But this is a private company so we really can't do anything about it can we? Even if they are acting as agents of the state. Besides, it's for our own good. Who knows what's better for us than our elected leaders, right?
Biden administration ‘flagging problematic posts for Facebook,’ Psaki says (msn.com)
The Biden administration is playing an active role in flagging Facebook posts it considers to be “problematic” or “disinformation,” according to White House press secretary Jen Psaki.
About time.
Much better than the trump campaign having Facebook employees embedded within their organization to assist in the election.
Trump never would have been elected if not for Facebook.
Holy cow....Trump stole the election....you heard it here first
If that were true we could spy on the Trump campaign and Americans in general, check
If that were true we could run a coup with a false Russian collusion angle, check
If that were true we could impeach him, check
If that were true we could impeach him again, check
If that were true we could make such a mess out of the next election that a even Joe Biden would win
I would very much enjoy reading a credible source on that allegation McFarmer.
Setting that aside, I am astounded that anyone would be comfortable with the government actively editing the information we are allowed to see, particularly a former history teacher.
correction Tim a former teacher who denies the Crt is pushed all over this country no matter how many times they have been caught...including the national union of teachers leader.
Embedded Facebook employees in Trump campaign:
https://www.salon.com/2017/10/09/how-facebook-helped-the-trump-campaign-in-2016/
Quote for those who struggle to read:
“After describing how the Trump campaign concentrated on Facebook in order to win the election, Parscale mentioned to CBS's Lesley Stahl that one reason he believed the Republicans won that election is because they "took opportunities that I think the other side didn't," according to CBS News.
After Stahl asked for specifics, Parscale replied, "Yeah, Facebook employees would show up for work every day in our offices." He added that "Google employees and Twitter employees" were also embedded within the Trump campaign for "multiple days a week, three, four days a week, two days week, five days a week."
I assume a Trump campaign manager is a good enough source.
Facebook themselves have acknowledged the same.
Fact, the Russians placed more than 3000 adds to sow discourse and generally were supportive of trump.
It has not been shown there was collusion, but Russian help is a fact.
Facebook adds from liberal news angle:
Facebooks adds from Fox news angle:
There are many more sources, it is common knowledge.
Oh, How Hysterical. Salon and Rolling Stone. Throw in a couple from the Daily Beast whilst you're at it.
And then we wrap it up with some "Russian Ads " as proof that Trump had employees embedded.
And all of this, implausible as it is, is FAR WORSE than the WhiteHouse openly admitting they are taking an active role in censorship.
"The Big Lie" <snicker>
Thanks for ending my week with a chuckle :-)
"Trump never would have been elected if not for Facebook."
That's an interesting take mcfarmer.
If you want to point to the slight advantage that Trump got from this in 2016(which is legit-I agree with you), then why ignore the MASSIVE disadvantage this exactly same element imposed on him in 2020........at least a 10 times bigger advantage from social media to Biden in 2020 than Trump got in 2016?
And that's to go with the MSM, outside of Fox news being Biden cheerleaders and the same thing with the DOJ/Intel community as the unelected bureaucrats get job security from Biden and they crystal clearly, by every objective measure wanted Trump out.
Hunter back in the news
9 responses |
Started by metmike - July 3, 2021, 3:25 a.m. https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/71953/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More smoking gun evidence on Bidens
78 responses |
Started by metmike - Oct. 14, 2020, 7:39 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/60077/
metmike: Applying your position/mentality (objectively and honestly) here mcfarmer means that Trump should have won by a wide margin in 2020. Is this what you think?
I am not disagreeing with your take on 2016(Trump did have an advantage in this realm), though I think Fox news had the biggest positive impact(maybe you don't watch them) and there were numerous other factors, including Clinton clearly being corrupt and having an abrasive personality instead of being charasmatic, like her husband.........who would have won easily.
So if Trump‘s digital campaign manager isn’t good enough I guess we are done.
Its obvious no source would be accepted.
You conveniently didn’t mention that part.
None so blind as he who will not see.
If you are referring to me mcfarmer, then you obviously didn't read my post.........or your cognitive bias caused you to ignore the parts that agreed with you on.
Looks like you were just responding to Tim, who, just like you and the tens to hundreds of millions of people in this country, have discussions which feature themselves proving they are totally right and trying to make people they disagree with look bad in the process.
