An attorney for former President Donald Trump outlined a six-point plan for overturning the 2020 presidential election results in a memo to then-Vice President Mike Pence, according to new reporting by journalists atThe Washington Postand CNN.
Link
Link to Memo in Entirety
So a statement made in a book written by a "journalist" who works for Washington Post that doesn't have any actually hard evidence to back it? Yeah, that sounds very much "WaPo" to me. When WaPo is using a WaPo "journalist" as evidence in a WaPo story, I take it with an even larger than usual grain of salt.
A shame it won't lead anywhere, most likely. Trump has an army of lawyers and has managed to avoid sexual assault charges, paying his employees and contractors, litigation due to crappy landlord practices, and worse.
Plus you have his bootlicking supporters (see second response in thread) who will deny, spin, and "whatabout" everything until the end of time.
The thing that get's me, still to this day, is that Trump is just a terrible person through and through. I don't see how anyone finds that appealing enough to vote into the office of the presidency. Or maybe that is the point?
So a statement made in a book written by a "journalist" who works for Washington Post that doesn't have any actually hard evidence to back it? Yeah, that sounds very much "WaPo" to me. When WaPo is using a WaPo "journalist" as evidence in a WaPo story, I take it with an even larger than usual grain of salt.
Let's just venture into hypothetical territory for a second: if all that was written about Trump and his cohorts was true, how would it make you feel? Would it change your opinion? Would Trump still have your support and/or vote?
So a statement made in a book written by a "journalist" who works for Washington Post that doesn't have any actually hard evidence to back it? Yeah, that sounds very much "WaPo" to me. When WaPo is using a WaPo "journalist" as evidence in a WaPo story, I take it with an even larger than usual grain of salt.
Let's just venture into hypothetical territory for a second: if all that was written about Trump and his cohorts was true, how would it make you feel? Would it change your opinion? Would Trump still have your support and/or vote?
Yes, let's venture into hypotheticals. Fox News writes an article claiming it has evidence Joe Biden inappropriate touched a young girl. Their source for the story is a book written by Tucker Carlson and no other evidence is shown. Do you buy it?
Washington Post isn't credible news. And the fact their only evidence is a book written by one of their employees would give an intelligent, critical thinker some red flags on the story. The problem is, I wouldn't consider WaPo's usual crowd to be all that intelligent, or free thinking, so they get away with it.
And I've told you before I'm not a fan of Trump's. But I am even less of a fan of obvious hit pieces written by well known fake news outlets.
So a statement made in a book written by a "journalist" who works for Washington Post that doesn't have any actually hard evidence to back it? Yeah, that sounds very much "WaPo" to me. When WaPo is using a WaPo "journalist" as evidence in a WaPo story, I take it with an even larger than usual grain of salt.
Let's just venture into hypothetical territory for a second: if all that was written about Trump and his cohorts was true, how would it make you feel? Would it change your opinion? Would Trump still have your support and/or vote?
Yes, let's venture into hypotheticals. Fox News writes an article claiming it has evidence Joe Biden inappropriate touched a young girl. Their source for the story is a book written by Tucker Carlson and no other evidence is shown. Do you buy it?
Washington Post isn't credible news. And the fact their only evidence is a book written by one of their employees would give an intelligent, critical thinker some red flags on the story. The problem is, I wouldn't consider WaPo's usual crowd to be all that intelligent, or free thinking, so they get away with it.
And I've told you before I'm not a fan of Trump's. But I am even less of a fan of obvious hit pieces written by well known fake news outlets.
You didn't answer my question really, but I'll just assume you'd be indifferent as your last sentence indicates.
Equating Tucker Carlson, an entertainer and self-declared liar, to actual reporters and journalists (left leaning they might be, but they aren't entertainers or liars), is just laughable though. I see what you're trying to do, the comparison you're trying to make....but c'mon.
I mean come on man you can do better than that.
So a statement made in a book written by a "journalist" who works for Washington Post that doesn't have any actually hard evidence to back it? Yeah, that sounds very much "WaPo" to me. When WaPo is using a WaPo "journalist" as evidence in a WaPo story, I take it with an even larger than usual grain of salt.
Let's just venture into hypothetical territory for a second: if all that was written about Trump and his cohorts was true, how would it make you feel? Would it change your opinion? Would Trump still have your support and/or vote?
Yes, let's venture into hypotheticals. Fox News writes an article claiming it has evidence Joe Biden inappropriate touched a young girl. Their source for the story is a book written by Tucker Carlson and no other evidence is shown. Do you buy it?
Washington Post isn't credible news. And the fact their only evidence is a book written by one of their employees would give an intelligent, critical thinker some red flags on the story. The problem is, I wouldn't consider WaPo's usual crowd to be all that intelligent, or free thinking, so they get away with it.
And I've told you before I'm not a fan of Trump's. But I am even less of a fan of obvious hit pieces written by well known fake news outlets.
You didn't answer my question really, but I'll just assume you'd be indifferent as your last sentence indicates.
Equating Tucker Carlson, an entertainer and self-declared liar, to actual reporters and journalists (left leaning they might be, but they aren't entertainers or liars), is just laughable though. I see what you're trying to do, the comparison you're trying to make....but c'mon.
