|
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 June 21 2026 23:22 Dan HH wrote:
I don't how you can keep reading this fellas. There's nothing new to learn from or about the imbecile diddler and his swarm of troglodyte sycophants. Sure it's something that affects us all, but at some point we've exhausted everything remotely interesting there is to observe about these lifeforms, just go on and enjoy your day, have some ice cream.
It's a compulsion. They can't help themselves
On June 22 2026 01:57 Fleetfeet wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 01:50 Billyboy wrote:On June 22 2026 00:34 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 23:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 21 2026 22:50 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 21:55 farvacola wrote:
The ease with which people conclude Trump is a piece of trash is really not a mystery. It’s all right there and easy to see, and while folks might rush to some of the premises underlying that notion, the same can be said for virtually every central body of believers in a popular idea.
Telling anti trumpers to be more careful with their criticisms is silly relative to pretty much every mobilized political idea in the US. I agree with you that "mobilized political ideas" weave in lies pretty regularly for political benefit, and I want to stress that this is a partisan-agnostic. Yes, people of any political affiliation can and do lie and spread misinformation, but this comes off as an equal-offender / all-sides-are-just-as-guilty statement, when in reality the frequency and severity of lies and misinformation are incredibly lopsided towards Republicans. It's not even close. It's like saying that climbing Mount Everest and climbing a flight of stairs are comparable because they're both increases in elevation. I fail to see how correcting misinformation that *helps my own side if everybody believed it* is unsayable because some portion of the audience is set off by anything that sounds like both-sides-ism. That's a license for lying. It might explain how these lies propagate, by making people too scared of being accused of both-sides-ism or Trump apologia for the crime of pointing it out. On June 21 2026 23:51 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2026 23:28 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 22:56 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2026 21:40 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 16:26 Geiko wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:
[quote]I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. But you didn't answer the questions right above what was quoted ? I wish more people would answer difficult questions instead of finding one sentence in a post to nitpick and ignoring the rest. That Trump was friends with Epstein doesn't automatically mean he's a pedo. However when you look at the evidence as a whole (likes walking in on underdressed minors, On June 21 2026 17:31 RenSC2 wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:
[quote]I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. Hi, purposely walking in on underage girls while they're getting changed so that you can take a peak would make you a pedo. Just like someone downloading naked pictures of underage girls from the internet is a pedo. You don't have to rape children to be a pedo. Trump has bragged about walking in on underage girls getting changed therefore he is a pedo. On June 21 2026 19:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:
[quote]I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. Trump has been recorded bragging about and that has been corroborated by others My only response to all of this is a question: What was your issue with the Snopes article saying that this wasn't true? I clicked LightSpectra's link to see if it said anything new, and lo and behold, it disputes the claim was that he bragged about walking in on underage people undressing. Snopes goes through it to say "misrepresented a real comment he made to [Howard] Stern." Then some stuff on a dispute after Buzzfeed started asking about that particular event ~20 years later, 11 not recalling that it happened, 5 did, and most of the 11 were dubious or dismissed the possibility. And now I read two people saying Snopes got it wrong without a discussion, so what's this about? The adult stuff evidence is overwhelming, and On June 21 2026 17:08 PoulsenB wrote:
Being friends with Epstein should automatically disqualify a person from being considered respectable, not to mention from holding any public office, in my opinion. thoroughly disqualifying if you have a basic moral requirement to vote someone into public office. Everybody is perfectly welcome to infer that Trump is a pedophile from the cheating with adults and his behavior with adults and that time he called his daughter hot and he was friends with Epstein before the first indictment. As long as we're all clear on how that impacts saying "we know," and nobody is going around spouting misinformation like "he bragged" or Trump "constantly go to parties on pedo island." You can read back to posts where there's outright disinformation weaved among exaggeration, interpretation bias, poor evidence, and real facts. I'm interested in that final category, and a little quizzical at people that swallow all of those categories in one go. So, here's the link dyhb is talking about: https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/07/08/trump-beauty-pageants-dressing-room/He did read far enough to get to "The above quote in which he appeared to brag about walking in on Miss Teen USA contestants misrepresented a real comment he made to Stern." But if you just go a bit further in this same article: "It is clear that Trump himself boasted about entering contestant dressing rooms, but those comments occurred during a discussion about Miss USA and Miss Universe, not Miss Teen USA. However, real allegations from former contestants of both Miss Teen USA and Miss USA bolstered claims that Trump behaved inappropriately." So Trump brags about walking in on nude contestants, and he's been accused of doing so to teen contestants, but he didn't explicitly brag about doing so to teen contestants. From this dyhb has concluded "the snopes link that says the exact opposite of your claim". To put this into perspective, it's like saying someone isn't a "rapist-murderer because the people they raped and the people they murdered are different people" and extrapolating that into "they are neither a rapist or murderer." LightSpectra may not have finished reading my post, which said "Then some stuff on a dispute after Buzzfeed started asking about that particular event ~20 years later, 11 not recalling that it happened, 5 did, and most of the 11 were dubious or dismissed the possibility." I skipped over it Yes. It shows I read the article, and skipping over what I said lets you say I didn't read the article. So what you’re saying is that it is really important for people to put the qualifier of “is extremely likely” to have had sex with underage girls and trafficked women. Rather than has had sex with underage girls and trafficked women. I look forward to you using level of precision in all your posts. + Show Spoiler +
I think it's just "I know" and "he definitely went in to underage miss USA pageant changing rooms to see naked kids" instead of "I believe" and "There are reports that he (went into underage etcetc)".
