record and say that facebook/twitter should suppress this story on Ron DeSantis because we all agree it's a nothingburger and not incriminating? Or is the dividing line for whether a story should be suppressed whether or not it embarrasses someone on the left vs the right? @ChristianS maybe you can weigh in on everyone's inability to grasp my arguments regarding this topic of censorship/selective media coverage. You seem to understand my posts quite clearly, writing in the COVID thread, "As usual BlackJack isn’t particularly interested in the thing itself, as much as what the thing can tell us about wokeness, censorship, etc. in our society." Why do you think everyone else that reads my posts responds by ranting about the details of the Hunter Biden laptop or ranting about how PV isn't trustworthy and insisting that I'm taking them at their word when I shouldn't? Do you think I'm not making my posts clear? Anyway, I think it's great that I can go on google now and easily find a story from maybe 100 different publications talking about Trump's retweet (re-truth?) of a Truth Social post by a guy with a Pepe the Frog avatar that shows DeSantis at a party with high schoolers 20 years ago when he was a teacher. I think it's even better that the NYT took the effort to track down and interview some of the girls at that party 20 years ago. My complaint was that the mainstream media should have been doing more of this by corroborating/debunking the PV video instead of largely ignoring it. But I can understand if they don't have the time for that if they have to focus on huge stories like this one. I will happily go on the record to say that Twitter and Facebook should suppress posts that claim "De Santis is a groomer" unless someone actually finds some actual evidence (and I will also happily agree with you that a photo posted by an idiot with a pepe avatar on truth social does not constitute evidence). That's basically all the stories on this since the main theme of the coverage is Trump calling DeSantis a groomer. So you basically want the entire thing suppressed. I just don't understand that opinion. Clearly you seem to not put much stock in "DeSantis is a groomer," so suppressing it is not for your benefit because your opinion wouldn't change either way. So it seems you just don't trust other people to apply to same level of skepticism as yourself.
Well, no, I don't trust most people to apply the same level of critical thought as myself. It'd be quite weird to expect most people capable of that, as I am a trained scientist, and most people aren't.
But that aside, I'd like media to be held to some minimum standards. Journalists generally are, either through self-organization in societies who advocate for ethical journalism or because reputable papers "police" their publications and uphold standards. Often both. For an example of what I'm talking about, simply consider the Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics (https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp). It isn't very long or complicated, but would definitely stop idiotic articles about a photo of De Santis with some high school students proving he's a groomer, or the existence of Hunter Biden's laptop proving that Joe Biden is corrupt. I don't know how to extend a code like this to random people on the internet, but Twitter and Facebook taking a stab at it is probably better than nothing at all.
|
On February 10 2023 07:36 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2023 07:16 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2023 22:56 JimmiC wrote:On February 09 2023 21:00 Acrofales wrote:On February 09 2023 19:54 BlackJack wrote:On February 09 2023 16:31 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I mean, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence while claims that elicit a ..so? reaction do not. DeSantis having been present at a couple parties for high school seniors when he was a 23 year old teacher is pretty believable.