I'm not intending that as any more than a statement about the reality of the world and the people that live and communicate in it and that you guys are just a part of that world.
Carry on with your counterproductive argument then.......... as long as it doesn't result in lobbing blatant insults please.
Setting aside your obvious attempt at diversion, having FaceBook, etc employees working on the Trump campaign hardly seems relevant., or much of a factor in his victory in 2016.
I originally read that as Trump employees embedded at Facebook. Mea Culpa.
And why you want to compare that to the WhiteHouse actively engaging in censorship is a mystery.
This is a great example of apples and oranges, for your future reference.
“That's an interesting take mcfarmer.
If you want to point to the slight advantage that Trump got from this in 2016(which is legit), then why ignore the MASSIVE disadvantage this exactly same element imposed on him in 2020........at least a 10 times bigger advantage from social media to Biden in 2016 than Trump got in 2020?”
I don’t ignore it, quite the contrary, I am thankful for it. The danger was obvious and a free society acted.
I hold the military in very high esteem, look what the generals have said. We may have come very close to a crisis we couldn’t recover from. We still aren’t out of the woods.
“I’ve got the best generals” ——Donald Trump
Yeah, well what happened to them all ? They got out before their integrity was destroyed. It’s a long list.
Trump needs to flee to a foreign county, or go to prison, before this is behind us. I hope he doesn’t die first. The final shoe is yet to drop. Folks who “poo poo“ this haven’t a grasp of history; declines are seldom gradual, they occur in fits and spurts. This may take fifty years to play out, hopefully historians will be able to write it without interference.
Todays republican party knows their only hope is to reduce minority voting, that also is common knowledge. That sort of thing will work only so long, old white men need to look to a future that is inclusive, not exclusive.
I‘m done with this.
edit: Reading is hard.
As McFarmer discussed everything BUT the orignal topic, I don't blame him for deciding to exit. I can fully understand why he'd rather not answer.
Reading is easy. Comprehending is difficult, or impossible for some.
replying to the original post..
Biden is making a step in the right direction.
What is really needed is a Ministry of Truth…. an agency that clearly defines what is government-approved, authentic information and what is disinformation.
Our MSM and social media are already doing a wonderful job eliminating opposing views and deleting any evidence that contradicts the government-approved reality… but more needs to be done.
At this time, the government has graciously allowed the public to use the internet to communicate. Should misuse of this privilege continue, use of the internet should be restricted to those who adhere to the government guidelines, and violators should be sent to re-education camps.
(sarcasm intended)
I made a mistake on the quote you sent and the years should be flipped from 2016 to 2020 but I think you realized that based on my points.
I strongly agree with most of your points in the reply to my post but they had absolutely nothing to do with the points in my post to you.
If you said, grass is always green.
Then met mike said : mcfarmer, grass is green most of the time but is brown after it dies if not enough rain falls and in the Winter and you replied with
cows eat grass and cows fed with green grass are real yummy.
Then you avoided my point which had nothing to do with cows.
this makes great common sense. The republican party wants to destroy minority voting or words to that affect by mcfarmer. And to think Trump set records for recent rep candidates for what? Let me help you, MINORITY VOTING. It almost seems he made great strides for the big tent but some people had him all figured out
Evidently my communications skills are not up to the task at hand.
In my first reply I said “About time”.
I felt that made clear my reaction to the topic of this administration and its interaction with facebook. I really wonder how that could be taken as avoidance. To simple words, used commonly to express agreement.
I then expanded the topic to include the previous administrations dealings with facebook. Forgive me if I did something so unthinkable.
As far as grass and cows I have no idea what that’s about.
I'm just trying to assist in the communication process mcfarmer, as well as communicating accurate facts and authentic perspectives from an objective, non party affiliated scientist with no agenda except to show the truth............ and to make a few friends while I show it to them.
And to help readers here to get those messages, which differ from their preferred echo chambers which are drawing them in like flies on sheet.
"As far as grass and cows I have no idea what that’s about.'
As former school teacher, I 'm very surprised at this response mcfamer. What subjects did you teach?