It's a thin level of truth monitor, but fair enough imo.
-e- LightSpectra are you under contractual obligation to be a dick, or is it just for funsies?
I'm inclined to believe the same applies here.
|
On June 22 2026 01:57 Fleetfeet wrote:
-e- LightSpectra are you under contractual obligation to be a dick, or is it just for funsies?
Believe me, I'd be perfectly content to never post here again if the all the rightwing rape apologists were banned. Then GH could just link back to his own posts at himself like two instances of chatGPT talking to each other.
|
On June 22 2026 02:26 LightSpectra wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 01:57 Fleetfeet wrote:
-e- LightSpectra are you under contractual obligation to be a dick, or is it just for funsies?
+ Show Spoiler +
Believe me, I'd be perfectly content to never post here again if the all the rightwing rape apologists were banned.
Then GH could just link back to his own posts + Show Spoiler + at himself like two instances of chatGPT talking to each other.
Given our last exchanges, I understand your aversion to citations.
|
United States44122 Posts
I think the word you’re looking for is patriots.
And to paraphrase from the discussion around Charlie Kirk's overdose, whether or not I think it's okay, Trump thinks it's okay. Trump famously advocated for Second Amendment enthusiasts to remove a president they disagreed with from office.
|
On June 22 2026 02:31 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 02:26 LightSpectra wrote:On June 22 2026 01:57 Fleetfeet wrote:
-e- LightSpectra are you under contractual obligation to be a dick, or is it just for funsies?
+ Show Spoiler +
Believe me, I'd be perfectly content to never post here again if the all the rightwing rape apologists were banned.
Then GH could just link back to his own posts + Show Spoiler + at himself like two instances of chatGPT talking to each other. Given our last exchanges, I understand your aversion to citations.
Well, if you insist.
GreenHorizons, "US Politics Mega-thread". <https://tl.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=28353364>. Accessed 21 June 2026.
|
But will they protect her from Trump? And his friends since he is clueless about their behavior …. Now a sicko like you would likely be proud if Trump assaulted your daughter. So it was not directed at you.
You live in a world where all those around him are awful, but he just didn’t know. And given how many terrible people he’s hired (his words and many firings) , plus his friend group being so bad. You would think even with your twisted world view, that you would be like, man he’s great but what a poor judge of character and he probably shouldn’t be in a position where he makes important hiring decisions.
But somehow your brain allows you to both hold that it’s never his fault just everyone around him is evil, incompetent or both AND he’s a really good judge of people and only hires the bestest.
|
On June 22 2026 02:08 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On June 21 2026 23:22 Dan HH wrote:
I don't how you can keep reading this fellas. There's nothing new to learn from or about the imbecile diddler and his swarm of troglodyte sycophants. Sure it's something that affects us all, but at some point we've exhausted everything remotely interesting there is to observe about these lifeforms, just go on and enjoy your day, have some ice cream. It's a compulsion. They can't help themselvesShow nested quote +On June 22 2026 01:57 Fleetfeet wrote:On June 22 2026 01:50 Billyboy wrote:On June 22 2026 00:34 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 23:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 21 2026 22:50 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 21:55 farvacola wrote:
The ease with which people conclude Trump is a piece of trash is really not a mystery. It’s all right there and easy to see, and while folks might rush to some of the premises underlying that notion, the same can be said for virtually every central body of believers in a popular idea.