But more than anything the whole 'let's rehash this tired argument in this thread too' is pretty silly. It's probably preferable if you take any issues you have with dpbs hypocrisy through PM or even more preferable if you don't bother at all. It is the type of argument nobody else really gives a shit about and most likely it doesn't really make life more interesting for you nor him either. DPB was just an example but the argument was directed at multiple people, I was actually going to post more in my response to ChristianS but I had to go. I can recall the time I brought up how I thought it was wrong for Facebook and Twitter to suppress the Hunter Biden laptop story and everyone would rant at me about how nothing incriminating was found on the laptop and it's a nothingburger of a story. Last week Acrofales said the social media companies were right to censor the story because it was a nothingburger. I'm sure not "nothing" as in the laptop wasn't real, since nobody disputes that, but "nothing" in that nothing on the laptop was incriminating. So is that the bar now for the stories that should be suppressed on social media? Does Acrofales, or anyone else want to go on record and say that facebook/twitter should suppress this story on Ron DeSantis because we all agree it's a nothingburger and not incriminating? Or is the dividing line for whether a story should be suppressed whether or not it embarrasses someone on the left vs the right? @ChristianS maybe you can weigh in on everyone's inability to grasp my arguments regarding this topic of censorship/selective media coverage. You seem to understand my posts quite clearly, writing in the COVID thread, "As usual BlackJack isn’t particularly interested in the thing itself, as much as what the thing can tell us about wokeness, censorship, etc. in our society." Why do you think everyone else that reads my posts responds by ranting about the details of the Hunter Biden laptop or ranting about how PV isn't trustworthy and insisting that I'm taking them at their word when I shouldn't? Do you think I'm not making my posts clear? Anyway, I think it's great that I can go on google now and easily find a story from maybe 100 different publications talking about Trump's retweet (re-truth?) of a Truth Social post by a guy with a Pepe the Frog avatar that shows DeSantis at a party with high schoolers 20 years ago when he was a teacher. I think it's even better that the NYT took the effort to track down and interview some of the girls at that party 20 years ago. My complaint was that the mainstream media should have been doing more of this by corroborating/debunking the PV video instead of largely ignoring it. But I can understand if they don't have the time for that if they have to focus on huge stories like this one. I will happily go on the record to say that Twitter and Facebook should suppress posts that claim "De Santis is a groomer" unless someone actually finds some actual evidence (and I will also happily agree with you that a photo posted by an idiot with a pepe avatar on truth social does not constitute evidence). I would agree, it looks like the photo has been comfirmed but that is long stretch from groomer. edit: the same way "hunter biden owns a laptop" should not be taken down, but "hunter bidens laptop contains incriminating evidence of joe's corruption should. On February 09 2023 21:57 gobbledydook wrote:On February 09 2023 11:06 JimmiC wrote:
I think it is going actually effect him a lot. Groomer is a huge insult as bad as it gets and to MAGA culture wars are massive, the most important issue and desantis has leaned into it harder than anyone in the country. Which is the big reason why he is so well known.
Now people who believe that Truth social was an accurate name, think Trump is the savior and brining of the storm.
Had this come from anyone else on planet I think you are right. I think trump made it so people have to pick sides. Either trump is a liar or desantis is a groomer.
Does anyone know if conservative media is covering it? I would assume they are since Trump gets big airtime. What direction are they leaning or just completely ignoring the landmine for fear of losing viewership. Like no way Trump calls anyone else a groomer and its not lead story with lots of inuendos that its true.
No matter what the media say they are gauranteed to anger people at someone other than dems or the left! Are they going to be balanced? Do they know how to be? Will like fox support desantis and OAN support Trump and those viewers will split accordingly? Just leaving it alone would be good for the reps but Im not sure the networks care, especially the ones not on top.
This is exactly what I think the republicans like mccarthy are worried about. Trump only cares about him, he is only going to do more. And hes telling the kochs of the world who are saying they are going to put money behind other reps that if they do that they will lose to the dems because he is willing to burn it all down if its not him. Trump is selling him or no one. I would be shocked if desantis entered the race and this type of attack was not regular.
I had a quick check on right wing news media like Fox, Breitbart, New York Post, etc. This story doesn't seem to appear anywhere. Looks like it has been buried. That is not surprising but a little disappointing. They have been railing about suppression of stories with less evidence and this comes from a person they have been saying is a source of Truth for over 6 years now. @blackjack the other side of the coin from your attack is how do you feel about conservative media suppressing this news? Does it make you think there is a lot more to it because they are? Edit: And to quote you There must be something to the story as Pfizer felt the need to release a statement saying they don't do gain-of-function research in response although they didn't directly address the allegations in the video of the guy working for them. So since Ron responded there must be something to the story? And he did not say he did not do it.... therefore??? What are your thoughts? Also this story of the picture was very easy for reporters to confirm because it was not a negative. That is why they did it and so quickly. You notice they have not confirmed the "grooming" part because that is a much bigger question. Where as with PV they couldn't even confirm that the high up executive existed and given the history of the source it was pretty obvious that if that key piece was a lie there was nothing more to it. The gotcha's and conspiracies you are looking for just don't exist. On February 09 2023 22:15 Velr wrote:
It's biggish on /r conservative.
Fun read, would recommend. Ive never been their but I have to admit it is tempting. Those two have similar popularity and similar shticks, so who is winning or is it a pretty even bloodbath? You would think that it's very easy for the MSM to confirm and track down girls that attended a party with Ron DeSantis 20 years ago but near impossible for the MSM to track down whoever the guy is in the PV video that was released last month. Yes. You see PV could easily release the actual name and title of the person. PV could also give the unedited video but dp not. The name and title they gave do not exist. In your mind that makes the PV video and conclusion seem more likely?