I mean come on man you can do better than that.
Oh, so Washington Post only has actual reporters and groups you associate with the other side are not, so when Washington Post sites one of their own reporters as a source it's credible? Is that seriously what you are saying?
What's fucking laughable is you think a known, highly political source using itself as evidence in an article is credible, and good journalism. GTFO with that shit. There is NOTHING to indicate WaPo is any more credible than Fox News. Both are pretty low on that spectrum.
@mrbojangles25: Ill answer for him! He will never accept any negative criticism on Trump and its all fake news. Washington Post isnt fake news, he just slaps thst BS label his side slaps on anything they dont like.
It'll be fun to see what comes out of the Dominion lawsuit.
I mean, I know Trump loved to destroy his paper trail while in office, but I'd be shocked if there aren't a few memos showing the White House knew there was no evidenxe of election fraud.
@mrbojangles25: Ill answer for him! He will never accept any negative criticism on Trump and its all fake news. Washington Post isnt fake news, he just slaps thst BS label his side slaps on anything they dont like.
Washington Post is absolutely fake news. It's face news no critically thinking, intelligent person would take at face value without actual evidence to back it up unless the garbage they were pedaling is something their viewers desperately want to believe it was true. You only believe the story is credible because you want to believe it to be true, not because there's any actual evidence to it.
So a statement made in a book written by a "journalist" who works for Washington Post that doesn't have any actually hard evidence to back it? Yeah, that sounds very much "WaPo" to me. When WaPo is using a WaPo "journalist" as evidence in a WaPo story, I take it with an even larger than usual grain of salt.
in sert.. if its not from right news sources... all lies!
This should be reason number 1 why Trump and his ilk are unsuited for governance. They were comfortable destroying the very backbone of our democracy, which unsurprisingly, doesn't upset very many of his supporters. They're all complicit as far as I'm concerned. Can you imagine if a democratic president had tried to do the same? The GOP is party over country 100%. The fact that nearly no Republicans voted to impeach is proof enough of this.
I mean come on man you can do better than that.
He can't and he won't. And he has an agenda he has to push.
It'll be fun to see what comes out of the Dominion lawsuit.
I mean, I know Trump loved to destroy his paper trail while in office, but I'd be shocked if there aren't a few memos showing the White House knew there was no evidenxe of election fraud.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trump-campaign-fake-voting-machine-claim_n_614a3daee4b001718341de85
Memos for this are already showing up in court documents. They all new as early as November that there was no evidence.
So a statement made in a book written by a "journalist" who works for Washington Post that doesn't have any actually hard evidence to back it? Yeah, that sounds very much "WaPo" to me. When WaPo is using a WaPo "journalist" as evidence in a WaPo story, I take it with an even larger than usual grain of salt.
Let's just venture into hypothetical territory for a second: if all that was written about Trump and his cohorts was true, how would it make you feel? Would it change your opinion? Would Trump still have your support and/or vote?
Yes, let's venture into hypotheticals. Fox News writes an article claiming it has evidence Joe Biden inappropriate touched a young girl. Their source for the story is a book written by Tucker Carlson and no other evidence is shown. Do you buy it?
Washington Post isn't credible news. And the fact their only evidence is a book written by one of their employees would give an intelligent, critical thinker some red flags on the story. The problem is, I wouldn't consider WaPo's usual crowd to be all that intelligent, or free thinking, so they get away with it.
And I've told you before I'm not a fan of Trump's. But I am even less of a fan of obvious hit pieces written by well known fake news outlets.
Well, that's a nice way to deflect from his question, but to answer your own...
You act as if this story is written in exclusivity. Trump has been taking every initiative he can grasp to push his fraud narrative. He's hammered home lie after lie, incessantly, brought his supporters to a fervor which boiled over and resulted in Jan. 6th, and has effectively coalesced the Republican Party around delusion in his desire to overturn the 2020 election. Yet according to you, that is all irrelevant, and we're to disregard a story that Trump is.......acting like Trump in the attempt to subvert democracy simply to appeal to a genetic fallacy?
Yes, what a reach and a granting of the benefit of the doubt to that "fake news" source, eh? It's not like we have actual EVIDENCE FROM THE PAST TEN MONTHS NOW to lend credence to this story. You think if Biden had a proven, demonstrable history of inappropriately touching young girls that Tucker Carlson's new story, per your analogy, might not be just a little more credible?
No, of course it wouldn't, because that'd go against the agenda you're attempting to push by ignoring broader context that very easily lends it credibility.
GTFO with this nonsense.
@MirkoS77: The funniest part is that you are having this conversation with a guy that pushed that narrative here.
@eoten: Your hypocrisy is almost too much. You just call anything you disagree with fake news and go on your merry way with no proof it is. According to you all news that isnt conservative is fake.
So a statement made in a book written by a "journalist" who works for Washington Post that doesn't have any actually hard evidence to back it? Yeah, that sounds very much "WaPo" to me. When WaPo is using a WaPo "journalist" as evidence in a WaPo story, I take it with an even larger than usual grain of salt.
