What if Hillary won the election???

"

soneka101 wrote:

"

diablofdb wrote:

what is fake about it? there is not a single proof to follow the statement, it has as much truth in it as me writing a blog and saying Godzilla attacked Montréal today *post a picture from the movie* there.

You aren't ignoring what I wrote on my last post are you? I gave you a solid proof, an interview with the guy who stood outside the campaign office while armed. He didn't deny being there for 12 hours, he didn't deny being armed, alas, he was still armed at the time of the interview.

You want more proof than that, without giving any proof from your side that this is not real?

You want me to bring the guy to your house, so he can tell to your face that he did it? Or do you want me to call the President of the US so he can tell to you if it's fake or not?

That's not a proof at all, he could be a guy paid to fake an interview. This has been done by CNN where the journalist ended up interviewing his own cameraman making it look like he was a prostester. Words coming out from a mouth isn't a proof.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOIjSM4n4pw

"

diablofdb wrote:

"

soneka101 wrote:

"

diablofdb wrote:

what is fake about it? there is not a single proof to follow the statement, it has as much truth in it as me writing a blog and saying Godzilla attacked Montréal today *post a picture from the movie* there.

You aren't ignoring what I wrote on my last post are you? I gave you a solid proof, an interview with the guy who stood outside the campaign office while armed. He didn't deny being there for 12 hours, he didn't deny being armed, alas, he was still armed at the time of the interview.

You want more proof than that, without giving any proof from your side that this is not real?

You want me to bring the guy to your house, so he can tell to your face that he did it? Or do you want me to call the President of the US so he can tell to you if it's fake or not?

That's not a proof at all, he could be a guy paid to fake an interview. This has been done by CNN where the journalist ended up interviewing his own cameraman making it look like he was a prostester. Words coming out from a mouth isn't a proof.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOIjSM4n4pw

Do you have proof that this guy was paid for a fake interview? If you don't have proof but still make that claim then aren't you also spreading "Fake news and lies"?

You have proof that other guy was paid by CNN, but those are different interviews, you know that right?

Once again I ask you to take your own advice.

"

soneka101 wrote:

Do you have proof that this guy was paid for a fake interview? If you don't have proof but still make that claim then aren't you also spreading "Fake news and lies"?

You have proof that other guy was paid by CNN, but those are different interviews, you know that right?

Once again I ask you to take your own advice.

The news anchor called it, lol which is very evident and sufficient for me to see the bias.

"

diablofdb wrote:

"

soneka101 wrote:

Do you have proof that this guy was paid for a fake interview? If you don't have proof but still make that claim then aren't you also spreading "Fake news and lies"?

You have proof that other guy was paid by CNN, but those are different interviews, you know that right?

Once again I ask you to take your own advice.

The news anchor called it, lol which is very evident and sufficient for me to see the bias.

Very scientific.

Edit:Googled this just now:

Look... the simple fact that the journalist interview his own cameraman instead of someone in the street is showing the whole thing is fishy.


Was he paid for that? yes no idk... is there a bias??? for sure yes , is it how journalism integrety should be? No fucking not.

Stop posting fake news....Posts right wing youtube conspiracy theory channels and claims to want unbiased news?

"

diablofdb wrote:

Look... the simple fact that the journalist interview his own cameraman instead of someone in the street is showing the whole thing is fishy.


Was he paid for that? yes no idk... is there a bias??? for sure yes , is it how journalism integrety should be? No fucking not.

Man, I understand why would you become cynical after seeing some stuff that CNN and other liberal media outlet does, there are a certain amount of lies going around, but there are also truth out there , even from liberal outlets.

Giving up on believing every single news that appears to be liberal biased is like giving up on dating brunettes just because some of them cheated on you. Not every single brunette in the world will cheat on you, and even in case you try dating blondes (the equivalent of republican biased news outlets in this metaphor) its not like they will never cheat on you either.

And before you say: "But what if the number of brunettes that cheated on me are way higher than the number of blondes if any". The point still stands, you can't call someone a slut before he or she shows slutyness(I don't know if there is such a word, but it sounds cool af).


I will now share my opinion with you, you can ignore or not, your choice.

In my opinion a certain amount of trust or open-mindedness is a sign of strength. If you trust too much you put yourself on harms way, but if you don't trust anything it just shows that you are afraid or/and is insecure of yourself.

One example, when you let a lover become really intimate with you, it's not just a sign of trust, it shows that you aren't afraid of being hurt or/and, that you have the confidence that you will avoid any problem or/and that you can deal with the consequences. If you close yourself and don't let your partner to get intimate (like not moving together after a long time dating) it can show the contrary of all those things.

When you hear news that sound biased towards liberals do you become afraid that they will fool you and you won't find out? Or you become afraid that they are true and you will have to rethink about your beliefs?

I don't know about you, but my opinion is that if you believe in something that is true and solid, then then other people won't be able to make you change out of nowhere. But if you have to stop listening to people or else you wont be able to maintain your beliefs, then maybe it's better to rethink your beliefs.

It's like that song from Audioslave:

I met a man locked away
For things he hadn't done
Innocence on a ball and chain
He'll never feel the sun
Again on his face or roses
In his hands but when he smiled
At me I could understand

If your're free you'll never see the walls
If your head is clear you'll never free fall
If you're right you'll never fear the wrong <---This
If your head is high you'll never fear at all


Well, I wrote too much, I'm going to read something now, maybe I'm back tomorrow.

"

sarahaustin wrote:

Are you one of those Trumpsters who thinks he is pro LGBT because he held a damn pride flag?

No, that was just an empty gesture. I think Trump gives exactly zero shits about LBGT. When the Advocate asked him in 2000 if his gay employees are allowed to be out, he said "Look, it just doesn’t matter to me." On whether gays would be in his presidential administration: "I would want the best and brightest. Sexual orientation would be meaningless. I’m looking for brains and experience. If the best person for the job happens to be gay, I would certainly appoint them."

I thoroughly believe him there. Trump has no interest in either helping or harming LGBT people. You are not the center of his attention; you're not even close. His priorities lay elsewhere.

By the way, US VPs don't usually matter. At all. Pence was only there to sucker the Religious Right into continuing to vote Right. The closest he'll come to mattering is tied Senate votes, so I guess a 51-50 vote on a key piece of legislation is your nightmare scenario.

Hillary wanted Harambe to die