Hollywood elites?
You mean Hollywood elites like Ronald Reagan, Clint Eastwood, Charleton Heston, Arnold Schwarzenegger or James Woods
Or just the ones they dismiss as being left?
Musk/Twitter Document Dump
- Thread starter stollcpa
- Start date
You mean Hollywood elites like Ronald Reagan, Clint Eastwood, Charleton Heston, Arnold Schwarzenegger or James Woods
Or just the ones they dismiss as being left?
It's not if you're saying any means necessary to get rid of Trump is justified.
We look for your upcoming update, now that Trump's tax returns have been legally obtained by non-Trumpers.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Repeat after me: Liberals hold no imaginary high ground over conservatives. I am an American first and a liberal second. What happened at Twitter was a problem and shouldn’t ever happen again.
Now say it again.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
No sick burn is necessary. You’re so far over your skis on this it’s sad. Start at the beginning and reread what you’re “defending” and what you’re sniping at. It’s pathetic.If that was supposed to be a sick burn, it would help if you posted it in English. Words matter.
Look, I get it. You think you’re some high minded arbiter of justice. Hickory said something ludicrously indefensible - and passed off as fact - and you read what I wrote as not legal fact but clearly more legitimate than what Hickory wrote - notwithstanding that you misread it which I’ll take on my ambiguous wording. And here we are, with you and your golden staff (err sniper rifle) pointed from the imaginary liberal high ground. My hero.
I don't like censorship in any form. But what Twitter did is Twitters prerogative. As a company operating in a capitalist country they will face the consumers judgement for their misdeeds. Nothing illegal happened. At least in the Twitter portion of this. Unethical? yep. Illegal? No. Has every politician on earth in history used their influence in some shape or manner to better their standing/position? Yep. Was it right before? Nope. Is it right now? Nope. Is it going to happen again by Republicans, Democrats and others? Yep.
Last edited:
Their disclaimer was '..had all the earmarks of a Russian disinformation op.'
Didn't say it WAS disinfo...
Didn't say it was fake...
Didn't dispute the facts of how it was discovered..
Multiple copies of the device exist.
Nothing can stop what's coming.
I wish you'd tell me what's coming!
So they use their own created, previous ruse to "define" what Russian disinformation looks like to use that as a mafia style tactic to leverage Big tech. Then use that exact same thing as a defense that they were trying to warn big tech. Not to exploit an overly used comparison, but early Nazi Germany would be applauding this at their Grammy's.
Doesn't mean
1) It's news
2) Joe knew about it
3) Joe pulled political favors that violated laws
The only new material in this so called dump was some behind the scenes stuff at Twitter. I kept tweets about Hunter's laptop off for two days, and once the NY Post reporter removed objectionable material from her tweets, her account was restored.
It appears, too, the only material the Biden campaign requested be pulled were the dick pics. However, campaigns aren't government entities, nor are political parties.
You've clearly identified your problem, Ranger. You think I'm defending what Hickory said when all I did was point out that you were doing the same kind of thing he was (with the implication that, if words matter, you both had it wrong.)
And then you doubled down on it and I pointed it out again.
Sorry that I struck a nerve when I correctly identified that you didn't really mean it when you said "words matter". It's not a golden staff or sniper rifle. It's not heroes and villains. It's a mirror and it's not my fault that you don't like the way you look in it after insisting how ugly the other guy is.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
I should’ve known better than to respond to either of you. What a way to spend my day - talking nonsense with nincompoops.You've clearly identified your problem, Ranger. You think I'm defending what Hickory said when all I did was point out that you were doing the same kind of thing he was (with the implication that, if words matter, you both had it wrong.)
And then you doubled down on it and I pointed it out again.
Sorry that I struck a nerve when I correctly identified that you didn't really mean it when you said "words matter". It's not a golden staff or sniper rifle. It's not heroes and villains. It's a mirror and it's not my fault that you don't like the way you look in it after insisting how ugly the other guy is.
Sure, they were the same. In some alternate reality.