Let's just venture into hypothetical territory for a second: if all that was written about Trump and his cohorts was true, how would it make you feel? Would it change your opinion? Would Trump still have your support and/or vote?
Yes, let's venture into hypotheticals. Fox News writes an article claiming it has evidence Joe Biden inappropriate touched a young girl. Their source for the story is a book written by Tucker Carlson and no other evidence is shown. Do you buy it?
Washington Post isn't credible news. And the fact their only evidence is a book written by one of their employees would give an intelligent, critical thinker some red flags on the story. The problem is, I wouldn't consider WaPo's usual crowd to be all that intelligent, or free thinking, so they get away with it.
And I've told you before I'm not a fan of Trump's. But I am even less of a fan of obvious hit pieces written by well known fake news outlets.
Well, that's a nice way to deflect from his question, but to answer your own...
You act as if this story is written in exclusivity. Trump has been taking every initiative he can grasp to push his fraud narrative. He's hammered home lie after lie, incessantly, brought his supporters to a fervor which boiled over and resulted in Jan. 6th, and has effectively coalesced the Republican Party around delusion in his desire to overturn the 2020 election. Yet according to you, that is all irrelevant, and we're to disregard a story that Trump is.......acting like Trump in the attempt to subvert democracy simply to appeal to a genetic fallacy?
Yes, what a reach and a granting of the benefit of the doubt to that "fake news" source, eh? It's not like we have actual EVIDENCE FROM THE PAST TEN MONTHS NOW to lend credence to this story. You think if Biden had a proven, demonstrable history of inappropriately touching young girls that Tucker Carlson's new story, per your analogy, might not be just a little more credible?
No, of course it wouldn't, because that'd go against the agenda you're attempting to push by ignoring broader context that very easily lends it credibility.
GTFO with this nonsense.
So what you are saying is that because you already believe it's true, you don't actually care if the article has any legitimate sources or not. Let me know when WaPo has more than WaPo as a source for evidence. Until then I will continue to laugh at you people who fall for this shit over and over again.
I mean come on man you can do better than that.
He can't and he won't. And he has an agenda he has to push.
You're right, but I keep hoping. Much to my chagrin.
Probably has something to do with my inability to comprehend how someone can sit there, type out something they know is wrong, but somehow justifies it because it supports their agenda, and then proceed to live with themselves.
i'm confused. is @eoten arguing ( without evidence ) that the eastman memo itself is fraudlent? that the wapo authors just fabricated the thing in its entirety?
where is the "fake" in the fake news here?
@comp_atkins: Yes. Its fake because….Well….Because.
So a statement made in a book written by a "journalist" who works for Washington Post that doesn't have any actually hard evidence to back it? Yeah, that sounds very much "WaPo" to me. When WaPo is using a WaPo "journalist" as evidence in a WaPo story, I take it with an even larger than usual grain of salt.
Let's just venture into hypothetical territory for a second: if all that was written about Trump and his cohorts was true, how would it make you feel? Would it change your opinion? Would Trump still have your support and/or vote?
Yes, let's venture into hypotheticals. Fox News writes an article claiming it has evidence Joe Biden inappropriate touched a young girl. Their source for the story is a book written by Tucker Carlson and no other evidence is shown. Do you buy it?
Washington Post isn't credible news. And the fact their only evidence is a book written by one of their employees would give an intelligent, critical thinker some red flags on the story. The problem is, I wouldn't consider WaPo's usual crowd to be all that intelligent, or free thinking, so they get away with it.
And I've told you before I'm not a fan of Trump's. But I am even less of a fan of obvious hit pieces written by well known fake news outlets.
Well, that's a nice way to deflect from his question, but to answer your own...
You act as if this story is written in exclusivity. Trump has been taking every initiative he can grasp to push his fraud narrative. He's hammered home lie after lie, incessantly, brought his supporters to a fervor which boiled over and resulted in Jan. 6th, and has effectively coalesced the Republican Party around delusion in his desire to overturn the 2020 election. Yet according to you, that is all irrelevant, and we're to disregard a story that Trump is.......acting like Trump in the attempt to subvert democracy simply to appeal to a genetic fallacy?
Yes, what a reach and a granting of the benefit of the doubt to that "fake news" source, eh? It's not like we have actual EVIDENCE FROM THE PAST TEN MONTHS NOW to lend credence to this story. You think if Biden had a proven, demonstrable history of inappropriately touching young girls that Tucker Carlson's new story, per your analogy, might not be just a little more credible?
No, of course it wouldn't, because that'd go against the agenda you're attempting to push by ignoring broader context that very easily lends it credibility.
GTFO with this nonsense.
So what you are saying is that because you already believe it's true, you don't actually care if the article has any legitimate sources or not. Let me know when WaPo has more than WaPo as a source for evidence. Until then I will continue to laugh at you people who fall for this shit over and over again.
