Forum Replies Created
Emes: Whether or not the MSM lied about the election or not, is not material to this conversation.What is material is that they constantly slant the news to the anle they wish. White on black violence is reported on front page. Black on black violence is barely reported on. If a white cop performs an act ov violence, justified or not, it is reported as “a white policeman did… to an african american. If it is a black policeman, it is just reported as a policeman did… to a black man. As terrible as violence against minorities is, the reporting is totally unbalanced. There is no report of what the victim was doing or his criminal history. The point is that many people are jaded by anything the MSM publishes.
BTW I get no information from the right wing press. I am one of tthose that are jaded , andsaid 6 months before the election, that the situation is totally open for fraud, by either side. I just never thought that it would reach such levels of swearing by the election or swearing at the election.
Emes: Please let’s get the correct definition of “Lie”. A lie is to deliberately give over false information. My “justification” is not a lie- it is an opinion. The fact that you don’t agree with it does not make it wrong or a lie. To remain on topic, please remember that all your information about court cases, etc. comes through the media. As the OP asked, since at this point many people have difficulty believing anything the media says, Right or Left, how could we make an infomed decision?Saying the media doesnt lie is foolish, and even you would have to admit they cherry pick the news they print.
I personally don’t trust any media, right or left. There is no unbiased media, as I said before. To use the expression, anything I read in any form of media I take with a grain of salt (or the whole saltshaker). The fact that the election was not overturned does not mean that fraud wasn’t there. I personally subscribe to the school of thought that elections are “too big to fail”. Once you overturn one election, there will be doubt cast on any election, past, present, and future. Sort of like when a policeman is caught falsifying evidence. It casts doubt on all his previous cases. Threfore, unless the fraud was so widespread and evident that all parties agree that it happened, the courts should throw the cases out even with the flimsiest of excuses. I believe that in many of the court cases in this election, that is exactly what happened, amnd while I may not be happy with the overall election situation, this is a case that for the greater long term good, we have to ignore the irregularities. If a court were to actually hear the evidence at an open trial, it could not ignore the evidence. So in many cases, based on what I am seeing in the media, the courts threw the case out (refused to take the case) so as not to have to deal with the terrifying possibility of overturning an election. Sort of the courts way of pleading the fifth.
The issue in this thread is not whether there was fraud or not. The issue is, since all the info that most of us get is funneled through the MSM, how do we know what to believe? ALL media is biased. Was itt the American revolution or the American revolt(1776)? One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter- NOT referring to the current situation. I am strong minded, you are stubborn and he is a pig-headed fool. Just how we subconciously word an article reveals our inner bias.
So you are assuming that when the MSM responds that there is no proof, or that there proof is not valid, the MSM is telling the truth. Perhaps they are, but why should I believe them? This is not a court of law, that I need burden of proof. I would assume, given the last four years of Trump bashing, that that the MSM would not support anything that is pro Trump. The MSM need to earn the trust of the public before we can assume that they will have honest reporting with regard to Trump, and the whole Conservative Republican wing. The idea that the media is unbiased has not been true for as long as I can remember.
Emes: I do not know whether there was “massive voter fraud” or not. I wasn’t there, as in all the places that there are issues being raised. I also understand the concept of innocent until proven guilty. But YOU also must understand that the fact that voter fraud cannot be proven (if that is the case) does not mean it didn’t happen. It just means that we can’t act on it. We can compare it to the OJ trial. OJ was aquitted on murder, but in a subsequent civil trial was found guilty of depriving the victims of civil rights.Well, did he kill them or not? the point is that there is a level of proof needed to to have soomething be found guilty in a court of law, but not having reached that level, does not mean that it didn’t happen. As such, anyone is free to believe what he wants, but not to act on it in a harmful way. So, you choose to believe that there was no fraud, and all the claims of people that say they saw fraud are lies. And you can believe that OJ did not kill his wife. the thing is, your startng point is that there was no fraud so you can believe the media, and you know there was no fraud because the media said so, unless you have a direct source of information that bypasses the media. Remember, no proof does not mean it didn’t happen.(also does not mean it did happen)
R’ E. Mirsas means that they fear the consequences of their actions. I don’t think that in this climate the Democrats fear any consequences, the same as they accused President Trump for the last four years.
With all due respect, all I see now is that the social media platforms are using the excuse of “inciting violence” to suppress conservative free speach. One after another, they are scrambling to shut them down, and everyone is too scared to stand up to it. I am not referring to President Trump, although it is true for his rights too. There was no court that deemed him a danger, your opinions not withstanding.