I have no idea what you're talking about. PV did release the name and title of the person they claimed to be in the video since Day 1.
Snopes is a very reputable fact checking website, here is part of their breakdown
https://www.snopes.com/news/2023/01/31/project-veritas-pfizer-mutating-covid/
Since our initial publication of this report, we have looked at various pieces of data that appear to show photos of Walker or mention his name. Among that evidence is a YouTube video slideshow and webpage listing associated with The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, both from 2018, as well as a since-deleted LinkedIn profile and medical license in New York. Also, we found that an email inbox appeared to exist at Pfizer for someone with Walker's name. This lended credibility to the claim that a man with that name has a background in medicine and is employed by the pharmaceutical company. Pfizer has not confirmed Walker's employment.
Additionally, we received information from readers after this story was published that showed DuckDuckGo search results that mentioned Walker as being, "Director, Worldwide R&D Strategic Operations and mRNA Scientific Planning at Pfizer" in New York City. That very same LinkedIn profile URL was linked with Walker's name as a consultant under an article on the Boston Consulting Group website. The article's headline was, "The Near-Term Outlook for COVID-19 Therapeutic Treatments." Further, a person with the same name was listed as having a medical license on the New York State Education Department .gov website.
Here's the article referenced in the Snopes article
https://archive.is/J8ODr#selection-2423.0-2449.1
Scroll down to the bottom and it's obviously the same guy.
So you have the guy's name, his resume, the med school he attended, a record of his medical license, research articles that he has helped author and with all that information you still think it would be a herculean task to track him down. Or as you put it, he "does not exist." Is he a ghost? Snopes seems to be the only reputable source that I could find to put any serious effort into fact checking this and almost everything they found is corroborating.*
+ Show Spoiler +*That is to say, corroborating to the notion that the guy in the video is someone with a background in research/medicine and is or was employed by pfizer in some capacity.
*That is not to say that the article is corroborating to the notion that pfizer is doing gain-of-functiony stuff on viruses or whatever the guy specifically talks about in the video
|
|
|
BlackJack posting sources that he clearly didn't read that claim the opposite of what he says they do?
Colour me surprised.
|
On February 10 2023 16:49 Mikau313 wrote:
BlackJack posting sources that he clearly didn't read that claim the opposite of what he says they do?
Colour me surprised.
Here's that quote again I gave from the Snopes article
Since our initial publication of this report, we have looked at various pieces of data that appear to show photos of Walker or mention his name. Among that evidence is a YouTube video slideshow and webpage listing associated with The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, both from 2018, as well as a since-deleted LinkedIn profile and medical license in New York. Also, we found that an email inbox appeared to exist at Pfizer for someone with Walker's name. This lended credibility to the claim that a man with that name has a background in medicine and is employed by the pharmaceutical company. Pfizer has not confirmed Walker's employment.
Additionally, we received information from readers after this story was published that showed DuckDuckGo search results that mentioned Walker as being, "Director, Worldwide R&D Strategic Operations and mRNA Scientific Planning at Pfizer" in New York City. That very same LinkedIn profile URL was linked with Walker's name as a consultant under an article on the Boston Consulting Group website. The article's headline was, "The Near-Term Outlook for COVID-19 Therapeutic Treatments." Further, a person with the same name was listed as having a medical license on the New York State Education Department .gov website.
What if I told you that "lended credibility" and "corroborated" are not actually opposites? What if I told you they actually meant the same thing?
|
Here are the "Findings" from the Snopes article
FINDINGS
From what we can tell, the man shown in the videos may really be named Jordon/Jordan Walker. The video and website for the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center also may have shown and referenced the very same person. Further, Pfizer did not answer questions or provide information about the man identified as Walker either by email or in its statement, and email inboxes appeared to be active at the company for someone with the same name.
In an effort to see what other news organizations had found about the Project Veritas story, we noticed that Newsweek had established a rating of "Unverified."
Meanwhile, Medical Marketing and Media (MM+M) reported that its team had been "unable to verify that Walker works for Pfizer — or even exists," adding that "he lacks a digital presence on every major technology platform." (The article did not appear to make mention of the claims about the video or website listing for the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.)
