Breaking News January 6th Stop the Steal Rally & Capitol Breaching/Storming

Battlegrinder said:
So, when Fox says "hey, this isn't supposed to be 100% truth, it's just Tucker's opinion and not meant to be taken as literal truth", that's a lame defense of speaking false information for profit that shouldn't have worked.

When MSNBC says the exact same thing in defense, then they should win because it's a bogus SLAPP suit.

Care to explain how that's not a double standard based on nothing more than partisanship?
Click to expand...
well as I understand it's, Madow was commenting on facts that the court verified, OAN does employ someone who does also work for the Russian government.she can have opinions and comment about that, Tucker has been ruled to says things on air no reasonable person can be expect to take as true
slate.com

Judge Rules Tucker Carlson Is Not a Credible Source of News

The “general tenor” of Carlson’s show is not “stating actual facts” about the topics he discusses, the judge wrote.
slate.com slate.com
tl'dr
Judge Rules Tucker Carlson Is Not a Credible Source of News
 
Proxy 404 said:
Could you explain that so someone can parse it without doing 6 weeks of background research? just the basic context of what you are saying
Click to expand...

Judge in Jones trial is Democrat, as in literally party member. She denied motions for mistrial after Jones' lawyers straight up sabotaged his defense by "accidentally" leaking his entire phone data without a warrant when the court asked for only a few snippets of data. She constantly attacked Jones on personal terms instead of legal ones, and of course she did settle on slapping him with a hilarious absurd 900 billion dollar fine that made no sense whatsoever.

As for your second post, "Madow was commenting on facts that the court verified" is such a weak cop out my guy. Are you saying that everything Tucker says is a lie? And of course this opens up the question: How did the courts "verify" these "facts"? Are we talking about the same courts that took the Piss Dossiers that was totally legit guys for real? This is simply a appeal to authority of the weakest type.

BTW, been days and you still haven't justified why Jones should pay 960 billion.
 
Proxy 404 said:
Could you explain that so someone can parse it without doing 6 weeks of background research? just the basic context of what you are saying
Click to expand...

Alex Jones did nothing wrong and what was done to him was one of the most grotesque displays of judicial activism in the history of this country.

It was central Park 5 tier disgusting.
Proxy 404 said:
Judge Rules Tucker Carlson Is Not a Credible Source of News
Click to expand...

No one cares what Judges think anymore.

Barely half the population considers its government legitimate.
 
The Immortal Watch Dog said:
Alex Jones did nothing wrong and what was done to him was one of the most grotesque displays of judicial activism in the history of this country.

It was central Park 5 tier disgusting.
Click to expand...
Oh I see the problem here let me help
FYI convinicng your marks that grieving parents are crisis actors in effect further destroying their lives in ways hither to unknown to man IS actually wrong, glad to help you out there
 
Proxy 404 said:
well as I understand it's, Madow was commenting on facts that the court verified, OAN does employ someone who does also work for the Russian government.she can have opinions and comment about that, Tucker has been ruled to says things on air no reasonable person can be expect to take as true
slate.com

Judge Rules Tucker Carlson Is Not a Credible Source of News

The “general tenor” of Carlson’s show is not “stating actual facts” about the topics he discusses, the judge wrote.
slate.com slate.com
tl'dr
Judge Rules Tucker Carlson Is Not a Credible Source of News
Click to expand...

From the Maddow suit, per my linked article:

"The statement could not reasonably be understood to imply an assertion of objective fact,"
And
"Anything beyond this is Maddow’s opinion or her exaggeration of the facts,"
And
“Maddow had inserted her own colorful commentary into and throughout the segment, laughing, expressing her dismay (i.e., saying ‘I mean, what?’)"


Which certainly sounds a lot like "Maddow says things on air no reasonable person can be expected to take as true."

The parallel gets a lot stronger when you know the actual opinion from Tucker's case (rather than Slate's ax grinding), which used almost the exact same language:

[In] the context of “Tucker Carlson Tonight,” the Court finds that Mr. Carlson’s invocation of “extortion” against Ms. McDougal is nonactionable hyperbole, intended to frame the debate in the guest commentator segment that followed Mr. Carlson’s soliloquy. As Defendant notes, Mr. Carlson himself aims to “challenge political correctness and media bias.” This “general tenor” of the show should then inform a viewer that he is not “stating actual facts” about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in “exaggeration” and “non-literal commentary.” … Given Mr. Carlson’s reputation, any reasonable viewer ‘arrive with an appropriate amount of skepticism.
Click to expand...
 
Proxy 404 said:
Oh I see the problem here let me help
FYI convinicng your marks that grieving parents are crisis actors in effect further destroying their lives in ways hither to unknown to man IS actually wrong, glad to help you out there
Click to expand...

Never happened, but it is notable that one piece of shit was laughing when his son died but was sobbing when he got awarded money he never deserved.

In any case even if he did all that, it'd be protected by the 1A.

So go cope and seethe, first amendment shields us from traitors who glow in the dark.
 
Battlegrinder said:
From the Maddow suit, per my linked article:

"The statement could not reasonably be understood to imply an assertion of objective fact,"
And
"Anything beyond this is Maddow’s opinion or her exaggeration of the facts,"
And
“Maddow had inserted her own colorful commentary into and throughout the segment, laughing, expressing her dismay (i.e., saying ‘I mean, what?’)"


Which certainly sounds a lot like "Maddow says things on air no reasonable person can be expected to take as true."

The parallel gets a lot stronger when you know the actual opinion from Tucker's case (rather than Slate's ax grinding), which used almost the exact same language:
Click to expand...
well you can certainly make the argument, but I don't find it at all compelling similar language has more to do with everyone involve being lawyers talking in court over agreed on terms and precedent then a I direct 1 to 1 approximation,

The Immortal Watch Dog said:
Never happened,
Click to expand...
it did happen and unfortunately for everyone in this world you being a little bitch about it on the internet is never going to bring those kids back form the dead or transform Alex Jones into something other then the total piece of shit he's spent his adult life working towards being

oh if you a were saying Jones never defamed the families ,

at 12 minutes 50 seconds a nice super cut of Jones ruining lives on air
proving it too happened
and it is still bad if you forgot morality again
 
Last edited:
Proxy 404 said:
well you can certainly make the argument, but I don't find it at all compelling similar language has more to do with everyone involve being lawyers talking in court over agreed on terms and precedent then a I direct 1 to 1 approximation,
Click to expand...

A one to one comparison makes Maddow look worse, not Tucker.

Tucker was discussing Trump's legal issues with a pari of ex-porn stars, comparing their tactics to extortion, which is certainly debatable. Though given that Michael Avenatti, the lawyer for one them, is currently in federal prison for extortion, Tucker seemed to have the man's measure even if what he said was not technically correct.

Maddow noted that OAN had hired a guy who had also worked for a russian state new service, and declared OAN to be "literally paid Russian propaganda", despite the fact that OAN in no way profited off of that arrangement nor did they receive any money from Russia. That seems substantially more made-up-off-thin-air than Tucker's bit.
 
Battlegrinder said:
A one to one comparison makes Maddow look worse, not Tucker.

Tucker was discussing Trump's legal issues with a pari of ex-porn stars, comparing their tactics to extortion, which is certainly debatable. Though given that Michael Avenatti, the lawyer for one them, is currently in federal prison for extortion, Tucker seemed to have the man's measure even if what he said was not technically correct.

Maddow noted that OAN had hired a guy who had also worked for a russian state new service, and declared OAN to be "literally paid Russian propaganda", despite the fact that OAN in no way profited off of that arrangement nor did they receive any money from Russia. That seems substantially more made-up-off-thin-air than Tucker's bit.
Click to expand...
well that is just the most compeling argumentation ever I guess I must be a hack good job, I'm sure you will receive many likes
 
Typhonis said:
So, after that mistake how soon will Jones's defense lawyer will face being Disbarred?
Click to expand...
might not be necessary, not like people will want the guy who lost a billion dollars defending them but unless there was something to the fever dream that it was purposeful you don't loose the bar for just one screw up that isn't a felony
 
Last edited:
Sobek said:
Judge in Jones trial is Democrat, as in literally party member. She denied motions for mistrial after Jones' lawyers straight up sabotaged his defense by "accidentally" leaking his entire phone data without a warrant when the court asked for only a few snippets of data. She constantly attacked Jones on personal terms instead of legal ones, and of course she did settle on slapping him with a hilarious absurd 900 billion dollar fine that made no sense whatsoever.
Click to expand...
What does the judge's political affiliation have to do with anything? The trial wasn't related to politics. Jones and his team were told what had happened, and failed to take relevant remedial action. Given all the other fuckery they'd engaged in, and the amount of court time and tax payer money they'd wasted by doing so, further delaying action in the form of a mistrial wasn't appropriate. Finally, the size of the settlement isn't decided by the judge at all.

Honestly, you sound like you don't have a clue what you're talking about.
 
