🇳🇱
Funny, remember how all the liberals complained about the heinous injustice of Trump using executive orders excessively.... well surprise surprise Biden issued many times over what Trump issued in executive orders already. In fact in just one day in office Biden had already twice the number of executive orders as Trump had after 2 weeks... funny dont hear a single liberal complaining, not one... its almost as if they were just complaining because it was a republican doing it and they have complete double standards... nah that couldnt be it right?
🏳️🌈
@freemo they both have double standards though
@louiscouture Both? Both who? We are only talking about liberals.. who is the other group your talking about and why is it relevant?
@freemo oh because republicans literally impeached over a blowjob but seems to be totally fine with encouraging a coup,
@louiscouture Not true.. they impeached because a president lied, under oath, and in court... thats pretty serious. The fact that he used his position to take advantage of a woman isnt the best but it is not what he was impeached over.
Trump on the other hand never planned or asked anyone to do a coup. The moment any violence broke out he immediately was on TV asking everyone to go home and asking for there to be no violence.. he did not start, encourage, or perpetuate a coup.
Now what Trump was legitimately guilty of was being a fucking nut job conspiracy theorist and spreading that bullshit and others believed him... Which is totally legitimate to dislike Trump for that, but it is hardly illegal.
@louiscouture I've read this before.. does not disprove a single thing i just said.
@louiscouture it also is a horrifically inaccurate account (to be expected considering the source which is pretty bias)... but thats another matter.
@freemo ok so now that’s fake news too?
@freemo ok,
1) what’s the agenda, where is the agenda? Trump lost and Biden won and there was next to no voter fraud, and if there was, it wouldn’t change the outcome.
2) Facts aren’t opinions, you don’t have two side of the same fact.
> what’s the agenda, where is the agenda?
What do youmean where is the agenda. Its literally right in the **title**
> ...of how Trump incited...
The very title says "We have decided that Trump is guilty of inciting a coup and here are all the reasons you should agree with our agenda to sell that perspective.
Any news agency that had even a smidgen of journalistic integrity would not be telling you how to interpret the days events they would simply give an unbiased accounted of what happened, both supporting and contradicting any such agenda, and let the reader decide what conclusions to draw.
The article has no intention of doing that, they have a very clear agenda and the article is cherry picked and written to try to support that agenda, so very clear bias. Not a single mention of any counter points that might lead someone to disagree. That is **not** journalism.
> Trump lost and Biden won and there was next to no voter fraud, and if there was, it wouldn’t change the outcome.
Yes he did... your point?
> Facts aren’t opinions, you don’t have two side of the same fact.
What someone deems to be a fact (true) or not **is** a matter of opinion.. your opinion is that trump tried to incite a coup, you have the **opinion** that that is a fact. I am of the opinion he did not try to start a coup, I declare that him intentionally inciting a coup is **not** a fact.
There may be only one of those two facts which are true, but your opinion as to which of them that they are, and my opinion are still opinions. Saying "Facts dont care about your opinions" is a pretty dumb argument considering as it doesnt do anything to help support that your opinion of what is fact is any more valid than mine.
@louiscouture @freemo
not really.. yes there is a lot of disinformation, and that disinformation poured in from both sides, so neither gets to play the good guy in that respect, though I admit liberals are a bit more guilty of that the last 4 years, but when a democrat president is in the republicans are the more guilty party in that regard.. either way both sides did it in spades.
There were virtually no illegal election changes. All changes were perfectly legal except for one that I know of which effected about a dozen votes total and didnt appear to be an attempt at rigging an election so much as just a poorly constructed law that was overthrown. For the most part there is no evidence to back up your stance in any meaningful way.
Election laws were illegally changed to allow for votes to be counted without signature checks, by getting judges to change them, instead of going through the state legislature. This is illegal under the Pennsylvania Constitution, and I'm sure the same for Georgia too.
Mail-in ballots is an illegitimate method voting based on the fact that it cannot be cast anonymously.
Theses illegal and unethical things affected 100s of thousands, probably millions of votes in Joe's favor.
@freemo @louiscouture
I agree, the news had shitposted like crazy trying to destroy trump and exaggerate every nonsense thing.. but the republican news does the **exact** same thing. The issue here is that the democrats just happened to do it better, and it won them an election. I am not saying that is ok, its completely unacceptable. But the republicans should have thought of that and not acted the same way and then maybe they would come out smelling like roses.
Instead as far as I can see it both sides have been completely bat shit crazy slinging shit for over a decade and the liberals just happened to out exaggerate the right and won. Yea its wrong, yea it should get the democrats abolished, but it should also get the republicans abolished for doing the same thing, they dont get a free pass just cause they did a shittier job at it.
> Election laws were illegally changed to allow for votes to be counted without signature checks, by getting judges to change them, instead of going through the state legislature. This is illegal under the Pennsylvania Constitution, and I'm sure the same for Georgia too.
You will have to site the specific examples if you want to discuss this point. I have reviewed a shit ton of law changes on this topic and have yet to find one that is illegal and effected any significant number of votes.
> Mail-in ballots is an illegitimate method voting based on the fact that it cannot be cast anonymously.
Wait what, no votes are cast anonymously, including mail in ballots. Which have been a legitimate form of voting for multiple elections now. They were used and legal when Trump won too, why were you up in arms about it then, you had 4 years to get it changed before Trump lost, after which any such efforts are too little too late.
Republicans do not control who gets banned/shadowbanned on Twitter/Facebook, nor do they control what gets trending and what doesn't. Jack and Mark do.
Same with Youtube. Google controls what get trending, it suppresses and alters view count and likes to skew its own algorithm. In this way, it suppresses content they deem wrongthink.
This is entirely different than a co-ordinated group of Republicans, or leftists for that matter, organizing together on a hashtag "campaign" or whatever social media campaign.
This explains how they changed the signature verification in pennsylvania illegally: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/12/07/levin_why_pennsylvania_mail-in-ballot_changes_are_unconstitutional.html
>no votes are cast anonymously
No, you're wrong. In a traditional lever machine voting booths, they are cast in secret. It's the same with the scanning machines. Your vote is literally anonymous. There is no way to determine who voted for who, although there are methods to determine whether you voted or not. (I mean, if you voted at the physical polling station) A secret ballot is crucial to a free and fair election. Otherwise, you can be extorted, votes can be bought, etc. You cannot cast a mail-in ballot in secret, therefor it is an illegitimate method of voting.
@freemo @louiscouture
@wishgranter14 @freemo hey nobody is forcing you to use google. There are plenty of alternative such as DuckDuckGo.
@louiscouture I wouldnt use the term Fake News.. discredited for sure though. It is clear their intention is not an objective analysis of both sides.. it is pretty obvious by the wording and context the intention is to sell a particular political perspective... is that not even obvious to you? seems pretty obvious to me, you just happen to agree with that agenda, but you suddenly become blind to the bias just because the bias is the same as yours?