No. What I’m saying is that it is silly to discount such a story that Trump had been acting like Trump attempting to overturn the election (as he has been doing for well over a year now) on the basis of a genetic fallacy for one news outlet. You are ignoring a mountain of evidence…..no, proof consisting of Trump’s actions and statements that directly substantiate what the WaPo is claiming. If there is a benefit of the doubt to be granted, it is not on Trump’s side given his behavior. But then again as Ghost_Of_Phobos stated, you were claiming the election rigged after Trump lost, which until you correct me otherwise, I’ll assume is a position you still hold. So no, I’d say it’s because you think fraud is true which is why you dismiss this under such pretense.
Aside, since when do you grant credence to a story by substantiation? You don’t do that with Covid, where nearly the entirety of the scientific community and numerous news outlets are in agreement….then you simply appeal to tinfoil hat territory so you can lump them all under one conspiracy in dismissal.
There’s no difference here. Genetic fallacy slung against the singular, or a vast conspiracy slung against the collective….it’s simply a matter of degrees not yet attained in crossing such a threshold.
Let's just venture into hypothetical territory for a second: if all that was written about Trump and his cohorts was true, how would it make you feel? Would it change your opinion? Would Trump still have your support and/or vote?
Yes, let's venture into hypotheticals. Fox News writes an article claiming it has evidence Joe Biden inappropriate touched a young girl. Their source for the story is a book written by Tucker Carlson and no other evidence is shown. Do you buy it?
Washington Post isn't credible news. And the fact their only evidence is a book written by one of their employees would give an intelligent, critical thinker some red flags on the story. The problem is, I wouldn't consider WaPo's usual crowd to be all that intelligent, or free thinking, so they get away with it.
And I've told you before I'm not a fan of Trump's. But I am even less of a fan of obvious hit pieces written by well known fake news outlets.
Well, that's a nice way to deflect from his question, but to answer your own...
You act as if this story is written in exclusivity. Trump has been taking every initiative he can grasp to push his fraud narrative. He's hammered home lie after lie, incessantly, brought his supporters to a fervor which boiled over and resulted in Jan. 6th, and has effectively coalesced the Republican Party around delusion in his desire to overturn the 2020 election. Yet according to you, that is all irrelevant, and we're to disregard a story that Trump is.......acting like Trump in the attempt to subvert democracy simply to appeal to a genetic fallacy?
Yes, what a reach and a granting of the benefit of the doubt to that "fake news" source, eh? It's not like we have actual EVIDENCE FROM THE PAST TEN MONTHS NOW to lend credence to this story. You think if Biden had a proven, demonstrable history of inappropriately touching young girls that Tucker Carlson's new story, per your analogy, might not be just a little more credible?
No, of course it wouldn't, because that'd go against the agenda you're attempting to push by ignoring broader context that very easily lends it credibility.
GTFO with this nonsense.
So what you are saying is that because you already believe it's true, you don't actually care if the article has any legitimate sources or not. Let me know when WaPo has more than WaPo as a source for evidence. Until then I will continue to laugh at you people who fall for this shit over and over again.
No. What I’m saying is that it is silly to discount such a story that Trump had been acting like Trump attempting to overturn the election (as he has been doing for well over a year now) on the basis of a genetic fallacy for one news outlet. You are ignoring a mountain of evidence…..no, proof consisting of Trump’s actions and statements that directly substantiate what the WaPo is claiming. If there is a benefit of the doubt to be granted, it is not on Trump’s side given his behavior. But then again as Ghost_Of_Phobos stated, you were claiming the election rigged after Trump lost, which until you correct me otherwise, I’ll assume is a position you still hold. So no, I’d say it’s because you think fraud is true which is why you dismiss this under such pretense.
Aside, since when do you grant credence to a story by substantiation? You don’t do that with Covid, where nearly the entirety of the scientific community and numerous news outlets are in agreement….then you simply appeal to tinfoil hat territory so you can lump them all under one conspiracy in dismissal.
There’s no difference here. Genetic fallacy slung against the singular, or a vast conspiracy slung against the collective….it’s simply a matter of degrees not yet attained in crossing such a threshold.
No, I discount the theory because there's no evidence to support it and plenty of evidence of WaPo pulling crap out of their ass for clicks and views. So do you have any evidence besides a WaPo reporter's say so? If not, then we're done here, but it won't be the last time you fall for a fake news hit piece from the same source.
Yes, let's venture into hypotheticals. Fox News writes an article claiming it has evidence Joe Biden inappropriate touched a young girl. Their source for the story is a book written by Tucker Carlson and no other evidence is shown. Do you buy it?
Washington Post isn't credible news. And the fact their only evidence is a book written by one of their employees would give an intelligent, critical thinker some red flags on the story. The problem is, I wouldn't consider WaPo's usual crowd to be all that intelligent, or free thinking, so they get away with it.
And I've told you before I'm not a fan of Trump's. But I am even less of a fan of obvious hit pieces written by well known fake news outlets.
Well, that's a nice way to deflect from his question, but to answer your own...
You act as if this story is written in exclusivity. Trump has been taking every initiative he can grasp to push his fraud narrative. He's hammered home lie after lie, incessantly, brought his supporters to a fervor which boiled over and resulted in Jan. 6th, and has effectively coalesced the Republican Party around delusion in his desire to overturn the 2020 election. Yet according to you, that is all irrelevant, and we're to disregard a story that Trump is.......acting like Trump in the attempt to subvert democracy simply to appeal to a genetic fallacy?