Proxy 404 said:
it did happen and unfortunately for everyone in this world you being a little bitch about it on the internet is never going to bring those kids back form the dead
Click to expand...

Why would I want them back from the dead? their parents clearly profited off their deaths and were quite happy to viciously exploit said deaths for that sweet, sweet clout. Stage parents and the children they raise to be fodder for their own vanity don't interest me much.

They clearly didn't love their children, so the onus isn't on me to care about them nor you to prop them up as dust puppets to advance your own inane agendas.

And that is precisely what you are doing, using dead kids to advocate for censorship. You twisted buzzard...



Proxy 404 said:
or transform Alex Jones into something other then the total piece of shit he's spent his adult life working towards being
Click to expand...

Yeah the first amendment doesn't give a single solitary fuck about whether a person is good or bad.

Jones did nothing wrong but I do hope that the appeals courts do not reverse that insane ruling. I want Americans to reject the legitimacy of their government and its institutions. I want them to believe the deck is so utterly stacked against them that they have no choice but to embrace a restoration to the pre-Lincoln era of the Federal Government being this tiny, impotent little thing that can't start wars, frame innocent people and burn children alive for the lulz anymore.


Proxy 404 said:
oh if you a were saying Jones never defamed the families ,

at 12 minutes 50 seconds a nice super cut of Jones ruining lives on air
proving it too happened
and it is still bad if you forgot morality again
Click to expand...


>Sam Seder
>Video irrelevant.

Megadeath said:
What does the judge's political affiliation have to do with anything? The trial wasn't related to politics.
Click to expand...

...You've made a lot of asinine blatantly trolling comments. But this one was so bad I think it traveled back in time and caused Adam Lanza's schizophrenia.
 
The Immortal Watch Dog said:
...You've made a lot of asinine blatantly trolling comments. But this one was so bad I think it traveled back in time and caused Adam Lanza's schizophrenia.
Click to expand...
And if you think that jones' lunatic conspiracies are in line with the republican position you're stupider than I thought. jones is being punished because he knowingly lied, and those lies had a detrimental impact on people's lives. If you'd like to explain how you ascribe any part of that to politics, I could use a good laugh.
 
Megadeath said:
And if you think that jones' lunatic conspiracies are in line with the republican position you're stupider than I thought. jones is being punished because he knowingly lied, and those lies had a detrimental impact on people's lives. If you'd like to explain how you ascribe any part of that to politics, I could use a good laugh.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you're a fucking moron.

Alex Jones is being silenced by the managerial class, because loudmouthed shock jocks like him represent an alternative voice for an increasingly larger bloc of Americans who hate the people who govern them and resent the course the country has taken. Because the loud mouth commentators represent a pretext for them to target alternative media, the people breaking official narratives and getting as much dirt out there as possible.

This isn't about Republicans. The GOP by and large is controlled by uniparty clowns any way.

This is about bureaucrats, credentialed people, the so called experts and the other assorted vermin that make up the parasitical class that's undermined and mangled our country desiring a means to circumvent the constitution to prevent anyone from challenging them.

That is the embodiment of politics. Its one inhuman group of traitors pursuing an agenda of disenfranchisement and usurpation against another.

But go on continue to be exactly what everyone says you are.
 
Last edited:
The Immortal Watch Dog said:
Yeah, you're a fucking moron.

Alex Jones is being silenced by the managerial class, because loudmouthed shock jocks like him represent an alternative voice for an increasingly larger bloc of Americans who hate the people who govern them and resent the course the country has taken. Because the loud mouth commentators represent a pretext for them to target alternative media, the people breaking official narratives and getting as much dirt out there as possible.

This isn't about Republicans. The GOP by and large is controlled by uniparty clowns any way.

This is about bureaucrats, credentialed people, the so called experts and the other assorted vermin that make up the parasitical class that's undermined and mangled our country desiring a means to circumvent the constitution to prevent anyone from challenging them.

That is the embodiment of politics. Its one inhuman group of traitors pursuing an agenda of disenfranchisement and usurpation against another.

But go on continue to be exactly what everyone says you are.
Click to expand...
So... It's not about GOP or Democrat. So, I was right when I initially said that it was irrelevant that the judge was a democrat, and all the lunatic conspiracy bitching is just another excuse for you to spew your crazy. Did you really need to involve me in that?

As for that insanity, I'm not going to bother arguing it. If you believe that stupid crap, I pity you for your sad, scary delusions. Even jones apparently doesn't since he made no effort to actually prove or defend his claims.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top