Telling anti trumpers to be more careful with their criticisms is silly relative to pretty much every mobilized political idea in the US. I agree with you that "mobilized political ideas" weave in lies pretty regularly for political benefit, and I want to stress that this is a partisan-agnostic. Yes, people of any political affiliation can and do lie and spread misinformation, but this comes off as an equal-offender / all-sides-are-just-as-guilty statement, when in reality the frequency and severity of lies and misinformation are incredibly lopsided towards Republicans. It's not even close. It's like saying that climbing Mount Everest and climbing a flight of stairs are comparable because they're both increases in elevation. I fail to see how correcting misinformation that *helps my own side if everybody believed it* is unsayable because some portion of the audience is set off by anything that sounds like both-sides-ism. That's a license for lying. It might explain how these lies propagate, by making people too scared of being accused of both-sides-ism or Trump apologia for the crime of pointing it out. On June 21 2026 23:51 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2026 23:28 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 22:56 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2026 21:40 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 16:26 Geiko wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:
[quote]You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. But you didn't answer the questions right above what was quoted ? I wish more people would answer difficult questions instead of finding one sentence in a post to nitpick and ignoring the rest. That Trump was friends with Epstein doesn't automatically mean he's a pedo. However when you look at the evidence as a whole (likes walking in on underdressed minors, On June 21 2026 17:31 RenSC2 wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:
[quote]You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. Hi, purposely walking in on underage girls while they're getting changed so that you can take a peak would make you a pedo. Just like someone downloading naked pictures of underage girls from the internet is a pedo. You don't have to rape children to be a pedo. Trump has bragged about walking in on underage girls getting changed therefore he is a pedo. On June 21 2026 19:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:
[quote]You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. Trump has been recorded bragging about and that has been corroborated by others My only response to all of this is a question: What was your issue with the Snopes article saying that this wasn't true? I clicked LightSpectra's link to see if it said anything new, and lo and behold, it disputes the claim was that he bragged about walking in on underage people undressing. Snopes goes through it to say "misrepresented a real comment he made to [Howard] Stern." Then some stuff on a dispute after Buzzfeed started asking about that particular event ~20 years later, 11 not recalling that it happened, 5 did, and most of the 11 were dubious or dismissed the possibility. And now I read two people saying Snopes got it wrong without a discussion, so what's this about? The adult stuff evidence is overwhelming, and On June 21 2026 17:08 PoulsenB wrote:
Being friends with Epstein should automatically disqualify a person from being considered respectable, not to mention from holding any public office, in my opinion. thoroughly disqualifying if you have a basic moral requirement to vote someone into public office. Everybody is perfectly welcome to infer that Trump is a pedophile from the cheating with adults and his behavior with adults and that time he called his daughter hot and he was friends with Epstein before the first indictment. As long as we're all clear on how that impacts saying "we know," and nobody is going around spouting misinformation like "he bragged" or Trump "constantly go to parties on pedo island." You can read back to posts where there's outright disinformation weaved among exaggeration, interpretation bias, poor evidence, and real facts. I'm interested in that final category, and a little quizzical at people that swallow all of those categories in one go. So, here's the link dyhb is talking about: https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/07/08/trump-beauty-pageants-dressing-room/He did read far enough to get to "The above quote in which he appeared to brag about walking in on Miss Teen USA contestants misrepresented a real comment he made to Stern." But if you just go a bit further in this same article: "It is clear that Trump himself boasted about entering contestant dressing rooms, but those comments occurred during a discussion about Miss USA and Miss Universe, not Miss Teen USA. However, real allegations from former contestants of both Miss Teen USA and Miss USA bolstered claims that Trump behaved inappropriately." So Trump brags about walking in on nude contestants, and he's been accused of doing so to teen contestants, but he didn't explicitly brag about doing so to teen contestants. From this dyhb has concluded "the snopes link that says the exact opposite of your claim". To put this into perspective, it's like saying someone isn't a "rapist-murderer because the people they raped and the people they murdered are different people" and extrapolating that into "they are neither a rapist or murderer." LightSpectra may not have finished reading my post, which said "Then some stuff on a dispute after Buzzfeed started asking about that particular event ~20 years later, 11 not recalling that it happened, 5 did, and most of the 11 were dubious or dismissed the possibility." I skipped over it Yes. It shows I read the article, and skipping over what I said lets you say I didn't read the article. So what you’re saying is that it is really important for people to put the qualifier of “is extremely likely” to have had sex with underage girls and trafficked women. Rather than has had sex with underage girls and trafficked women. I look forward to you using level of precision in all your posts. + Show Spoiler +
I think it's just "I know" and "he definitely went in to underage miss USA pageant changing rooms to see naked kids" instead of "I believe" and "There are reports that he (went into underage etcetc)".
It's a thin level of truth monitor, but fair enough imo.
-e- LightSpectra are you under contractual obligation to be a dick, or is it just for funsies? I'm inclined to believe the same applies here.
Can you please stop mocking and gawking with people and stick to political discussion? This really does nothing but muck up the thread.
|
Sir, this is a Wendy's.
Billyboy asked a simple Yes or No question.
|
|
|
On June 22 2026 02:38 Billyboy wrote:But will they protect her from Trump? And his friends since he is clueless about their behavior …. Now a sicko like you would likely be proud if Trump assaulted your daughter. So it was not directed at you. You live in a world where all those around him are awful, but he just didn’t know. And given how many terrible people he’s hired (his words and many firings) , plus his friend group being so bad. You would think even with your twisted world view, that you would be like, man he’s great but what a poor judge of character and he probably shouldn’t be in a position where he makes important hiring decisions. But somehow your brain allows you to both hold that it’s never his fault just everyone around him is evil, incompetent or both AND he’s a really good judge of people and only hires the bestest.