Yes, what a reach and a granting of the benefit of the doubt to that "fake news" source, eh? It's not like we have actual EVIDENCE FROM THE PAST TEN MONTHS NOW to lend credence to this story. You think if Biden had a proven, demonstrable history of inappropriately touching young girls that Tucker Carlson's new story, per your analogy, might not be just a little more credible?
No, of course it wouldn't, because that'd go against the agenda you're attempting to push by ignoring broader context that very easily lends it credibility.
GTFO with this nonsense.
So what you are saying is that because you already believe it's true, you don't actually care if the article has any legitimate sources or not. Let me know when WaPo has more than WaPo as a source for evidence. Until then I will continue to laugh at you people who fall for this shit over and over again.
No. What I’m saying is that it is silly to discount such a story that Trump had been acting like Trump attempting to overturn the election (as he has been doing for well over a year now) on the basis of a genetic fallacy for one news outlet. You are ignoring a mountain of evidence…..no, proof consisting of Trump’s actions and statements that directly substantiate what the WaPo is claiming. If there is a benefit of the doubt to be granted, it is not on Trump’s side given his behavior. But then again as Ghost_Of_Phobos stated, you were claiming the election rigged after Trump lost, which until you correct me otherwise, I’ll assume is a position you still hold. So no, I’d say it’s because you think fraud is true which is why you dismiss this under such pretense.
Aside, since when do you grant credence to a story by substantiation? You don’t do that with Covid, where nearly the entirety of the scientific community and numerous news outlets are in agreement….then you simply appeal to tinfoil hat territory so you can lump them all under one conspiracy in dismissal.
There’s no difference here. Genetic fallacy slung against the singular, or a vast conspiracy slung against the collective….it’s simply a matter of degrees not yet attained in crossing such a threshold.
No, I discount the theory because there's no evidence to support it…..
…what theory is that?
No. What I’m saying is that it is silly to discount such a story that Trump had been acting like Trump attempting to overturn the election (as he has been doing for well over a year now) on the basis of a genetic fallacy for one news outlet. You are ignoring a mountain of evidence…..no, proof consisting of Trump’s actions and statements that directly substantiate what the WaPo is claiming. If there is a benefit of the doubt to be granted, it is not on Trump’s side given his behavior. But then again as Ghost_Of_Phobos stated, you were claiming the election rigged after Trump lost, which until you correct me otherwise, I’ll assume is a position you still hold. So no, I’d say it’s because you think fraud is true which is why you dismiss this under such pretense.
Aside, since when do you grant credence to a story by substantiation? You don’t do that with Covid, where nearly the entirety of the scientific community and numerous news outlets are in agreement….then you simply appeal to tinfoil hat territory so you can lump them all under one conspiracy in dismissal.
There’s no difference here. Genetic fallacy slung against the singular, or a vast conspiracy slung against the collective….it’s simply a matter of degrees not yet attained in crossing such a threshold.
No, I discount the theory because there's no evidence to support it and plenty of evidence of WaPo pulling crap out of their ass for clicks and views. So do you have any evidence besides a WaPo reporter's say so? If not, then we're done here, but it won't be the last time you fall for a fake news hit piece from the same source.
Except it exists.
No. What I’m saying is that it is silly to discount such a story that Trump had been acting like Trump attempting to overturn the election (as he has been doing for well over a year now) on the basis of a genetic fallacy for one news outlet. You are ignoring a mountain of evidence…..no, proof consisting of Trump’s actions and statements that directly substantiate what the WaPo is claiming. If there is a benefit of the doubt to be granted, it is not on Trump’s side given his behavior. But then again as Ghost_Of_Phobos stated, you were claiming the election rigged after Trump lost, which until you correct me otherwise, I’ll assume is a position you still hold. So no, I’d say it’s because you think fraud is true which is why you dismiss this under such pretense.
Aside, since when do you grant credence to a story by substantiation? You don’t do that with Covid, where nearly the entirety of the scientific community and numerous news outlets are in agreement….then you simply appeal to tinfoil hat territory so you can lump them all under one conspiracy in dismissal.
There’s no difference here. Genetic fallacy slung against the singular, or a vast conspiracy slung against the collective….it’s simply a matter of degrees not yet attained in crossing such a threshold.
No, I discount the theory because there's no evidence to support it and plenty of evidence of WaPo pulling crap out of their ass for clicks and views. So do you have any evidence besides a WaPo reporter's say so? If not, then we're done here, but it won't be the last time you fall for a fake news hit piece from the same source.
Except it exists.
The amusing thing is, numerous news outlets are reporting this, not just the WaPo.
I suppose it’s now a conspiracy.