Should I clarify the intended analogy? Maybe its my fault for not being clear enough.
https://www.writerswrite.co.za/what-is-an-analogy-how-do-i-write-one/
I'm still trying to geet my head around McFarmer saying "it's about time" the government got involved in censorship.
OMG!!!
"it's about time" the government got involved in censorship."
My parents grew up in Hitler's Germany. They could tell you all about it. You guys on the extreme Left... be careful what you wish for. What you want is NOT the USA, as it was intended to be. It's not what made the USA the leading force on earth.
China is on the way of becoming the leading country on this planet. You guys are speeding up this process. Right now, we have a weak administration... an administration too weak to control it's borders...an administration so weak, they have to ask the UN for help in dealing with our own domestic problems. How pitiful!!!
I certainly am not a Trumpster..... but 4 more years of this????
I hope our children's history books don't teach; USA 1776-2021
In mcfarmers defense, the 1 day Jan 6th riot has been magnified to have caused more than 10 times the damage that it really caused.
However, the real damage by an off the charts wide margin has been caused since the election and continues to grow......to the brains
What people like McFarmer don't seem to grasp. They seem to feel that censorship is just swell when they disagree with the subjects that are being censored. The list of "forbidden" subject matter is "dangerous". But the funny thing about censorship. That list grows and includes more and more subjects until almost every discussion becomes "forbidden". And at that point, saddest of all, people like McFarmer will cry "How did this ever happen?!?!?!?".
That last post was extremely long but most of it vanished.
Will finish it later but the main point was that we have a very dangerous situation of brains being captured with extreme measages based on lies......like the fake election steal and that COVID is not much worse than the flu and that vascinations kill more people than COVID.
Disinformation and fake news is running rampant and is greatly harming people as it gets passed along.
On the other hand the fake climate crisis is the biggest successful disinformation campaign in history. Censoreship and shunning of authentic climate science and anything that shows that the planet is massively greening up with the current climate optimum and people with that message has been in force for 2 decades now.
The truth about cloth masks and where COVID came from are 2 other things recently censored as well as when protests were spreading COVID.
So like Tim said, who decides to censor and what do they censor?
Eventually, this could morph into another 1984.... in fact, it already has but the mind controlling entities are the MSM, especially extreme right and extreme left sources that tell people things that are not true......but people want to hear.....a Trump won.....cops are bad,,,,etc,,,and social media passing all the fake news and conspiracy theory crap on to tens of millions.
It’s already well entrenched in society. And has been happening as the above examples noted.
So mcfarmer is right to be alarmed....but if the government steps in, they get rid of some really bad stuff....but they endorse some really bad stuff and the fake news/propaganda which lines with the belief system of whoever is imposing the censoring.
The proof is everywhere right now.
Hunter and joe Biden are being protected right now from investigations for instance, while the fraudulent spread of fake climate crisis news has been accepted and passed on by almost everybody.
look mcfarmer, I found those sissys who should of been fired years ago and now they go running to the press with their hurt wok feelings. Just what we do not need in our military that is another remnant of the left. Thanks
Gunter, I understand your position. But “You guys on the extreme Left..”, and I stop reading.
Broad brushes and sweeping generalizations do no good in conversations like this.
Mike:
“In mcfarmers defense, the 1 day Jan 6th riot has been magnified to have caused more than 10 times the damage that it really caused.
However, the real damage by an off the charts wide margin has been caused since the election and continues to grow......to the brains “
I don’t need or want any defense, but thanks. We are 95% of the way towards agreement on this portion of the conversation.
The little we disagree on is what Jan 6 represents. I said represents because you are right, it alone did little to nothing. However when the textbooks are written the accompanying photos will be of this event. The whole “big lie” will be represented by that day. Hopefully no other event associated with the lie yet to come will top it visually.
Why would a high ranking republican, and others, knowingly place her entire political career on the line to underscore what we witnessed ? They know we have to make examples. Good folks will get hurt, yes, and I’m sorry for that but we have to land as hard as we can to ensure a repeat isn’t encouraged.
That means finding any collaborators in congress or government and holding them accountable for what happened due to their recklessness with the truth for their own political gain. You have to prosecute specific events, or on going criminal behavior.
And only Tucker would equate flagging with censorship. I can always tell what was on Fox news yesterday, folks on here can be depended on to parrot it. Original thinking is difficult.
