My thoughts on Trump
- Thread starter Zoot Allures
- Start date
Your point? It was a joke based on the nonsense and bullshit your cult leader started by calling any organization that calls out his bullshit fake news. He is freaking out at Fox for having Jessica and other liberals on the air and running ads for the DEMS. So tell me, is FOX supposed to be Trump's propaganda outlet?
This Trump-Fallon episode was shot in 2015. I don't know about the legality under Federal Election law, but it seemed to be an obvious SNL endorsement the weekend prior to the final vote.but but it was okay when Trump did it in the past in the Jim Fallon Show:
Lighten up Francis. I'm just responding to your declaration regarding CNN. I didn't even mention Fox News.
The clip has impact because it was a raw and candid response by the Colbert audience.
I'm not upset buttercup! They laughed at the way it was sarcastically presented by the host.
it is not so much to the timing but whether NBC should have also invited Trump on it. No doubt if they did then Tump's campaign would have advised him not to participate in the SNL.
However, Fox should also have been called into account when their two hosts Hannity and Pirro actually campaigned for Trump on his Rally. Hannity also was involved in a Trump promotional video. NBC apparently justified the Harris appearance by airing the NASCAR Playoff race with a recorded message from Trump in the equivalent time that it allocated for Harris!!
Some Trump allies are 'completely exasperated' over how he's closing his campaign
I would prefer Hannity not campaign for Trump. However, it's more a style point rather than a point of principle.
Hannity showing bias for Trump on his show is no different than Maddow showing obvious bias towards Harris. It's expected that they are not objective news anchors. It's kind of like watching Kamala Harris on The View. You could have confused it for a Harris campaign rally.
Last edited:
Who said they weren't a legit news organization?
I said they were biased. One only has to watch it for a couple of hours to observe the constant Trump battery by their hosts and panels. Are you seriously denying that?
Why are liberals so mentally ill nowadays? I remember 20 years ago when they were to the smart people.
So let me get this straight.
You stand by the words you said except the one part I objected to?
Fine.
I didn't object to the bit about civil being different from criminal, I objected to the false implication about it not being sexual assault, which you have removed in your rephrase.
All good.
It was defined legally as sexual abuse. I can go back and add to my post if you're concerned about it. You might have also noticed that I added the part about twenty-seven years because again it was fact relating to the case.
You're flying by the main point that the legal language is important.
I do want to say anyone here who says Trump is a rapist is perfectly entitled to their opinion. When they start using inaccurate legal language to make their point, it becomes a point of contention.
PS- Why can't we just say the Carroll trial was a "job interview"?
Last edited:
Are you seriously denying that Trump is a liar who lies constantly and needs to be fact-checked? DO you deny that he said the media should act as a bullet screen on his behalf and do you acknowledge it was lying trump that began calling MSM fake news because they fact checked him and deservingly so.
You claiming it was abuse and NOT assault was the entirety of what I objected to.
You have fixed that in your update by not trying to say it wasn't assault any more.
That's fine with me.
On the contrary.
I was the one who was insisting language was important.
You have corrected your language.
It's all good.
Which was exactly my point.
You were using inaccurate legal language, and trying to imply something with it.
You've stopped.
I'm good.
Because it wasn't.PS- Why can't we just say the Carroll trial was a "job interview"?
Why undermine your point about legal language like that for a weak joke that isn't even relevant?
The moment a news organization becomes an opinion source, they are no longer a news organization.
btw last time I showed you a fact-checked article about his accomplishments you threw it away.
I guess facts only count when they jive with your narrative?
The why can't we just call it a "job interview" comment is sarcasm. Anyone with a semblance of recall can see the similarities between Jean Carroll and Christine Blasey Ford.
If I remember correctly, he didn't accomplish much, and I don't remember you producing a link.
He did play a part in Warp Speed for the vaccine which the media did give me credit for but he can't claim that as a victory because of his dumb anti-vax base.
He made a tax cut to help himself, his family and rich buds,
He never built the wall
He raised the deficit
He caused the death of many of his voters with hiding how serious COVID was, and lost him the election, to be honest
I can go on and on without even looking for a link