No. What I’m saying is that it is silly to discount such a story that Trump had been acting like Trump attempting to overturn the election (as he has been doing for well over a year now) on the basis of a genetic fallacy for one news outlet. You are ignoring a mountain of evidence…..no, proof consisting of Trump’s actions and statements that directly substantiate what the WaPo is claiming. If there is a benefit of the doubt to be granted, it is not on Trump’s side given his behavior. But then again as Ghost_Of_Phobos stated, you were claiming the election rigged after Trump lost, which until you correct me otherwise, I’ll assume is a position you still hold. So no, I’d say it’s because you think fraud is true which is why you dismiss this under such pretense.
Aside, since when do you grant credence to a story by substantiation? You don’t do that with Covid, where nearly the entirety of the scientific community and numerous news outlets are in agreement….then you simply appeal to tinfoil hat territory so you can lump them all under one conspiracy in dismissal.
There’s no difference here. Genetic fallacy slung against the singular, or a vast conspiracy slung against the collective….it’s simply a matter of degrees not yet attained in crossing such a threshold.
No, I discount the theory because there's no evidence to support it and plenty of evidence of WaPo pulling crap out of their ass for clicks and views. So do you have any evidence besides a WaPo reporter's say so? If not, then we're done here, but it won't be the last time you fall for a fake news hit piece from the same source.
Except it exists.
The amusing thing is, numerous news outlets are reporting this, not just the WaPo.
I suppose it’s now a conspiracy.
Do you think multiple outlets reporting on it and citing Washington Post as their sources makes the source material more credible? So multiple outlets reported on it. Big fucking deal. Have any of them provided any sources other than the same Washington Post "journalists" cited in the initial story? They haven't.
No, I discount the theory because there's no evidence to support it and plenty of evidence of WaPo pulling crap out of their ass for clicks and views. So do you have any evidence besides a WaPo reporter's say so? If not, then we're done here, but it won't be the last time you fall for a fake news hit piece from the same source.
Except it exists.
The amusing thing is, numerous news outlets are reporting this, not just the WaPo.
I suppose it’s now a conspiracy.
Do you think multiple outlets reporting on it and citing Washington Post as their sources makes the source material more credible? So multiple outlets reported on it. Big fucking deal. Have any of them provided any sources other than the same Washington Post "journalists" cited in the initial story? They haven't.
As I'm sure you're aware, the source is from the book "Peril", written by Woodward and Costa, the latter of which has won many awards for journalism. So what if he's in WaPo's employ? Something tells me no matter where this story arose, you're going to attempt to discredit it.
.....to what end? What are you trying to achieve by invalidating the source of this story? To prove that Trump hasn't tried to subvert democracy and our elections? Is that really what you're after?
Let's assume as a hypothetical that this story is entirely bogus. What do you gain?
@comp_atkins: Yes. Its fake because….Well….Because.
it's fake because....well.... it's terribly inconvenient to my locked-in ideology it if were true.
so it's fake.
Except it exists.
The amusing thing is, numerous news outlets are reporting this, not just the WaPo.
I suppose it’s now a conspiracy.
Do you think multiple outlets reporting on it and citing Washington Post as their sources makes the source material more credible? So multiple outlets reported on it. Big fucking deal. Have any of them provided any sources other than the same Washington Post "journalists" cited in the initial story? They haven't.
As I'm sure you're aware, the source is from the book "Peril", written by Woodward and Costa, the latter of which has won many awards for journalism. So what if he's in WaPo's employ? Something tells me no matter where this story arose, you're going to attempt to discredit it.
.....to what end? What are you trying to achieve by invalidating the source of this story? To prove that Trump hasn't tried to subvert democracy and our elections? Is that really what you're after?
Let's assume as a hypothetical that this story is entirely bogus. What do you gain?
Do you have a point? Citing awards won by a couple WaPo journalists doesn't make their evidence-lacking statements any more credible. Either there's evidence to back their statements, or their isn't, and WaPo is just running a hit piece as per usual. If these journalists are so AAA then they should understand the importance of having evidence. Without evidence, this is just propaganda.
@eoten: All you have been saying is washington post is trash, you have yet to provide one single shred of evidence. If you have nothing then this is just grade f trolling.
@eoten: All you have been saying is washington post is trash, you have yet to provide one single shred of evidence. If you have nothing then this is just grade f trolling.
Let's also not forget general standards and practices; if this was untrue, they could face some serious lawsuits for libel and/or slander (forgot which one it is).
No doubt Trump will saber rattle and threaten but at the end of the day if the words stand on the page and Trump can't take them down, it's not necessarily a lie.
Newspapers would go out of business if they lied a fraction of what people thought they did.
And, again for emphasis, I'm not discounting bias, I'm just referring to outright lies.
@eoten: All you have been saying is washington post is trash, you have yet to provide one single shred of evidence. If you have nothing then this is just grade f trolling.
Let's also not forget general standards and practices; if this was untrue, they could face some serious lawsuits for libel and/or slander (forgot which one it is).
No doubt Trump will saber rattle and threaten but at the end of the day if the words stand on the page and Trump can't take them down, it's not necessarily a lie.
Newspapers would go out of business if they lied a fraction of what people thought they did.
And, again for emphasis, I'm not discounting bias, I'm just referring to outright lies.
You mean like when Washington Post got caught pushing bullshit before and had to pay out $250 million to Nick Sandman? But they're so credible, right? A quarter billion dollars for pushing fake news to attack a kid. But they're credible to you?
