Trump

[Harlequin]

What's y'all anti-Trump types' thoughts about the media's suppression of the Joe Biden corruption revelations?

Care to elaborate? If the media have suppressed it, chances are we won't know what you are talking about.

I would assume snaff is referring to the story from Don Tramp's lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, that he found a drive that Biden's son left in a repair shop containing an e-mail from a Ukrainian asking to meet his father. It seems that even Fox News originally turned the story down due to credibility concerns so Giuliani instead had it published by a Murdoch tabloid despite credibility doubts also being expressed at that paper. Giuliani did not seem happy when someone at Fox Business News compared his story to that of the Steele dossier that Giuliani and Tramp have railed about being fake:



The above paragraph contains links to just some of the BBC, Grauniad and Independent coverage. An Internet search for something like https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Rudy+ ... en&tbm=nws reveals far more, including some even from the Daily Mail!


Edit: I see that ThetaReactor posted while I was finding links.

[Foozwah]

What's y'all anti-Trump types' thoughts about the media's suppression of the Joe Biden corruption revelations?

That if you actually believe that you really are a special kind of stupid, even for a blatant troll.

(For the reasons summarised in ThetaReactor's post.)

Seriously, 'dumb as a bag of rocks' doesn't even start to cover it.

[Harlequin]

What's y'all anti-Trump types' thoughts about the media's suppression of the Joe Biden corruption revelations?

That if you actually believe that you really are a special kind of stupid, even for a blatant troll.
(For the reasons summarised in ThetaReactor's post.)
Seriously, 'dumb as a bag of rocks' doesn't even start to cover it.

For balance, however, Intercept founder Glenn Greenward has never struck me as particularly dumb and yet he appears to not only believe such suppression exists but, in part, to have resigned over it.

[Foozwah]

For balance, however, Intercept founder Glenn Greenward has never struck me as particularly dumb and yet he appears to not only believe such suppression exists but, in part, to have resigned over it.

I dunno man. Greenwald throwing all his toys out of the pram because his piece on Joe Biden was rejected by his former mag doesn't suddenly make the ludicrously fictitious Hunter Biden laptop non-story distraction attempt suddenly real or worthy of wasting any more time.

The fact that literally every single step of the laptop story is so clearly bogus and fabricated from whole cloth that even FOX NEWS thinks it's too embarrassing to run with is why no-one is keen to report on it now.

Greenwald has done good work in the past, for sure, but that doesn't make him infallible. Also, having a piece rejected by the very magazine he co-founded would probably hurt. Maybe even enough to try and reframe that rejection so as not to be personal: it's not about me, or my work*, but because of some nebulous global conspiracy.

Who knows? Hubris is a powerful drug.

*Apparently the story was rejected at least partially because it presents as "evidence", without examination, highly dubious claims made by the Trump campaign. If so, wow... Would like to read it myself just to see if that's the case. And hey, if Greenwald really believes in his stuff, then there are other media outlets. Or just publish it online himself.

[merman]

What's y'all anti-Trump types' thoughts about the media's suppression of the Joe Biden corruption revelations?

Unlike Fox refusing to do any stories on the corruption involving Trump's family, right?

[Harlequin]

For balance, however, Intercept founder Glenn Greenward has never struck me as particularly dumb and yet he appears to not only believe such suppression exists but, in part, to have resigned over it.

I dunno man. Greenwald throwing all his toys out of the pram because his piece on Joe Biden was rejected by his former mag doesn't suddenly make the ludicrously fictitious Hunter Biden laptop non-story distraction attempt suddenly real or worthy of wasting any more time.
…
Greenwald has done good work in the past, for sure, but that doesn't make him infallible. Also, having a piece rejected by the very magazine he co-founded would probably hurt. Maybe even enough to try and reframe that rejection so as not to be personal: it's not about me, or my work*, but because of some nebulous global conspiracy.

Who knows? Hubris is a powerful drug.

*Apparently the story was rejected at least partially because it presents as "evidence", without examination, highly dubious claims made by the Trump campaign. If so, wow... Would like to read it myself just to see if that's the case. And hey, if Greenwald really believes in his stuff, then there are other media outlets. Or just publish it online himself.

I agree that all I have read suggests that most, if not all, of the laptop story is bullshit. I was primarily pointing out that extreme dumbness does not seem to be required to believe anti-Biden interpretations are being suppressed by what are touted as non-partisan multi-viewpoint outlets. Perhaps his piece could have been published, as Greenwald suggested, between dissenting ones. Or perhaps getting those written well would not have fit into the required time frame.

