I traditionally have a thread heading to the election, here we go.

Get out the popcorn for this one.

Quote

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is expected to formally announce next week he is running for president in 2024, NBC News reported Thursday, citing two sources familiar with the matter.

The governor's official entry into the Republican primary field will put him head-to-head with former President Donald Trump, the party's current frontrunner for the nomination. Trump has already spent months treating DeSantis as his primary campaign rival, thrashing him with torrents of criticism over his gubernatorial record, his political skills and his personality.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/18/desantis-plans-to-officially-announce-presidential-run-next-week.html

toomuchbaloney said:

Are you under some illusion that taped programs, like 60 Minutes, airs all of the recorded content with no editing?  What exactly do you have evidence that they "got caught" doing? 

All media is biased.  Some media is so biased they tell they audience literal lies for a political agenda and have to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.  

I get my unedited information about the candidates by watching or listening to their speeches and public appearances. 

I'm well aware of network editing. Are you under the illusion this common practice of editing is void of bias and/or agenda? 

Are you aware that depending on the political leaning of the network upto the person actually doing the editing, these networks can modify footage freely without any accountability? 

Do you really believe that these networks  not using the editing as a advantage? 

toomuchbaloney said:

Republicans didn't prove anything in those hearings about Hunter Biden except that republicans will publish nude photos of a private citizen in congress for political purposes.  They didn't prove that Biden pressured anyone in the media.  They didn't prove the providence of the harddrive. 

Now y'all are trying to suggest that there's a conspiracy to suppress reporting on the violence that swirls around Trump.  

Projection of the open attempts of Trump Republicans to instill doubt about election results or the independence of the DOJ is commonplace in the era of Trump.  

Did the FBI not warn Facebook that the laptop was "Russian disinformation' and to not allow it on its platform? Didn't the owner of FB testify to this? 

Did Twitter not suspend any account refering to it? 

Has the laptop not been deemed real? Did criminal charges not been filed due to its contents? 

LOL

 Cope harder. 

subee said:

Yep!  That's why networks have this thing called "editing."  Nevertheless, 60 Minutes gives the best live reporting on the major networks.  They even edit when reporting on wild animals, forest fires and celebrity conductors.  Imagine that.

Imagine being able to selectivy edit during an election!? I imagine that this editing is of upmost integrity and not subject to the networks or editing chief's political agenda. Not a chance   

And definitely not under the guise of "standard editing". 

toomuchbaloney said:

 

Now y'all are trying to suggest that there's a conspiracy to suppress reporting on the violence that swirls around Trump.  

 

What are you even talking about here? 

Crusades said:

Imagine being able to selectivy edit during an election!? I imagine that this editing is of upmost integrity and not subject to the networks or editing chief's political agenda. Not a chance   

And definitely not under the guise of "standard editing". 

Are you talking about the selective editing that Fox did in Hannity's interview with Trump or their standard editing of Trump's lies and word salad? 

You're probably not at all concerned about that editing, are you? 

Crusades said:

What are you even talking about here? 

Read it again.  

Crusades said:

I'm well aware of network editing. Are you under the illusion this common practice of editing is void of bias and/or agenda? 

Are you aware that depending on the political leaning of the network upto the person actually doing the editing, these networks can modify footage freely without any accountability? 

Do you really believe that these networks  not using the editing as a advantage? 

LOL

I'm not the one making claims about networks to cover up for Trump being unable to sit for a customary interview. 

You're the member making a big deal about editing that every network does.  I'm not the one shocked and concerned about this.  That was an interesting attempt to gas light me though.  

 

toomuchbaloney said:

Are you talking about the selective editing that Fox did in Hannity's interview with Trump or their standard editing of Trump's lies and word salad? 

You're probably not at all concerned about that editing, are you? 

Read it again.  

No. I was clearly talking about the media in the current discussion. 60 minutes selectively editing Harris word salad. 