So a statement made in a book written by a "journalist" who works for Washington Post that doesn't have any actually hard evidence to back it? Yeah, that sounds very much "WaPo" to me. When WaPo is using a WaPo "journalist" as evidence in a WaPo story, I take it with an even larger than usual grain of salt.
WaPo is mostly credible and has won many awards for incredible fact finding stories, regardless of your opinion.
Sure they have had to issue retractions and corrections, but at a low rate. You're really putting them in a wrong spot. They are about even with NYT or BBC. They are above CNN and MSNBC. They are below NPR though.
You trying to equate them with a 100% fake information source like Infowars or Breitbart is cute though. Not that it will ever work. You're just getting beat up by everyone ITT for even remotely suggesting it.
that doesn't have any actually hard evidence to back it?
This article in question is evidence. Any actual evidence yet? At all?
without evidence, this is just propaganda.
Either there's evidence to back their statements, or their isn't, and WaPo is just running a hit piece as per usual.
The memo is linked in the article page. It was also Published by CNN. The memo is in the original post of this thread. That is literally their evidence. Did you even click the link?
The document in question is in their procession and has been shown to us, the one that this entire fiasco is about. You're squirming.
BTW,
Eastman Memo: Law Professor Says Trump Attorney Abused His Work (businessinsider.com)
Except it exists.
The amusing thing is, numerous news outlets are reporting this, not just the WaPo.
I suppose it’s now a conspiracy.
Do you think multiple outlets reporting on it and citing Washington Post as their sources makes the source material more credible? So multiple outlets reported on it. Big fucking deal. Have any of them provided any sources other than the same Washington Post "journalists" cited in the initial story? They haven't.
As I'm sure you're aware, the source is from the book "Peril", written by Woodward and Costa, the latter of which has won many awards for journalism. So what if he's in WaPo's employ? Something tells me no matter where this story arose, you're going to attempt to discredit it.
.....to what end? What are you trying to achieve by invalidating the source of this story? To prove that Trump hasn't tried to subvert democracy and our elections? Is that really what you're after?
Let's assume as a hypothetical that this story is entirely bogus. What do you gain?
I don't get his purpose ITT.
We already know Trump tried to steal the election. It's not even a conspiracy theory, it's all out in the open. We know this from Woodward (I sure as shit know Eoten won't question his credibility). We literally have recorded phone calls lmao. This document, which Eoten has not refuted, surprises no one.
Why even bother defending this with idiotic Q-Anon shitposting when we already know what Trump tried to do?
Yeah, Q-Anon shitposting. I'm not the one pretending information from the outlet that lost a $250 billion dollar defamation suit is credible. That's not shitposting, it's reality. You really, desperately just want to believe their propaganda is fact, but there's nothing to suggest it actually is.
@eoten: All you have been saying is washington post is trash, you have yet to provide one single shred of evidence. If you have nothing then this is just grade f trolling.
Let's also not forget general standards and practices; if this was untrue, they could face some serious lawsuits for libel and/or slander (forgot which one it is).
No doubt Trump will saber rattle and threaten but at the end of the day if the words stand on the page and Trump can't take them down, it's not necessarily a lie.
Newspapers would go out of business if they lied a fraction of what people thought they did.
And, again for emphasis, I'm not discounting bias, I'm just referring to outright lies.
You mean like when Washington Post got caught pushing bullshit before and had to pay out $250 million to Nick Sandman? But they're so credible, right? A quarter billion dollars for pushing fake news to attack a kid. But they're credible to you?
That's exactly the point. They did it, were caught, and had to pay a massive fine. They are less likely to do that again as a result.
I never said they don't lie, they're just less likely to lie out of habit compared to an entertainment-masquerading-as-news network like FOX, OANN, and so on.
@eoten: All you have been saying is washington post is trash, you have yet to provide one single shred of evidence. If you have nothing then this is just grade f trolling.
Let's also not forget general standards and practices; if this was untrue, they could face some serious lawsuits for libel and/or slander (forgot which one it is).
No doubt Trump will saber rattle and threaten but at the end of the day if the words stand on the page and Trump can't take them down, it's not necessarily a lie.
Newspapers would go out of business if they lied a fraction of what people thought they did.
And, again for emphasis, I'm not discounting bias, I'm just referring to outright lies.
You mean like when Washington Post got caught pushing bullshit before and had to pay out $250 million to Nick Sandman? But they're so credible, right? A quarter billion dollars for pushing fake news to attack a kid. But they're credible to you?
That's exactly the point. They did it, were caught, and had to pay a massive fine. They are less likely to do that again as a result.
I never said they don't lie, they're just less likely to lie out of habit compared to an entertainment-masquerading-as-news network like FOX, OANN, and so on.
You think that makes them less likely? You think getting busted for pedaling fake news to push a political agenda is suddenly going to make them want to be honest? If you want to believe the story that damn bad that you're going to excuse them and pretend they're credible, go for it. But don't pretend more critically thinking adults are going to do the same.
If they want me to believe their bullshit story, they can provide some kind of actual evidence to back up their claim besides "our journalist said so."