It's right there in the report. Mueller explicitly says that he does not address the issue of collusion, as it is not a legal issue that can be investigated.
If it's not a legal issue, then why the Special Prosecutor to investigate RUSSIAN COLLUSION?
You can't have it both ways. It was clearly Mueller's charge to find collusion.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Bullshit. Read what forms what we call collusion (criminal conspiracy) and if he investigated it. Don’t be an ass.
I read the entire thing. But if you guys are going to get in a semantics fight because "words matter," then at least get the words right.
I guess you're right. That's all we heard was Russian Collusion, but the investigation had nothing to do with it. Nothing at all.
But you know what? I'll bet if they did find collusion, suddenly, it would be ALL about collusion.
Who are you fooling?
He was tasked with investigating any links or coordination between Russia and people related to the Trump campaign, as well as any other issues that arose directly out of that investigation (that's where the obstruction came in). In the course of his investigation, he specifically investigated criminal conspiracy and coordination, because these were terms that were defined by U.S. law and precedent, while ignoring "collusion," because it was a term that had no legal meaning. How "conspiracy" and "coordination" relate to what each of us might mean if we use the word "collusion" is up for us all to decide/debate, I suppose, but Mueller explicitly rejected the "collusion" framework as one that could even be addressed.
Part I of the Mueller report concludes that it cannot be proven beyond a reasonable doubt that anyone committed criminal conspiracy or illegal coordination.
Twitter, the FBI, and the First Amendment - Washington Examiner
TWITTER, THE FBI, AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT. New Twitter owner Elon Musk made a lot of news in the conservative world on Friday when he released information about Twitter's infamous suppression of the October 2020 New York Post story about Joe Biden and influence peddling, a story based on...
www.washingtonexaminer.com
Okay, now that's a juicy idea.Twitter, the FBI, and the First Amendment - Washington Examiner
TWITTER, THE FBI, AND THE FIRST AMENDMENT. New Twitter owner Elon Musk made a lot of news in the conservative world on Friday when he released information about Twitter's infamous suppression of the October 2020 New York Post story about Joe Biden and influence peddling, a story based on...
Watch FoX for one night. It won’t take long. Or talk to any old person who gets their news from Fox only.
The fact that you think Mueller didn’t think anything is wrong with it proves that you are the cartoon. Do you honestly not know the difference? You know OJ is innocent too, right?
You seem to have a real disconnect over who was responsible for APPOINTING Mueller and designating his role...
Hint- it wasn't any Democrats. All 3 branches of Govt were in GOP hands when Rod Rosenstein (GOP) nominated fellow GOP Mueller in 2017... And the final straw was Trump's May 9 firing of Comey, a typical pure ego move from Trump...
From the DOJ release of May 17...
"Deputy Attorney General Rod J. Rosenstein today announced the appointment of former Department of Justice official and FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III to serve as Special Counsel to oversee the previously-confirmed FBI investigation of Russian government efforts to influence the 2016 presidential election and related matters."
Nary a Dem in sight...And no mention of "collusion"...
You were definitely talking nonsense. All except the "words matter" part. That's the one part you got right. Unfortunately, it was the part you couldn't live up to either. Well...that and that it was probably time for you to take your ball and go home.
So you think the government should be meddling in private businesses now? Okay.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
Yeah I’m out. I won’t be a party to your gaslighting any longer. Enjoy the circle jerk. Enjoy the perspective that Hickory brings to the board. Utterly hopeless.
Last edited by a moderator:
Have to wonder how smart Musk is. Letting the fox in the hen house disclose suppression documents.
nypost.com
Elon Musk fires Twitter lawyer James Baker over ‘suppression’ of documents on Hunter Biden story
Elon Musk has fired Twitter’s deputy general counsel, James Baker, over his alleged suppression of internal documents about blocking The Post’s Hunter Biden laptop exposé.
nypost.com
Brad stevens had good advice. Limit who you interact with on the board and it’s infinitely better. I think Lars said the same. There are a number of posters I won’t read or respond to going forward