Crusades said:

Did the FBI not warn Facebook that the laptop was "Russian disinformation' and to not allow it on its platform? Didn't the owner of FB testify to this? 

Did Twitter not suspend any account refering to it? 

Has the laptop not been deemed real? Did criminal charges not been filed due to its contents? 

LOL

 Cope harder. 

Yes they did.  Was that inappropriate of the FBI to be monitoring Russian disinformation during the Trump administration? Was it inappropriate for the federal government to notify relevant businesses of foreign disinformation campaigns within their business scope of influence? Do you think there were demands or threats associated with the notifications?  There weren't.  

Who cares what Twitter did relative to the laptop story?  What the congressional investigation and hearings revealed was that Twitter made its own choices when it came to suspending accounts for laptop disinformation... just like it did when it suspended the account of the former president, while he was president, because he told so many dangerous lies about Covid while he was sending our testing supplies to Putin.  

Can you show me some documentation of the pedigree of that hard-drive was after it was left at a shop? How did Giuliani get it, exactly?  

Regardless, Hunter has never been a candidate for public office.  But the GOP candidate is a felon, fraudster and rapist. 

toomuchbaloney said:

LOL

I'm not the one making claims about networks to cover up for Trump being unable to sit for a customary interview. 

You're the member making a big deal about editing that every network does.  I'm not the one shocked and concerned about this.  That was an interesting attempt to gas light me though.  

 

Outraged? Did I say I was "outraged"? It isn't an usual occurrence for left media to spin and selectively editing. It's common practice so not outrage warranted. 

So 60 minutes editing of Harris interview is because Trump is "unable to sit for a customary interview "? 

Trump's biggest weakness is his mouth. So not doing a interview was the smartest thing possible. He may be listening to his advisor more this time arround. No doubt he wanted to do it. 

Yes every network does. Most recently 60 minutes.  

Do you think these networks selectively edit without bias? LOL. 

How did I "gaslight" you? 

weird 

 

Crusades said:

What are you even talking about here? 

I made no mention of "violence surrounding Trump". So I have no idea what you are talking about. 

We were discussing media editing.  

toomuchbaloney said:

Quote

Yes they did.  Was that inappropriate of the FBI to be monitoring Russian disinformation during the Trump administration?

No. Except it was not "Russian Disinformation " was it? The question remains if the FBI knew that already or jumped to clarify it without knowing it's origins. 

 

Quote

Was it inappropriate for the federal government to notify relevant businesses of foreign disinformation campaigns within their business scope of influence? 

It was inappropriate to notify something as "foreign disinformation " when it was not. 

 

Quote

Can you show me some documentation of the pedigree of that hard-drive was after it was left at a shop? How did Giuliani get it, exactly?  

Does this change the fact the laptop was authentic and that the FBI told social media to not allow it on the platform? Do you think that when the FBI asked something like this they wouldn't "choose" to not allow it? Even by their own choice? Are you claiming that the laptop was not Hunters and was "Russian disinformation "? 

 

toomuchbaloney said:

Quote

Regardless, Hunter has never been a candidate for public office.  But the GOP candidate is a felon, fraudster and rapist. 

 

Same lane deflect. 

Crusades said:

 

Same lane deflect. 

It's pretty clear that the only things you know about the laptop are limited to the right wing spin.  You simply don't know what you don't know while believing things are important which really are not important.  

Where and how did Giuliani get involved with the hard-drive? 

Why was congress investigating a private citizen? Can you outline how investigating the affairs of a private citizen fits with the legislative function of the House of Representatives? I know that it is a big deal for a president's son to be convicted of crimes and potentially spend time in prison, but it's certainly not as unprecedented as a former president trying to overturn an election and then getting convicted of dozens of felonies.  

 

Crusades said:

I made no mention of "violence surrounding Trump". So I have no idea what you are talking about. 

We were discussing media editing.  

I mentioned violence around Trump.  Try to keep up.  Trump inspires violence, the imagery and language of violence swirls around him.