The best hope one has for things taking a turn for the sane is the VP. He's not just fitter than his predecessor, he also has a history that makes him more likely to wrap his head around sensible issues. But he's also in the position where he has to stick to his bosses' game while he has to.
|
On June 22 2026 01:50 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 00:34 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 23:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 21 2026 22:50 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 21:55 farvacola wrote:
The ease with which people conclude Trump is a piece of trash is really not a mystery. It’s all right there and easy to see, and while folks might rush to some of the premises underlying that notion, the same can be said for virtually every central body of believers in a popular idea.
Telling anti trumpers to be more careful with their criticisms is silly relative to pretty much every mobilized political idea in the US. I agree with you that "mobilized political ideas" weave in lies pretty regularly for political benefit, and I want to stress that this is a partisan-agnostic. Yes, people of any political affiliation can and do lie and spread misinformation, but this comes off as an equal-offender / all-sides-are-just-as-guilty statement, when in reality the frequency and severity of lies and misinformation are incredibly lopsided towards Republicans. It's not even close. It's like saying that climbing Mount Everest and climbing a flight of stairs are comparable because they're both increases in elevation. I fail to see how correcting misinformation that *helps my own side if everybody believed it* is unsayable because some portion of the audience is set off by anything that sounds like both-sides-ism. That's a license for lying. It might explain how these lies propagate, by making people too scared of being accused of both-sides-ism or Trump apologia for the crime of pointing it out. On June 21 2026 23:51 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2026 23:28 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 22:56 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2026 21:40 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 16:26 Geiko wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On June 21 2026 14:20 dyhb wrote:
[quote]They really gotta do a better job with fake signatures. Seriously, it's not even good as a fake gag.
You ever revisit the snopes link that says the exact opposite of your claim, or did that one get memory holed like the rest of the Trump=pedo stack? I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. But you didn't answer the questions right above what was quoted ? I wish more people would answer difficult questions instead of finding one sentence in a post to nitpick and ignoring the rest. That Trump was friends with Epstein doesn't automatically mean he's a pedo. However when you look at the evidence as a whole (likes walking in on underdressed minors, On June 21 2026 17:31 RenSC2 wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On June 21 2026 14:20 dyhb wrote:
[quote]They really gotta do a better job with fake signatures. Seriously, it's not even good as a fake gag.
You ever revisit the snopes link that says the exact opposite of your claim, or did that one get memory holed like the rest of the Trump=pedo stack? I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. Hi, purposely walking in on underage girls while they're getting changed so that you can take a peak would make you a pedo. Just like someone downloading naked pictures of underage girls from the internet is a pedo. You don't have to rape children to be a pedo. Trump has bragged about walking in on underage girls getting changed therefore he is a pedo. On June 21 2026 19:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:On June 21 2026 14:20 dyhb wrote:
[quote]They really gotta do a better job with fake signatures. Seriously, it's not even good as a fake gag.
You ever revisit the snopes link that says the exact opposite of your claim, or did that one get memory holed like the rest of the Trump=pedo stack? I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. Trump has been recorded bragging about and that has been corroborated by others My only response to all of this is a question: What was your issue with the Snopes article saying that this wasn't true? I clicked LightSpectra's link to see if it said anything new, and lo and behold, it disputes the claim was that he bragged about walking in on underage people undressing. Snopes goes through it to say "misrepresented a real comment he made to [Howard] Stern." Then some stuff on a dispute after Buzzfeed started asking about that particular event ~20 years later, 11 not recalling that it happened, 5 did, and most of the 11 were dubious or dismissed the possibility. And now I read two people saying Snopes got it wrong without a discussion, so what's this about? The adult stuff evidence is overwhelming, and On June 21 2026 17:08 PoulsenB wrote:
Being friends with Epstein should automatically disqualify a person from being considered respectable, not to mention from holding any public office, in my opinion. thoroughly disqualifying if you have a basic moral requirement to vote someone into public office. Everybody is perfectly welcome to infer that Trump is a pedophile from the cheating with adults and his behavior with adults and that time he called his daughter hot and he was friends with Epstein before the first indictment. As long as we're all clear on how that impacts saying "we know," and nobody is going around spouting misinformation like "he bragged" or Trump "constantly go to parties on pedo island." You can read back to posts where there's outright disinformation weaved among exaggeration, interpretation bias, poor evidence, and real facts. I'm interested in that final category, and a little quizzical at people that swallow all of those categories in one go. So, here's the link dyhb is talking about: https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/07/08/trump-beauty-pageants-dressing-room/He did read far enough to get to "The above quote in which he appeared to brag about walking in on Miss Teen USA contestants misrepresented a real comment he made to Stern." But if you just go a bit further in this same article: "It is clear that Trump himself boasted about entering contestant dressing rooms, but those comments occurred during a discussion about Miss USA and Miss Universe, not Miss Teen USA. However, real allegations from former contestants of both Miss Teen USA and Miss USA bolstered claims that Trump behaved inappropriately." So Trump brags about walking in on nude contestants, and he's been accused of doing so to teen contestants, but he didn't explicitly brag about doing so to teen contestants. From this dyhb has concluded "the snopes link that says the exact opposite of your claim". To put this into perspective, it's like saying someone isn't a "rapist-murderer because the people they raped and the people they murdered are different people" and extrapolating that into "they are neither a rapist or murderer." LightSpectra may not have finished reading my post, which said "Then some stuff on a dispute after Buzzfeed started asking about that particular event ~20 years later, 11 not recalling that it happened, 5 did, and most of the 11 were dubious or dismissed the possibility." I skipped over it Yes. It shows I read the article, and skipping over what I said lets you say I didn't read the article. So what you’re saying is that it is really important for people to put the qualifier of “is extremely likely” to have had sex with underage girls and trafficked women. Rather than has had sex with underage girls and trafficked women. I look forward to you using level of precision in all your posts. My focus is on the facts. Everybody here can come to their own independent conclusion on what the facts make them think is likely or extremely likely or suspicious. You can use the word "likely" instead of stuff like "know" and "multiple eyewitnesses" and "he bragged" and "constantly go to parties on pedo island." I might just say you're lying out of prejudice or ignorance if you make your strong presumptions sound like established facts. If they're just what you surmise in the absence of facts, there's plenty of words in the English language for that.
I'll give you an example. I'm going to presume that people aside from Fleetfeet have zero problem with LightSpectra quoting facts with links that aren't facts. If DarkPlasmaBall never responds, I'm going to assume that correcting LightSpectra will run into either "this comes off as an equal-offender / all-sides-are-just-as-guilty statement" or "only Trump apologists would ever interrogate the facts" and people either agree with DarkPlasmaBall or don't disagree enough to warrant a response. Those are presumptions and assumptions that I'm basing on facts like "At the time of this post, nobody but I responded to glaring factual inaccuracies in an earlier LightSpectra's post" and "At the time of this post, DarkPlasmaBall has not offered a reply concerning the license for lying, and potentially propagating lies by making people too scared from backlash to point them out."
|
On June 22 2026 03:02 Vivax wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 02:38 Billyboy wrote:But will they protect her from Trump? And his friends since he is clueless about their behavior …. Now a sicko like you would likely be proud if Trump assaulted your daughter. So it was not directed at you. You live in a world where all those around him are awful, but he just didn’t know. And given how many terrible people he’s hired (his words and many firings) , plus his friend group being so bad. You would think even with your twisted world view, that you would be like, man he’s great but what a poor judge of character and he probably shouldn’t be in a position where he makes important hiring decisions. But somehow your brain allows you to both hold that it’s never his fault just everyone around him is evil, incompetent or both AND he’s a really good judge of people and only hires the bestest. The best hope one has for things taking a turn for the sane is the VP. He's not just fitter than his predecessor, he also has a history that makes him more likely to wrap his head around sensible issues. But he's also in the position where he has to stick to his bosses' game while he has to.
One of my favorite brain broken held beliefs of these morons is that Covid was a Chinese bio weapon, that is completely harmless, but you need ivermectin to fix it, a pharmaceutical, but don’t take vaccines from smaller pharma, because those are the bad pharma and doctors are all in on it, but if you get really sick do go to those same doctors for treatment.
Pwning dum libs all day.
|
On June 22 2026 03:06 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 01:50 Billyboy wrote:On June 22 2026 00:34 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 23:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 21 2026 22:50 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 21:55 farvacola wrote:
The ease with which people conclude Trump is a piece of trash is really not a mystery. It’s all right there and easy to see, and while folks might rush to some of the premises underlying that notion, the same can be said for virtually every central body of believers in a popular idea.