Except it exists.
The amusing thing is, numerous news outlets are reporting this, not just the WaPo.
I suppose it’s now a conspiracy.
Do you think multiple outlets reporting on it and citing Washington Post as their sources makes the source material more credible? So multiple outlets reported on it. Big fucking deal. Have any of them provided any sources other than the same Washington Post "journalists" cited in the initial story? They haven't.
As I'm sure you're aware, the source is from the book "Peril", written by Woodward and Costa, the latter of which has won many awards for journalism. So what if he's in WaPo's employ? Something tells me no matter where this story arose, you're going to attempt to discredit it.
.....to what end? What are you trying to achieve by invalidating the source of this story? To prove that Trump hasn't tried to subvert democracy and our elections? Is that really what you're after?
Let's assume as a hypothetical that this story is entirely bogus. What do you gain?
I don't get his purpose ITT.
We already know Trump tried to steal the election. It's not even a conspiracy theory, it's all out in the open. We know this from Woodward (I sure as shit know Eoten won't question his credibility). We literally have recorded phone calls lmao. This document, which Eoten has not refuted, surprises no one.
Why even bother defending this with idiotic Q-Anon shitposting when we already know what Trump tried to do?
Yeah I’m not sure what he’s after.
Even if one doesn’t believe in fraud, Trump’s own actions since November have made very clear his intentions to overturn the election. We have mountains of irrefutable evidence from the horse’s own mouth, yet one more attempt to do so is a step too far so it’s suddenly bullshit and all appeals to a genetic fallacy. If this story turned out to indeed be a complete fabrication, it would leave Trump in no greater standing than he is currently.
Seems to me he’s not so much defending Trump here as he is attempting to validate his own beliefs of fake news and the gullibility of those he sees believing them. If only he realized how just as gullible he is in granting the benefit of the doubt to a proven conman in doing so.
The amusing thing is, numerous news outlets are reporting this, not just the WaPo.
I suppose it’s now a conspiracy.
Do you think multiple outlets reporting on it and citing Washington Post as their sources makes the source material more credible? So multiple outlets reported on it. Big fucking deal. Have any of them provided any sources other than the same Washington Post "journalists" cited in the initial story? They haven't.
As I'm sure you're aware, the source is from the book "Peril", written by Woodward and Costa, the latter of which has won many awards for journalism. So what if he's in WaPo's employ? Something tells me no matter where this story arose, you're going to attempt to discredit it.
.....to what end? What are you trying to achieve by invalidating the source of this story? To prove that Trump hasn't tried to subvert democracy and our elections? Is that really what you're after?
Let's assume as a hypothetical that this story is entirely bogus. What do you gain?
I don't get his purpose ITT.
We already know Trump tried to steal the election. It's not even a conspiracy theory, it's all out in the open. We know this from Woodward (I sure as shit know Eoten won't question his credibility). We literally have recorded phone calls lmao. This document, which Eoten has not refuted, surprises no one.
Why even bother defending this with idiotic Q-Anon shitposting when we already know what Trump tried to do?
Yeah I’m not sure what he’s after.
Even if one doesn’t believe in fraud, Trump’s own actions since November have made very clear his intentions to overturn the election. We have mountains of irrefutable evidence from the horse’s own mouth, yet one more attempt to do so is a step too far so it’s suddenly bullshit and all appeals to a genetic fallacy. If this story turned out to indeed be a complete fabrication, it would leave Trump in no greater standing than he is currently.
Seems to me he’s not so much defending Trump here as he is attempting to validate his own beliefs of fake news and the gullibility of those he sees believing them. If only he realized how just as gullible he is in granting the benefit of the doubt to a proven conman in doing so.
What I am after is simple. Proof of the claims made by a confirmed to be uncredible media outlet.
What I am after is simple. Proof of the claims made by a confirmed to be uncredible media outlet.
WaPo is mostly factual,
Washington Post - Media Bias/Fact Check (mediabiasfactcheck.com)
I don't think there is a single publication on Earth that hasn't made at least 1 mistake or correction. You're entire basis is flawed.
@eoten: Let it go. They arent a confirmed uncredible outlet because you said so and you havent proven jack shit.
@eoten: Whatever you say champ. *Rubs head* You only brought that up after getting pounded on everything else. You still havent backed your claims up, you are just using one thing to forever discredit something you dont like.
@eoten: Whatever you say champ. *Rubs head* You only brought that up after getting pounded on everything else. You still havent backed your claims up, you are just using one thing to forever discredit something you dont like.
Are you denying they lost a quarter billion in a defamation suit pedaling fake news? Tell me, is that true or not?
@eoten: Whatever you say champ. *Rubs head* You only brought that up after getting pounded on everything else. You still havent backed your claims up, you are just using one thing to forever discredit something you dont like.
Are you denying they lost a quarter billion in a defamation suit pedaling fake news? Tell me, is that true or not?
You tell us. Did they? Please provide a source.
@eoten: You mean that bullshit money grab by some stupid teen? Nobody cares. Are you denying you are just trying to use that in order to discredit something you dont like?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment