Donald John Trump: The 2nd Greatest President of the USA (by volume)

[Techne]

And yet you'll listen when ZH tells you to watch this 'new' James o'Keefe video

Saw it on youtube, blame youtube for making me aware of it, ithe videos being trendy and all.. I think you got the wrong guy here for your little disqualify crusade.

 

[RanzB]

Saw it on youtube, blame youtube for making me aware of it, ithe videos being trendy and all.. I think you got the wrong guy here for your little disqualify crusade.

And yet you'll listen when your Youtube recommended videos, courtesy of other ZH videos, tells you to watch the new James o'Keefe video

 

[Techne]

And yet you'll listen when your Youtube recommended videos, courtesy of other ZH videos, tells you to watch the new James o'Keefe video

Yeah sorry, you are a bit confused.

 

[greg0205]

Yeah sorry, you are a bit confused.

Nope. Randhir has this point.

Google/YouTube's algorithms are selecting your trending videos for you... Much like my YouTube landing page is full of Colbert and Meyers and Oliver and Bee and Olbermann, 'cos that's what I've been watching, yours will be full of the exact opposite, whatever that may be.

 

[Techne]

Shame, you sure you want to share to everyone your horrible tastes? He is still confused since I am not and avid follower of ZH.

 

[greg0205]

Shame, you sure you want to share to everyone your horrible tastes? He is still confused since I am not and avid follower of ZH.

You sure you want to share the utter humorlessness of yours..?

 

[Xarog]

@9.50

I hope this story has a part 3...

 

[S7wede]

just FYI, Phillip Defranco has nothing to do with ZH. He is one of the best sources for unbiased news on Youtube right now and he encourages discussion. I will take his word over most mainstream news networks in the US right now.

 

[Unhappy438]

I hope this story has a part 3...

I suppose thats up to fake news veritas.

 

[Xarog]

I suppose thats up to fake news veritas.

I've already linked to part 3 from PV's side, and it's quite clear that CNN has been manipulating footage. The way O'Keefe is derided for doing so but CNN's sins are ignored is actually rather amusing.

 

[RanzB]

I've already linked to part 3 from PV's side, and it's quite clear that CNN has been manipulating footage.

0'Keefe video
"Quite clear"

Choose one

I The way O'Keefe is derided for doing so but CNN's sins are ignored is actually rather amusing.

On MyBB?

 

[Xarog]

0'Keefe video
"Quite clear"

Choose one

https://youtu.be/4dRGMME4VnM?t=298

There's a nice timestamp for you.

On MyBB?

Yeah, I have yet to see a reaction.

 

[Knyro]

Nope. Randhir has this point.

Google/YouTube's algorithms are selecting your trending videos for you... Much like my YouTube landing page is full of Colbert and Meyers and Oliver and Bee and Olbermann, 'cos that's what I've been watching, yours will be full of the exact opposite, whatever that may be.

+1

Hence whenever I do watch a video posted on MyBB I do it incognito to avoid polluting my YouTube recommendations with internet right-wing trash.

 

[RanzB]

https://youtu.be/4dRGMME4VnM?t=298

There's a nice timestamp for you.

Lol. Asks for proof, if he's actually seen it, then CNN omits him asking if anyone has seen what o'Keefe has been doing on TV.

Solid stuff.

Yeah, I have yet to see a reaction.

What reaction are you looking for? Is anyone here pushing CNN as a credible news source? What I've seen are people showing that O'Keefe is up to the usual nonsense, the fact that his subject is CNN doesn't mean anyone is calling them credible, just that O'Keefe is not.

 

[Xarog]

Lol. Asks for proof, if he's actually seen it, then CNN omits him asking if anyone has seen what o'Keefe has been doing on TV.

Solid stuff.

It also omits him saying he was a poll watcher in New Jersey and how this sort of behaviour is common. Given that they edited it out, it was dishonest and biased of CNN to put the byline in that he did not offer a credible substantiation of his position.

What reaction are you looking for? Is anyone here pushing CNN as a credible news source? What I've seen are people showing that O'Keefe is up to the usual nonsense, the fact that his subject is CNN doesn't mean anyone is calling them credible, just that O'Keefe is not.

I don't see anyone on the left wing instantly dismissing anything published by CNN because of their behaviour, so say what you will, but the difference in reaction is clear to see.

 

[Arthur]

Douglas Gibbs gives an interesting angle on the Mika tweet that produced vapours in the usual media:

In my posts about it I said I like the fact that Trump tweets, but this one may have skirted a little too close to the edge.* Perhaps, I have been saying, he should be more diplomatic with his Tweets.

Then, I discovered I was wrong.

The Mika Brzezinski tweet was incredibly brilliant.

The timing was perfect, as planned.

While the Press is talking about Trump’s Tweet:

The travel ban went into effect, two immigration bills were approved by Congress, and other things the Democrats would normally be screaming about are getting done. . . under the radar, because the people suffering from Trump Derangement Syndrome are too busy to notice because they are too occupied with screaming and yelling about Trump’s tweets.

He pulled a basketball move, looking one way, and passing the ball in the opposite direction.

 

[RanzB]

It also omits him saying he was a poll watcher in New Jersey and how this sort of behaviour is common. Given that they edited it out, it was dishonest and biased of CNN to put the byline in that he did not offer a credible substantiation of his position.

He says that he saw people using provisional ballots and that they weren't challenged, it doesn't offer any proof from him of anything.

I don't see anyone on the left wing instantly dismissing anything published by CNN because of their behaviour, so say what you will, but the difference in reaction is clear to see.

Again, are you talking in general, or on MyBB?

 

[RanzB]

Douglas Gibbs gives an interesting angle on the Mika tweet that produced vapours in the usual media:

As true as Trump's TIME covers, I'm sure.

But again, tacit approval from the Trumpites for behaviour that's questionable at best.

 

[Xarog]

He says that he saw people using provisional ballots and that they weren't challenged, it doesn't offer any proof from him of anything.

You say that as if it's a controversial claim to say that such things happen. America does have holes in its voter registration policies and they have been exploited in the past by both parties. If you want a local example, look no further than Tlokwe.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/17/no-voter-fraud-isnt-myth-10-cases-where-its-all-to/

If CNN really wanted to discredit the veracity of his testimony, they should have had the decency to respond to the "poorness" of what he did provide, not make it look as if he was just another conservatard that could offer no justification for his conclusions. If O'Keefe cannot be trusted because of the way he edits footage, then in principle everything CNN does should be thrown out too.

Again, are you talking in general, or on MyBB?

MyBB.

 

[RanzB]

If CNN really wanted to discredit the veracity of his testimony, they should have had the decency to respond to the "poorness" of what he did provide, not make it look as if he was just another conservatard that could offer no justification for his conclusions.

No. He offered no proof of anything, in an interview style sitting. Are you expecting Young Jamie to suddenly pull up stats to refute them on the basis of nothing?

If O'Keefe cannot be trusted because of the way he edits footage, then in principle everything CNN does should be thrown out too.

Yeah sure, why not. Except no one is claiming CNN can be trusted, but I see Trumpites pushing O'Keefe's videos as proof of something.

MyBB.

So, please show these posts claiming CNN is credible.