Telling anti trumpers to be more careful with their criticisms is silly relative to pretty much every mobilized political idea in the US. I agree with you that "mobilized political ideas" weave in lies pretty regularly for political benefit, and I want to stress that this is a partisan-agnostic. Yes, people of any political affiliation can and do lie and spread misinformation, but this comes off as an equal-offender / all-sides-are-just-as-guilty statement, when in reality the frequency and severity of lies and misinformation are incredibly lopsided towards Republicans. It's not even close. It's like saying that climbing Mount Everest and climbing a flight of stairs are comparable because they're both increases in elevation. I fail to see how correcting misinformation that *helps my own side if everybody believed it* is unsayable because some portion of the audience is set off by anything that sounds like both-sides-ism. That's a license for lying. It might explain how these lies propagate, by making people too scared of being accused of both-sides-ism or Trump apologia for the crime of pointing it out. On June 21 2026 23:51 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2026 23:28 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 22:56 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2026 21:40 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 16:26 Geiko wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:
[quote]I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. But you didn't answer the questions right above what was quoted ? I wish more people would answer difficult questions instead of finding one sentence in a post to nitpick and ignoring the rest. That Trump was friends with Epstein doesn't automatically mean he's a pedo. However when you look at the evidence as a whole (likes walking in on underdressed minors, On June 21 2026 17:31 RenSC2 wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:
[quote]I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. Hi, purposely walking in on underage girls while they're getting changed so that you can take a peak would make you a pedo. Just like someone downloading naked pictures of underage girls from the internet is a pedo. You don't have to rape children to be a pedo. Trump has bragged about walking in on underage girls getting changed therefore he is a pedo. On June 21 2026 19:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:
[quote]I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. Trump has been recorded bragging about and that has been corroborated by others My only response to all of this is a question: What was your issue with the Snopes article saying that this wasn't true? I clicked LightSpectra's link to see if it said anything new, and lo and behold, it disputes the claim was that he bragged about walking in on underage people undressing. Snopes goes through it to say "misrepresented a real comment he made to [Howard] Stern." Then some stuff on a dispute after Buzzfeed started asking about that particular event ~20 years later, 11 not recalling that it happened, 5 did, and most of the 11 were dubious or dismissed the possibility. And now I read two people saying Snopes got it wrong without a discussion, so what's this about? The adult stuff evidence is overwhelming, and On June 21 2026 17:08 PoulsenB wrote:
Being friends with Epstein should automatically disqualify a person from being considered respectable, not to mention from holding any public office, in my opinion. thoroughly disqualifying if you have a basic moral requirement to vote someone into public office. Everybody is perfectly welcome to infer that Trump is a pedophile from the cheating with adults and his behavior with adults and that time he called his daughter hot and he was friends with Epstein before the first indictment. As long as we're all clear on how that impacts saying "we know," and nobody is going around spouting misinformation like "he bragged" or Trump "constantly go to parties on pedo island." You can read back to posts where there's outright disinformation weaved among exaggeration, interpretation bias, poor evidence, and real facts. I'm interested in that final category, and a little quizzical at people that swallow all of those categories in one go. So, here's the link dyhb is talking about: https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/07/08/trump-beauty-pageants-dressing-room/He did read far enough to get to "The above quote in which he appeared to brag about walking in on Miss Teen USA contestants misrepresented a real comment he made to Stern." But if you just go a bit further in this same article: "It is clear that Trump himself boasted about entering contestant dressing rooms, but those comments occurred during a discussion about Miss USA and Miss Universe, not Miss Teen USA. However, real allegations from former contestants of both Miss Teen USA and Miss USA bolstered claims that Trump behaved inappropriately." So Trump brags about walking in on nude contestants, and he's been accused of doing so to teen contestants, but he didn't explicitly brag about doing so to teen contestants. From this dyhb has concluded "the snopes link that says the exact opposite of your claim". To put this into perspective, it's like saying someone isn't a "rapist-murderer because the people they raped and the people they murdered are different people" and extrapolating that into "they are neither a rapist or murderer." LightSpectra may not have finished reading my post, which said "Then some stuff on a dispute after Buzzfeed started asking about that particular event ~20 years later, 11 not recalling that it happened, 5 did, and most of the 11 were dubious or dismissed the possibility." I skipped over it Yes. It shows I read the article, and skipping over what I said lets you say I didn't read the article. So what you’re saying is that it is really important for people to put the qualifier of “is extremely likely” to have had sex with underage girls and trafficked women. Rather than has had sex with underage girls and trafficked women. I look forward to you using level of precision in all your posts. My focus is on the facts. Everybody here can come to their own independent conclusion on what the facts make them think is likely or extremely likely or suspicious. You can use the word "likely" instead of stuff like "know" and "multiple eyewitnesses" and "he bragged" and "constantly go to parties on pedo island." I might just say you're lying out of prejudice or ignorance if you make your strong presumptions sound like established facts. If they're just what you surmise in the absence of facts, there's plenty of words in the English language for that. I'll give you an example. I'm going to presume that people aside from Fleetfeet have zero problem with LightSpectra quoting facts with links that aren't facts. If DarkPlasmaBall never responds, I'm going to assume that correcting LightSpectra will run into either "this comes off as an equal-offender / all-sides-are-just-as-guilty statement" or "only Trump apologists would ever interrogate the facts" and people either agree with DarkPlasmaBall or don't disagree enough to warrant a response. Those are presumptions and assumptions that I'm basing on facts like "At the time of this post, nobody but I responded to glaring factual inaccuracies in an earlier LightSpectra's post" and "At the time of this post, DarkPlasmaBall has not offered a reply concerning the license for lying, and potentially propagating lies by making people too scared from backlash to point them out."