The MM+M story continued with, "It's worth noting that Project Veritas, while claiming to conduct investigative journalism, has a lengthy history of using ethically dubious tactics and deceptively editing videos to fit a conservative narrative."
Again, we have reached out to Project Veritas to obtain access to all of the raw footage so that we can look for clarifying information, and will update this article accordingly if we receive the video files.
The first paragraph is what Snopes found and the rest is a blurb about what others have reported. If you think the first paragraph is somehow "the opposite" of what I said I suggest reading it again.
JimmiC was able to read all that stuff that snopes found and still insist that this so called Jordon Walker still has "0 digital presence." A deleted linkedin page, stuff about him and med school, a research paper he co-authored, a medical license verified online, etc. I'm not sure if considers this not "digital" or not a "presence" or if it's all just fake.
I'm guessing he's getting the "0 digital presence" from that other outlet, MM&M, that reported that they had been "unable to verify that Walker works for Pfizer — or even exists," adding that "he lacks a digital presence on every major technology platform."
Some possibilities I see here
A) All the stuff snopes found is just a figment of our imagination and this so-called Jordon Walker guy doesn't actually exist
B) Someone that just got doxxed and humilated may not be to keen on maintaining a "digital presence" on the major tech platforms
|
Whether or not some guy exists doesn't matter. No one should give PV even a seconds worth of thought after the Planned Parenthood lies.
|
|
|
I'm gonna go ahead and re-quote Drone here, because I find it applies just as much to this PV shit as the DeSantis thing.
On February 09 2023 16:31 Liquid`Drone wrote:
I mean, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence while claims that elicit a ..so? reaction do not. DeSantis having been present at a couple parties for high school seniors when he was a 23 year old teacher is pretty believable.
But more than anything the whole 'let's rehash this tired argument in this thread too' is pretty silly. It's probably preferable if you take any issues you have with dpbs hypocrisy through PM or even more preferable if you don't bother at all. It is the type of argument nobody else really gives a shit about and most likely it doesn't really make life more interesting for you nor him either.
It's been a lot of hullabaloo about something that's just a big "so what". If an outlet (like PV) has demonstrated themselves to be a bad faith actor, and even a malevolent one, you're not gonna find a lot of interest when it comes to rehashing whether you can take this one random thing they said seriously. I know I don't give a shit. Maybe they can stop being a trash outlet designed to lend a platform to hateful people through conspiracy theories, lies and slander. Let that happen first. Then we can dig shit up on Snopes.
|
Also, as has been pointed out by me and several other folks over just the last few weeks alone, you don't get to rail against "The MSM" and conveniently leave out Fox News, which literally has the biggest ratings of any US media by a considerable margin, and are right out there with y'all in pushing this toxic bullshit when it suits them. That's your MSM. So unless your complaint also involves Fox News, hush. You're out here playing Mario Party and complaining that someone else has almost as many stars as you. Nobody cares, you're winning.
|
|
|
On February 10 2023 23:00 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2023 20:11 BlackJack wrote:Here are the "Findings" from the Snopes article FINDINGS
From what we can tell, the man shown in the videos may really be named Jordon/Jordan Walker. The video and website for the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center also may have shown and referenced the very same person. Further, Pfizer did not answer questions or provide information about the man identified as Walker either by email or in its statement, and email inboxes appeared to be active at the company for someone with the same name.
In an effort to see what other news organizations had found about the Project Veritas story, we noticed that Newsweek had established a rating of "Unverified."
Meanwhile, Medical Marketing and Media (MM+M) reported that its team had been "unable to verify that Walker works for Pfizer — or even exists," adding that "he lacks a digital presence on every major technology platform." (The article did not appear to make mention of the claims about the video or website listing for the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.)
The MM+M story continued with, "It's worth noting that Project Veritas, while claiming to conduct investigative journalism, has a lengthy history of using ethically dubious tactics and deceptively editing videos to fit a conservative narrative."
Again, we have reached out to Project Veritas to obtain access to all of the raw footage so that we can look for clarifying information, and will update this article accordingly if we receive the video files. The first paragraph is what Snopes found and the rest is a blurb about what others have reported. If you think the first paragraph is somehow "the opposite" of what I said I suggest reading it again. JimmiC was able to read all that stuff that snopes found and still insist that this so called Jordon Walker still has "0 digital presence." A deleted linkedin page, stuff about him and med school, a research paper he co-authored, a medical license verified online, etc. I'm not sure if considers this not "digital" or not a "presence" or if it's all just fake. I'm guessing he's getting the "0 digital presence" from that other outlet, MM&M, that reported that they had been "unable to verify that Walker works for Pfizer — or even exists," adding that "he lacks a digital presence on every major technology platform." Some possibilities I see here A) All the stuff snopes found is just a figment of our imagination and this so-called Jordon Walker guy doesn't actually exist B) Someone that just got doxxed and humilated may not be to keen on maintaining a "digital presence" on the major tech platforms Dude this just proves you do not read what is posted and have 0 reading comprehension. Look two posts up, I posted the entire findings and their opening statement. Od dont cherry pick like you. I said they think a jordan walker worked there. I also said No where do they give any even speculation to his title or mention that what he says is correct, which is also factual. Only one person in our discussion is bejng dishonest and its not me. Thank you for further proof that you clearly do not read the posts you respond too. I know you do not believe you are down the rabbit hole but this obession you have with hunters laptop, msm and pv says you are, that you post opinions that match tuckers right after his, says you are. That your friend told you the PV was BS and you went out to prove to them there was truth to it, couldnt find it, and that only proved to you there was, says you are. That this was covered by fox news with tucker going into detail and you say no MSM says you are (fox news is not some small outlet). Its fine that you are, but you need to come to grips with it and stop getting all offended when people who are not down the rabbit hole to not think these assumptions are facts. Also, before you post a gotcha message maybe read the whole post and try to understand it. It is embarassing for you to be mad at my post and then post the exact same thing I did and not even adress any of the claims of my post but rather make up your own for me. What few people who still believe your schitck are going to struggle to continue too if you can not get over that PV is all lies. Even the small facts they produce are produced dishonestly to sell a dishonest message. This has been true of all their stories. And will be true at the next one. If you can not understand this statement to be true than you are too far gone. Jordan walker can be a real person, he can work at Pfizer and the rest of the video can all be false. It very likely is because of their past, because of his title being a fabrication, and because they highly edited the content, including natration to make it less true, and wont release it all. No real media can accurately disprove it so they write how unlikely it is and that it is unverified. If they could 100% prove or disprove they would have said that. They assume its false, for the reasons above, but they do not treat assumptions like facts the way you do so they do not declare it false. This should vreate credibility not the opposite. If you want to be mad at people for surpressing the true information your side needs, be mad at trumps inner circle for not ever producing the laptop and taking over a year to realease what you have called a nothing burger of data. They surpessed it not the legitimate news sources. The legitimate media simply asked for thr data to back the (turns out false, shocker) claims of evidemce tieing joe to corruption. You want to be mad that no one in legitimate news sources belives PV and is not covering it, be mad at PV for lying about his title, be mad at them for supressing the real video. Be mad at them for every story thay have ever released being dishonest. Legitimate news has rules about sources to keep their credibility, this is a good thing. It is a bad thing that so many people like you do not require, evidence, corroboration, trackrecord of honesty or anything to believe conspircys. It is a major massive problem because you make up such a huge percentage of the population and your low bar of evidence and high level of anger lets them point you in amy direction they want with no proof. I do not think defending PV and being mad that everyone is not taking them as a factual, honest deliverer of news is the hill you want to die on.
Thanks for the essay on how Jordon Walker can be a real person that works at pfizer but the rest of the video can still be false. Unfortunately, as I have reiterated 10 times, I have never made any claims to the believability of the contents of the video. It's irrelevant to my point.
My point is that there is some credibility to the claim that someone with a background in medicine/research and is employed by pfizer is on video talking about "gain-of-functiony stuff" and the majority on this forum believe that this is completely not newsworthy and should be ignored all while we yuck it up over a photo of DeSantis having a beer from a party 20 years ago that has been covered by every MSM outlet with the NYT taking the effort to track down some girls from one of the parties to get them on the record.
|
On February 11 2023 07:15 BlackJack wrote:Show nested quote +On February 10 2023 23:00 JimmiC wrote:On February 10 2023 20:11 BlackJack wrote:Here are the "Findings" from the Snopes article FINDINGS
From what we can tell, the man shown in the videos may really be named Jordon/Jordan Walker. The video and website for the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center also may have shown and referenced the very same person. Further, Pfizer did not answer questions or provide information about the man identified as Walker either by email or in its statement, and email inboxes appeared to be active at the company for someone with the same name.
In an effort to see what other news organizations had found about the Project Veritas story, we noticed that Newsweek had established a rating of "Unverified."
Meanwhile, Medical Marketing and Media (MM+M) reported that its team had been "unable to verify that Walker works for Pfizer — or even exists," adding that "he lacks a digital presence on every major technology platform." (The article did not appear to make mention of the claims about the video or website listing for the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.)
The MM+M story continued with, "It's worth noting that Project Veritas, while claiming to conduct investigative journalism, has a lengthy history of using ethically dubious tactics and deceptively editing videos to fit a conservative narrative."
Again, we have reached out to Project Veritas to obtain access to all of the raw footage so that we can look for clarifying information, and will update this article accordingly if we receive the video files. The first paragraph is what Snopes found and the rest is a blurb about what others have reported. If you think the first paragraph is somehow "the opposite" of what I said I suggest reading it again. JimmiC was able to read all that stuff that snopes found and still insist that this so called Jordon Walker still has "0 digital presence." A deleted linkedin page, stuff about him and med school, a research paper he co-authored, a medical license verified online, etc. I'm not sure if considers this not "digital" or not a "presence" or if it's all just fake. I'm guessing he's getting the "0 digital presence" from that other outlet, MM&M, that reported that they had been "unable to verify that Walker works for Pfizer — or even exists," adding that "he lacks a digital presence on every major technology platform." Some possibilities I see here A) All the stuff snopes found is just a figment of our imagination and this so-called Jordon Walker guy doesn't actually exist B) Someone that just got doxxed and humilated may not be to keen on maintaining a "digital presence" on the major tech platforms Dude this just proves you do not read what is posted and have 0 reading comprehension. Look two posts up, I posted the entire findings and their opening statement. Od dont cherry pick like you. I said they think a jordan walker worked there. I also said No where do they give any even speculation to his title or mention that what he says is correct, which is also factual. Only one person in our discussion is bejng dishonest and its not me. Thank you for further proof that you clearly do not read the posts you respond too. I know you do not believe you are down the rabbit hole but this obession you have with hunters laptop, msm and pv says you are, that you post opinions that match tuckers right after his, says you are. That your friend told you the PV was BS and you went out to prove to them there was truth to it, couldnt find it, and that only proved to you there was, says you are. That this was covered by fox news with tucker going into detail and you say no MSM says you are (fox news is not some small outlet). Its fine that you are, but you need to come to grips with it and stop getting all offended when people who are not down the rabbit hole to not think these assumptions are facts. Also, before you post a gotcha message maybe read the whole post and try to understand it. It is embarassing for you to be mad at my post and then post the exact same thing I did and not even adress any of the claims of my post but rather make up your own for me. What few people who still believe your schitck are going to struggle to continue too if you can not get over that PV is all lies. Even the small facts they produce are produced dishonestly to sell a dishonest message. This has been true of all their stories. And will be true at the next one. If you can not understand this statement to be true than you are too far gone. Jordan walker can be a real person, he can work at Pfizer and the rest of the video can all be false. It very likely is because of their past, because of his title being a fabrication, and because they highly edited the content, including natration to make it less true, and wont release it all. No real media can accurately disprove it so they write how unlikely it is and that it is unverified. If they could 100% prove or disprove they would have said that. They assume its false, for the reasons above, but they do not treat assumptions like facts the way you do so they do not declare it false. This should vreate credibility not the opposite. If you want to be mad at people for surpressing the true information your side needs, be mad at trumps inner circle for not ever producing the laptop and taking over a year to realease what you have called a nothing burger of data. They surpessed it not the legitimate news sources. The legitimate media simply asked for thr data to back the (turns out false, shocker) claims of evidemce tieing joe to corruption. You want to be mad that no one in legitimate news sources belives PV and is not covering it, be mad at PV for lying about his title, be mad at them for supressing the real video. Be mad at them for every story thay have ever released being dishonest. Legitimate news has rules about sources to keep their credibility, this is a good thing. It is a bad thing that so many people like you do not require, evidence, corroboration, trackrecord of honesty or anything to believe conspircys. It is a major massive problem because you make up such a huge percentage of the population and your low bar of evidence and high level of anger lets them point you in amy direction they want with no proof. I do not think defending PV and being mad that everyone is not taking them as a factual, honest deliverer of news is the hill you want to die on. Thanks for the essay on how Jordon Walker can be a real person that works at pfizer but the rest of the video can still be false. Unfortunately, as I have reiterated 10 times, I have never made any claims to the believability of the contents of the video. It's irrelevant to my point. My point is that there is some credibility to the claim that someone with a background in medicine/research and is employed by pfizer is on video talking about "gain-of-functiony stuff" and the majority on this forum believe that this is completely not newsworthy and should be ignored all while we yuck it up over a photo of DeSantis having a beer from a party 20 years ago that has been covered by every MSM outlet with the NYT taking the effort to track down some girls from one of the parties to get them on the record. It was a video by Project Veritas. Why should anyone give a shit about anything after they were caught for creating an entirely fake narrative with they Planned Parenthood video? They even lost a court case over it.