Even then I would support it. The first amendment isn’t absolute. You can’t say whatever you like whenever you want.
And felons can‘t own guns.
"and felons can't own guns"........ does that not just describe the left perfectly. Well we wrote law and felons can no longer own guns and that crime of a kids getting shot by a felon will never happen again....we wrote a law and now we will go home to our mansions in the hills, surrounded by security guards and fences far from these inner cities so infested with felons we cannot possibly keep guns away from them.
From 7 pm Monday till 4 am Tuesday 9 people were shot in Indianapolis. 9. What does the left , well guns of course.
Ahh, so, we'll call government taking an active role in what social media allows something other than censorship. Yeah, that's the ticket.
When Zuckerberg and Fauci get together and decide what the "approved" covid narrative will be, that's a fine example of the government and the private sector "colaborating".
I'm sure you fully support Youtube banning "certain" non-compliant videos and Twitter banning certain users.
But here's the thing..
When you start maing ideas illegal, you've started a very dangerous process and we are well on our way.
BTW, I don't watch Fox news, but I know liberals feel that they've won a debate when they accuse someone of being a "Faux News Watcher". Only a liberal would not realize how very lame that is,
But thanks for adding a chuckle to my weekend.
Interesting that the views here are:
1. To basically not censor or ban anything............including some really, really dangerous stuff that would absolutely be harmful(actually HAS ALREADY BEEN off the charts extremely harmful) and not recognize the need to reign that in orrr.............
2. To give the power of censorship to authorities who, given that power have consistently banned some legit items that contradict their ideologies.
What is the best path forward?
You will NOT get the best of both worlds. Politics is deeply rooted in all entities that would have this power. They WILL abuse it. There might be some objective, independant individuals within those entities but everything we know with certainty about people and especially at this time in history where the political divide is historic and the ends justifies the means to obtain the political objective, only the naive could possibly believe truly objective censorship based on 100% authentic facts can ever exist.
Just the fact that the vast, VAST majority of authentic information about the current climate optimum on this greening planet from the beneficial gas, CO2 never sees the light of day...here in this country or anywhere in the world tells you how bad it's been for over a decade........and getting worse.
It's more likely than not, that this censorship of anything that contradicts mainstream viewpoints will increase. This will also motivate extreme, anti science anti factual anti reality sources to manufacture even more crapola for people that will be convinced that its being censored because its the truth and these merchants of deceit will continue to use this for their effective marketing scheme/pathway to capturing brains.
Their position is "the reason that you don't see this elsewhere is because the gatekeepers don't want you to see it but we are here uncovering the secrets for you!" Every once in awhile they hit pay dirt..................so everybody going there becomes convinced the rest of their 95% bs is just like that. It isn't.
Yet, the information to objectively fact check is totally available to everyone but people would prefer to believe in things that they want to be true.
The scientific method requires that you be skeptical of your own theories and beliefs. It's only when you and others can't prove them/you wrong that you know they/you are right.
In today's world, most people use the anti scientific method. The internet has plenty of different takes and information for people that want to believe in something.....to find it.........to show that what they want to be true.........really is true.
There are laws that specifically define what people can and can't say.
The old stand by, "You can't yell Fire in a crowded theater" unless of course, there is a fire. So, essentially, you can't incite violence, and there are very clear definitions of what that means. You also can't slander or libel tho those are generally dealt with in civil law, not criminal.
Saying Covid vaccines are dangerous does not meet any legal definition. Saying some medications work does not meet any legal definition. Saying the election was stolen does not meet and legal definition. Saying we are in a climate crisis does not meet any legal definition.
But saying any of the 1st 3 or disagreeing with the 4th can be "banned" or censored by assorted media platforms and it appears a strong spirit of colaboration between social meda and governemnt is forming.
If that doesn't scare you, you aren't paying attention.
I can say or believe any of the above without harming anyone. If I decide to storm the capitol, that's enters another realm. If I burn down a factory because I feel it's carbon emissions are too high, that enters another realm.
See the difference?
When we start banning ideas, or books or words we don't like, we're a short way from a world where you really don't want to live.
You are free to try to convince me about either side of any of the above, but you are not allowed to coerce.
Yes, I see the difference.
