- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Do you guys actually dispute the "fake news" thing?
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:20 pm to Powerman
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:20 pm to Powerman
Sure Powerman, when I heard the story about Joe McNight's killer walking up to him and executing him outside the car as he kneeled begging for his life, and shooting him several times as he laid there, I completely believed it! 
1
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:21 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:The NY Times never reported any such thing.
Off the top of my head, I recall the NYT running a piece on how Trump hadn't paid taxes in 18 years. They somehow knew this without ever seeing his returns.
quote:I don't remember the story, and obviously it wasn't repeated as fact by anyone.
Slate accused Trump of being a Russian double agent.
quote:Never debunked. Note that Trump has yet to sue.
A bunch of grope accusers were debunked rather easily
quote:I am pretty sure they never said he was a spy. The Post is a tabloid anyway.
The New York post reported that Paul Manafort was a Russian spy with zero evidence.
ETA: Your entire post ==== Fake News
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 8:29 pm
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:22 pm to bhtigerfan
quote:You mean when they reported what a possible witness said?
Sure Powerman, when I heard the story about Joe McNight's killer walking up to him and executing him outside the car as he kneeled begging for his life, and shooting him several times as he laid there, I completely believed it!
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:24 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
You mean when they reported what a possible witness said?
quote:
However, repeating something that was said as fact with no attribution is fake news.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:27 pm to Powerman
quote:
Certainly you realize that there were a lot of fake news stories floating around social media right?
Yes, because most people on social media have zero idea how to critically analyze information. The vast majority of "fake news" I saw on my feed were from liberals. And it wasn't even close.
Not to mention the "legitimate" media exploits this same lack of critical political analysis in the masses all the time with slanted reporting and omission of context, facts, counter arguments, etc.
It's a thought up scapegoat for why the left is losing traction. Nothing more.
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 8:28 pm
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:28 pm to EZE Tiger Fan
quote:
No, just like I don't dispute "climate change".
It's tough to trust the man-made climate change advocates because anyone who offers a competing viewpoint is professionally burned at the stake. The administration (AG) and some states have gone so far as to advocate suing for "climate denial".
One problem I have with them is that, according to past predictions, it's 2016, and I should be under 100 feet of melted glacier water right now. Before that, in the 70's, they were clamoring about the incontrovertible fact that man was responsible for a coming catastrophic ice age. Settled science my arse.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:29 pm to mmcgrath
So you ask for examples, I provide them, and you dismiss them by saying that you don't remember them so they didn't happen or weren't big stories? And if the Manafort story can be dismissed due to the source, why is your ilk in a tizzy over shite being posted on facebook? My goodness.
Don't post if you are not willing to have an honest debate about the issue, but If you need me to rock your fricking world line item by line item, I certainly will.
Don't post if you are not willing to have an honest debate about the issue, but If you need me to rock your fricking world line item by line item, I certainly will.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:31 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:No. They didn't happen. You are lying about (or fail to understand) what was reported.
So you ask for examples, I provide them, and you dismiss them by saying that you don't remember them so they didn't happen or weren't big stories?
quote:Let's go. Start with your claim about the NY Times.
Don't post if you are not willing to have an honest debate about the issue, but If you need me to rock your fricking world line item by line item, I certainly will.
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 8:32 pm
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:43 pm to mmcgrath
quote:The NYTimes speculated on Trump's tax returns and made negative assertions based on their hypothetical guesses. They did so in a way leading other fake news outlets like CBS or HuffPo citing the NYT to assert he did not pay taxes. Left-leaning outlets ran headlines such as "NY Times Finds Trump’s Tax Returns, HASN’T PAID IN 20 YEARS." The NYTimes itself ran fakenews headlines like "Donald Trump Used Legally Dubious Method to Avoid Paying Taxes".
Start with your claim about the NY Times.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:48 pm to mmcgrath
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
Now. You are a typical shill so I already know that you will explain all of this away by attacking the source, pointing out speculation, or op ed. Don't bother.
This is fake news. The pattern this cycle was clear. A media outlet runs a specious or speculative piece and the cable and network news media cover it as fact. Political operatives from the campaign chirp it on cable and it even surfaces in the debates. We saw this especially with the NYT tax piece and People's groping articles. We know, thanks to Wikileaks, how the media colludes with dems and how they message.
You will certainly type some brain dead, shill response, but there is nothing you can say to defend this that has a shred of intellectual honesty if you are going to come in here and bitch about people on message boards and facebook researching shite like pizzagate.
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
LINK
Now. You are a typical shill so I already know that you will explain all of this away by attacking the source, pointing out speculation, or op ed. Don't bother.
This is fake news. The pattern this cycle was clear. A media outlet runs a specious or speculative piece and the cable and network news media cover it as fact. Political operatives from the campaign chirp it on cable and it even surfaces in the debates. We saw this especially with the NYT tax piece and People's groping articles. We know, thanks to Wikileaks, how the media colludes with dems and how they message.
You will certainly type some brain dead, shill response, but there is nothing you can say to defend this that has a shred of intellectual honesty if you are going to come in here and bitch about people on message boards and facebook researching shite like pizzagate.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:49 pm to Powerman
quote:
Probably a lot more fake news that benefited Trump though
tMelt Day 30.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:52 pm to Powerman
So, what exactly is "fake news" and who decides what constitutes fake? That's right, the same MSM that has a vested interest in covering up or marginalizing any other sources of news or opinion that may go against their dogma.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:56 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:That would be this article.
The NYTimes itself ran fakenews headlines like "Donald Trump Used Legally Dubious Method to Avoid Paying Taxes".
It is a very detailed article going into depth on his tax return along with other Trump documents and reporting on the opinion of numerous tax experts. They also sought opinion from Trump and reported on what little response they got. NOT Fake News.
Maybe you can point out the factually untrue statements in the article?
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:58 pm to mmcgrath
quote:FAKE NEWS!
Legally Dubious Method
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:59 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:No. There is nothing fake about the very first article I pulled up.
Now. You are a typical shill so I already know that you will explain all of this away by attacking the source, pointing out speculation, or op ed. Don't bother.
quote:Please explain what is untrue in that statement, or anywhere else in the article.
Donald J. Trump declared a $916 million loss on his 1995 income tax returns, a tax deduction so substantial it could have allowed him to legally avoid paying any federal income taxes for up to 18 years, records obtained by The New York Times show.
What you said, however ...
quote:is false. See the difference? You additionally claim they did so without seeing any of his tax returns, which they state how they have one in the article.
I recall the NYT running a piece on how Trump hadn't paid taxes in 18 years
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 9:02 pm
Posted on 12/8/16 at 8:59 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
Maybe you can point out the factually untrue statements in the article?
quote:
opinion
Don't need the article. It's in your post, hack.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:01 pm to Powerman
Fake stories on social media!?!?!?!!!!!
No way!
No way!
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:02 pm to mmcgrath
John Podesta may frick toddlers
quote:
Please explain what is untrue in that statement.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:04 pm to Vacherie Saint
quote:Didn't think so. Listen, if you don't want an honest discussion, don't post.
Don't need the article. It's in your post, hack.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 9:05 pm to mmcgrath
quote:But it's no more true than if the Times had said
Please explain what is untrue in that statement, or anywhere else in the article.
"Donald J. Trump declared a $916 million loss on his 1995 income tax returns, a tax deduction so substantial it could mean he overpaid federal income taxes for up to 18 years, records obtained by The New York Times show."
Page 5 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News