And no one here is yucking it up over DeSantis, the only opinion I have seen is that it might not be entirely appropriate but is a complete nothing burger.
You seem to have made up your mind ages ago about what this conversation would be about and your entirely ignoring the reality of what is being said to play out your own fantasy of what should be said instead.
|
On February 11 2023 03:54 NewSunshine wrote:
Also, as has been pointed out by me and several other folks over just the last few weeks alone, you don't get to rail against "The MSM" and conveniently leave out Fox News, which literally has the biggest ratings of any US media by a considerable margin, and are right out there with y'all in pushing this toxic bullshit when it suits them. That's your MSM. So unless your complaint also involves Fox News, hush. You're out here playing Mario Party and complaining that someone else has almost as many stars as you. Nobody cares, you're winning.
You might not have been following the conversation as it carried over from the other thread but my complaint was that none of the "reputable media" companies were covering the story to fact check it. I think in that thread I listed the "NYT, WSP, Reuters, AP, etc." Now I'm using "MSM" as a short-hand colloquial for the reputable news media. Unfortunately Tucker Carlson does not fit the bill here. Even his own show/network have argued in court that his show is not a news show but instead an entertainment/talk show that should not be taken seriously.
|
On February 11 2023 07:29 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On February 11 2023 07:15 BlackJack wrote:On February 10 2023 23:00 JimmiC wrote:On February 10 2023 20:11 BlackJack wrote:Here are the "Findings" from the Snopes article FINDINGS
From what we can tell, the man shown in the videos may really be named Jordon/Jordan Walker. The video and website for the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center also may have shown and referenced the very same person. Further, Pfizer did not answer questions or provide information about the man identified as Walker either by email or in its statement, and email inboxes appeared to be active at the company for someone with the same name.
In an effort to see what other news organizations had found about the Project Veritas story, we noticed that Newsweek had established a rating of "Unverified."
Meanwhile, Medical Marketing and Media (MM+M) reported that its team had been "unable to verify that Walker works for Pfizer — or even exists," adding that "he lacks a digital presence on every major technology platform." (The article did not appear to make mention of the claims about the video or website listing for the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center.)
The MM+M story continued with, "It's worth noting that Project Veritas, while claiming to conduct investigative journalism, has a lengthy history of using ethically dubious tactics and deceptively editing videos to fit a conservative narrative."