Greenwald is indeed publishing it elsewhere. The last draft of the rejected article is at https://greenwald.substack.com/p/articl ... n-censored.

What he claims to be the e-mail exchange in which the objections were raised, and in which he defends the piece against accusations of presenting stuff as evidence uncritically, is at https://greenwald.substack.com/p/emails ... rs-showing.

[Dio]

What's y'all anti-Trump types' thoughts about the media's suppression of the Joe Biden corruption revelations?

That it's clearly of extraordinarily dubious provenance.

And even letting that go, while I'm hardly convinced Biden is a saint - I'm not sure very many politicians are - but it's absolutely bloody obvious that in the corruption and general all-round being an bit of a git stakes, compared Trump he's the second coming of the Messiah?

Even many of Trump's voters reckon he's pretty dodgy, but they just don't want Democrat policies and don't have any other option but to vote for Trump. "Hold my nose and vote for him" as more than one American has described it to me.

[phattslagg]

That it's clearly of extraordinarily dubious provenance.

There absolutely was provenance of extraordinary clarity. Unfortunately, Tucker Carlson lost the only copy of it. Oh well.

[Harlequin]

That it's clearly of extraordinarily dubious provenance.

There absolutely was provenance of extraordinary clarity. Unfortunately, Tucker Carlson lost the only copy of it. Oh well.

A spokesman for UPS told The Daily Beast on Thursday that they had located a mysterious packaged that Fox News host Tucker Carlson suggested had been deliberately misplaced or intercepted because it contained “damning” materials on the Biden family. “After an extensive search, we have found the contents of the package and are arranging for its return,” the spokesman said.

We wanted to assess what we had and we're still assessing it.

So we might presume that they are still searching it for anything that can be spun as scandal.

[p-saurus]

What's y'all anti-Trump types' thoughts about the media's suppression of the Joe Biden corruption revelations?

There have been no credible allegations. The only outlet they could get to publish them was a tabloid. It's a desperate, last-ditch attempt by the corrupt President and his alcoholic lawyer to drum up a fake controversy. The media isn't covering it because it isn't worth covering.

For balance, however, Intercept founder Glenn Greenward has never struck me as particularly dumb....

Greenwald is nothing more than a right-wing troll. He didn't get to publish his disinformation so he threw a temper tantrum and quit. The Intercept was smart to not throw away their credibility to assuage him.

[tufty]

The media isn't covering it because it isn't worth covering.

Also because they aren't being allowed to look at the alleged "evidence".

[F-ZeroOne]

Seems totally legit, to the pizza parlour basements!

https://gizmodo.com/author-behind-bogus ... 1845525713

[Dio]

The media isn't covering it because it isn't worth covering.

Also because they aren't being allowed to look at the alleged "evidence".

Dog ate it, sir.

[gilesgoat]

Looks like USA it's still pretty much a 50% 50% divided country .. the "T. is going to be erased" looks like it's NOT going to be "that simple".

You know when we were used to say "90% of people are ok it's 10% that isn't but they are noisy" or similar sentences ?

NOT TRUE, not any more, it's NOT 10% .. it's more 55% maybe we have to revise all those "beliefs in the fundamental good sense of people", the story (history) is no longer as we used ( or pretend ) to see it !

But one thing seems to be true over and over again "many countries are split 50% 50%" you can't talk any more of "mayority" you are more talking about "a tiny sliver of mayority somewhere but the other almost identical amount that does not like it".

I think it's unavoidable when you end up with situations that are "highly contrasting" almost polar opposite that by definition are really polar opposite, and you end up in a situation where "no one is really happy or can be made happy".

This kind of stuff I think it's going to make many states "hanging by a thread" because overall you are in a situation where almost 50% of something else does not like at all what you are doing.

I am guessing part of the problem is those "strange political currents" "trying to pleasure everyone" ending up with "too much flexibility and ideals too broad to define" ?

[Dio]

Frankly, even if he loses, this is a solid vindication of the Trump strategy.

Last time he was an unknown quantity, up against a vulnerable Democratic option, with all the social media problems largely uncontrolled. This time he's already got more votes than he did last time, against a (relatively) stronger candidate, and with there absolutely no doubts about exactly what kind of President he was going to be, and while it's hardly been a clean race it's a lot less murky than the previous.