Like I said, I look forward to this level of diligence in your posts and you holding people of like minded beliefs to these standard's as well.
|
On June 22 2026 02:33 KwarK wrote:I think the word you’re looking for is patriots. And to paraphrase from the discussion around Charlie Kirk's overdose, whether or not I think it's okay, Trump thinks it's okay. Trump famously advocated for Second Amendment enthusiasts to remove a president they disagreed with from office.
What date do you plan to become a patriot? I want to make a note to check the newspapers.
|
United States44122 Posts
On June 22 2026 03:16 oBlade wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 02:33 KwarK wrote:I think the word you’re looking for is patriots. And to paraphrase from the discussion around Charlie Kirk's overdose, whether or not I think it's okay, Trump thinks it's okay. Trump famously advocated for Second Amendment enthusiasts to remove a president they disagreed with from office. What date do you plan to become a patriot? I want to make a note to check the newspapers.
I don't love America nearly enough to do that. Hell, I don't even like America.
|
On June 22 2026 03:09 Billyboy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 03:02 Vivax wrote:On June 22 2026 02:38 Billyboy wrote:But will they protect her from Trump? And his friends since he is clueless about their behavior …. Now a sicko like you would likely be proud if Trump assaulted your daughter. So it was not directed at you. You live in a world where all those around him are awful, but he just didn’t know. And given how many terrible people he’s hired (his words and many firings) , plus his friend group being so bad. You would think even with your twisted world view, that you would be like, man he’s great but what a poor judge of character and he probably shouldn’t be in a position where he makes important hiring decisions. But somehow your brain allows you to both hold that it’s never his fault just everyone around him is evil, incompetent or both AND he’s a really good judge of people and only hires the bestest. The best hope one has for things taking a turn for the sane is the VP. He's not just fitter than his predecessor, he also has a history that makes him more likely to wrap his head around sensible issues. But he's also in the position where he has to stick to his bosses' game while he has to. One of my favorite brain broken held beliefs of these morons is that Covid was a Chinese bio weapon, that is completely harmless, but you need ivermectin to fix it, a pharmaceutical, but don’t take vaccines from smaller pharma, because those are the bad pharma and doctors are all in on it, but if you get really sick do go to those same doctors for treatment. Pwning dum libs all day.
Most early studies on covid came out of China (including studies that propagated chloroquine use). When they had to prepare for it in the west before being able to study the disease, it was the best they had to go with.
Since most were at home browsing news and social media, it was easy for outdated stuff to make the rounds.
It's more the fault of sensationalism being a business model in times where it had an expectedly good reach.
|
On June 22 2026 03:06 dyhb wrote:Show nested quote +On June 22 2026 01:50 Billyboy wrote:On June 22 2026 00:34 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 23:51 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 21 2026 22:50 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 21:55 farvacola wrote:
The ease with which people conclude Trump is a piece of trash is really not a mystery. It’s all right there and easy to see, and while folks might rush to some of the premises underlying that notion, the same can be said for virtually every central body of believers in a popular idea.
Telling anti trumpers to be more careful with their criticisms is silly relative to pretty much every mobilized political idea in the US. I agree with you that "mobilized political ideas" weave in lies pretty regularly for political benefit, and I want to stress that this is a partisan-agnostic. Yes, people of any political affiliation can and do lie and spread misinformation, but this comes off as an equal-offender / all-sides-are-just-as-guilty statement, when in reality the frequency and severity of lies and misinformation are incredibly lopsided towards Republicans. It's not even close. It's like saying that climbing Mount Everest and climbing a flight of stairs are comparable because they're both increases in elevation. I fail to see how correcting misinformation that *helps my own side if everybody believed it* is unsayable because some portion of the audience is set off by anything that sounds like both-sides-ism. That's a license for lying. It might explain how these lies propagate, by making people too scared of being accused of both-sides-ism or Trump apologia for the crime of pointing it out. On June 21 2026 23:51 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2026 23:28 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 22:56 LightSpectra wrote:On June 21 2026 21:40 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 16:26 Geiko wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:
[quote]I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. But you didn't answer the questions right above what was quoted ? I wish more people would answer difficult questions instead of finding one sentence in a post to nitpick and ignoring the rest. That Trump was friends with Epstein doesn't automatically mean he's a pedo. However when you look at the evidence as a whole (likes walking in on underdressed minors, On June 21 2026 17:31 RenSC2 wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:
[quote]I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. Hi, purposely walking in on underage girls while they're getting changed so that you can take a peak would make you a pedo. Just like someone downloading naked pictures of underage girls from the internet is a pedo. You don't have to rape children to be a pedo. Trump has bragged about walking in on underage girls getting changed therefore he is a pedo. On June 21 2026 19:55 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On June 21 2026 15:36 dyhb wrote:On June 21 2026 15:23 EnDeR_ wrote:
[quote]I'm not getting involved in this weird back and forth you guys are doing. You don't have to get involved if you don't want to. I wish more people would do that before they dress up Trump was friends with Jeffrey Epstein as Trump was a pedo. It would be less embarrassing and it would involve much less backtracking. Trump has been recorded bragging about and that has been corroborated by others My only response to all of this is a question: What was your issue with the Snopes article saying that this wasn't true? I clicked LightSpectra's link to see if it said anything new, and lo and behold, it disputes the claim was that he bragged about walking in on underage people undressing. Snopes goes through it to say "misrepresented a real comment he made to [Howard] Stern." Then some stuff on a dispute after Buzzfeed started asking about that particular event ~20 years later, 11 not recalling that it happened, 5 did, and most of the 11 were dubious or dismissed the possibility. And now I read two people saying Snopes got it wrong without a discussion, so what's this about? The adult stuff evidence is overwhelming, and On June 21 2026 17:08 PoulsenB wrote:
Being friends with Epstein should automatically disqualify a person from being considered respectable, not to mention from holding any public office, in my opinion. thoroughly disqualifying if you have a basic moral requirement to vote someone into public office. Everybody is perfectly welcome to infer that Trump is a pedophile from the cheating with adults and his behavior with adults and that time he called his daughter hot and he was friends with Epstein before the first indictment. As long as we're all clear on how that impacts saying "we know," and nobody is going around spouting misinformation like "he bragged" or Trump "constantly go to parties on pedo island." You can read back to posts where there's outright disinformation weaved among exaggeration, interpretation bias, poor evidence, and real facts. I'm interested in that final category, and a little quizzical at people that swallow all of those categories in one go. So, here's the link dyhb is talking about: https://www.snopes.com/news/2024/07/08/trump-beauty-pageants-dressing-room/He did read far enough to get to "The above quote in which he appeared to brag about walking in on Miss Teen USA contestants misrepresented a real comment he made to Stern." But if you just go a bit further in this same article: "It is clear that Trump himself boasted about entering contestant dressing rooms, but those comments occurred during a discussion about Miss USA and Miss Universe, not Miss Teen USA. However, real allegations from former contestants of both Miss Teen USA and Miss USA bolstered claims that Trump behaved inappropriately." So Trump brags about walking in on nude contestants, and he's been accused of doing so to teen contestants, but he didn't explicitly brag about doing so to teen contestants. From this dyhb has concluded "the snopes link that says the exact opposite of your claim". To put this into perspective, it's like saying someone isn't a "rapist-murderer because the people they raped and the people they murdered are different people" and extrapolating that into "they are neither a rapist or murderer." LightSpectra may not have finished reading my post, which said "Then some stuff on a dispute after Buzzfeed started asking about that particular event ~20 years later, 11 not recalling that it happened, 5 did, and most of the 11 were dubious or dismissed the possibility." I skipped over it Yes. It shows I read the article, and skipping over what I said lets you say I didn't read the article. So what you’re saying is that it is really important for people to put the qualifier of “is extremely likely” to have had sex with underage girls and trafficked women. Rather than has had sex with underage girls and trafficked women. I look forward to you using level of precision in all your posts. My focus is on the facts. Everybody here can come to their own independent conclusion on what the facts make them think is likely or extremely likely or suspicious. You can use the word "likely" instead of stuff like "know" and "multiple eyewitnesses" and "he bragged" and "constantly go to parties on pedo island." I might just say you're lying out of prejudice or ignorance if you make your strong presumptions sound like established facts. If they're just what you surmise in the absence of facts, there's plenty of words in the English language for that. I'll give you an example. I'm going to presume that people aside from Fleetfeet have zero problem with LightSpectra quoting facts with links that aren't facts. If DarkPlasmaBall never responds, I'm going to assume that correcting LightSpectra will run into either "this comes off as an equal-offender / all-sides-are-just-as-guilty statement" or "only Trump apologists would ever interrogate the facts" and people either agree with DarkPlasmaBall or don't disagree enough to warrant a response. Those are presumptions and assumptions that I'm basing on facts like "At the time of this post, nobody but I responded to glaring factual inaccuracies in an earlier LightSpectra's post" and "At the time of this post, DarkPlasmaBall has not offered a reply concerning the license for lying, and potentially propagating lies by making people too scared from backlash to point them out."
I thought my last response was sufficient; I don't really have anything else to add. Did you ever want to give an example of someone equating being Epstein's friend with automatically being a pedophile?
|
dyhb really going with "yeah only 5 eye-witnesses saw him sneaking in the miss teen USA dressing room so we can't really say with certainty that he was there. In fact, y'all are liars for saying he did."
|
On June 22 2026 04:37 Geiko wrote:
dyhb really going with "yeah only 5 eye-witnesses saw him sneaking in the miss teen USA dressing room so we can't really say with certainty that he was there. In fact, y'all are liars for saying he did."
And right after dyhb made accusatory remarks at unnamed TL posters but won't substantiate his claim.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