Again, we have reached out to Project Veritas to obtain access to all of the raw footage so that we can look for clarifying information, and will update this article accordingly if we receive the video files. The first paragraph is what Snopes found and the rest is a blurb about what others have reported. If you think the first paragraph is somehow "the opposite" of what I said I suggest reading it again. JimmiC was able to read all that stuff that snopes found and still insist that this so called Jordon Walker still has "0 digital presence." A deleted linkedin page, stuff about him and med school, a research paper he co-authored, a medical license verified online, etc. I'm not sure if considers this not "digital" or not a "presence" or if it's all just fake. I'm guessing he's getting the "0 digital presence" from that other outlet, MM&M, that reported that they had been "unable to verify that Walker works for Pfizer — or even exists," adding that "he lacks a digital presence on every major technology platform." Some possibilities I see here A) All the stuff snopes found is just a figment of our imagination and this so-called Jordon Walker guy doesn't actually exist B) Someone that just got doxxed and humilated may not be to keen on maintaining a "digital presence" on the major tech platforms Dude this just proves you do not read what is posted and have 0 reading comprehension. Look two posts up, I posted the entire findings and their opening statement. Od dont cherry pick like you. I said they think a jordan walker worked there. I also said No where do they give any even speculation to his title or mention that what he says is correct, which is also factual. Only one person in our discussion is bejng dishonest and its not me. Thank you for further proof that you clearly do not read the posts you respond too. I know you do not believe you are down the rabbit hole but this obession you have with hunters laptop, msm and pv says you are, that you post opinions that match tuckers right after his, says you are. That your friend told you the PV was BS and you went out to prove to them there was truth to it, couldnt find it, and that only proved to you there was, says you are. That this was covered by fox news with tucker going into detail and you say no MSM says you are (fox news is not some small outlet). Its fine that you are, but you need to come to grips with it and stop getting all offended when people who are not down the rabbit hole to not think these assumptions are facts. Also, before you post a gotcha message maybe read the whole post and try to understand it. It is embarassing for you to be mad at my post and then post the exact same thing I did and not even adress any of the claims of my post but rather make up your own for me. What few people who still believe your schitck are going to struggle to continue too if you can not get over that PV is all lies. Even the small facts they produce are produced dishonestly to sell a dishonest message. This has been true of all their stories. And will be true at the next one. If you can not understand this statement to be true than you are too far gone. Jordan walker can be a real person, he can work at Pfizer and the rest of the video can all be false. It very likely is because of their past, because of his title being a fabrication, and because they highly edited the content, including natration to make it less true, and wont release it all. No real media can accurately disprove it so they write how unlikely it is and that it is unverified. If they could 100% prove or disprove they would have said that. They assume its false, for the reasons above, but they do not treat assumptions like facts the way you do so they do not declare it false. This should vreate credibility not the opposite. If you want to be mad at people for surpressing the true information your side needs, be mad at trumps inner circle for not ever producing the laptop and taking over a year to realease what you have called a nothing burger of data. They surpessed it not the legitimate news sources. The legitimate media simply asked for thr data to back the (turns out false, shocker) claims of evidemce tieing joe to corruption. You want to be mad that no one in legitimate news sources belives PV and is not covering it, be mad at PV for lying about his title, be mad at them for supressing the real video. Be mad at them for every story thay have ever released being dishonest. Legitimate news has rules about sources to keep their credibility, this is a good thing. It is a bad thing that so many people like you do not require, evidence, corroboration, trackrecord of honesty or anything to believe conspircys. It is a major massive problem because you make up such a huge percentage of the population and your low bar of evidence and high level of anger lets them point you in amy direction they want with no proof. I do not think defending PV and being mad that everyone is not taking them as a factual, honest deliverer of news is the hill you want to die on. Thanks for the essay on how Jordon Walker can be a real person that works at pfizer but the rest of the video can still be false. Unfortunately, as I have reiterated 10 times, I have never made any claims to the believability of the contents of the video. It's irrelevant to my point. My point is that there is some credibility to the claim that someone with a background in medicine/research and is employed by pfizer is on video talking about "gain-of-functiony stuff" and the majority on this forum believe that this is completely not newsworthy and should be ignored all while we yuck it up over a photo of DeSantis having a beer from a party 20 years ago that has been covered by every MSM outlet with the NYT taking the effort to track down some girls from one of the parties to get them on the record. It was a video by Project Veritas. Why should anyone give a shit about anything after they were caught for creating an entirely fake narrative with they Planned Parenthood video? They even lost a court case over it.
This has been asked and answered. People should give a shit because the video has 31 million views on Twitter alone and across all platforms and mirrors, who knows. maybe double that? In fact quite a few people are in agreement with me that the reputable media should fact check such things and determine the truth as opposed to allowing people to retreat to their corners of the internet and believe what they want.
And no one here is yucking it up over DeSantis, the only opinion I have seen is that it might not be entirely appropriate but is a complete nothing burger.
You seem to have made up your mind ages ago about what this conversation would be about and your entirely ignoring the reality of what is being said to play out your own fantasy of what should be said instead.
yucking it up just means joking around, which is what people were doing with the DeSantis picture as opposed to believing it was something worthwhile
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