In that figurative world/definition(analogy), it would be ok to to give people all the ammo to blow up a building and give them reasons/incentive for why the people in that building are very bad people......but never tell them to blow it up........let them decide for themselves based on using your ideas that those people need to be blow it up.
Your position assumes that everybody out there is rational and law abiding and would never entertain thoughts of breaking laws or hurting other people for a cause that they use to justify their behavior.
The real world says the complete opposite.
10pm: This is exactly what caused the riots of Jan 6th. This is exactly what caused all the riots last Summer. People were given all the figurative ammo verbally and the reasons to use it because of bad people(Biden stealing the election in one case) (bad cops in the other case) but never told to actually riot..........break into the Capitol, burn/destroy buildings, injure cops. loot businesses............they decided on their own to do that after their minds were loaded with "ammo".
I really can't help you any more Tim if you don't understand that.
We should maximize all freedoms in this country but also take into consideration any harm that is being caused to innocent people when others exercise their freedoms......even if it’s unintentional.
mm, thinking about an action is along way from committing a crime or hurting innocents...just as the right to speech no matter how objectionable should not be taken, shaped, or limited.https://taibbi.substack.com/p/meet-the-censored-matt-orfalea
good example of taking action on thoughts
put libs together with big gov and they know all
mcfarm,
You guys are arguing with me about a point that I already strongly agreed with you on.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/72288/#72350
The huge problem with this issue is that there are 2 powerful sides and you only want to see one side, while totally ignoring the other side. Sending me information about your side, that I already agreed with you about tells me that you need to read my post over.
The other side only wants to see their side too.
The other thing is the assumption that if action A by the government takes place, then surely B, C, D,E.........and so on will take place down the road,
What you don't realize is that we are already a few letters into the alphabet on this and it has nothing to do with the legal authority of the government to censor.
The MSM has been colluding to censor all articles/studies which show that the planet is greening up and the massive benefits of CO2 that would contradict the fake climate crisis for almost 2 decades now.
Here is a link that shows quickly what the MSM DOES show and numerous links that totally contradict it that they will NEVER show.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/69258/
We got a sample of it with Hunter Biden last October and with the completely corrupt Mueller investigation coverage. The MSM all colluded on what they would report.
I'm sure that you can agree with all that and are against it, as I am.
However, my point has nothing to do with those realms.....which are ALL dead wrong.
It has to do with LEGIT censoring of things that DO hurt people. Total lies about the election being stolen from Trump.......widespread and affecting 10's of millions of believing Americans in a very negative/dangerous way. Lies about COVID vaccinations that cause people to not get vaccinated and result in actual deaths. Lies about how deadly COVID is that cause people to do things that may put themselves and others at risk.
The ones squawking the loudest about having that censored are the ones most likely to believe those lies.
Of course I'm against the lies about the climate crisis being the mainstream only view and having much of the authentic science censored but I can see the difference between that and censoring the truly dangerous stuff mentioned above.
Are you saying that you don't see the points made in bold?
In that world/definition, it would be ok to to give people all the ammo to blow up a building and give them reasons/incentive for why the people in that building are very bad people......but never tell them to blow it up........let them decide for themslves based on using your ideas that those people need to be blown up.
Absolute and utter nonesense. You don't understand what I am saying.. AT ALL
In your interpretation, saying something, thinking something.. Is the same as arming people and urging them to bomb something.
Holy crap MM.
Thoughts are not bombs. Word are not bullets.
Sorry that you completely misinterpreted/misunderstood my points Tim.
I don't have time for yet another discussion like this with you. So you go ahead and think whatever you want.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/72288/#72326
https://www.writerswrite.co.za/what-is-an-analogy-how-do-i-write-one/
https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/knowledge/other/figurative-language/
OK, I couldn't resist trying to help you understand because maybe I was not clear enough the first time and gave it one last attempt.
Wow, this thread turned into a lengthy political debate.
However, the current drive of the Biden administration to control misinformation is basically very simple.
It’s only about vaccine information…. nothing else.
The government has an official view about the vaccines, and any opposing view is “misinformation” and must be deleted.
Any stories describing serious side effects, deaths,or other negative views about the vaccines, are “misinformation” and “dangerous” for the public to know, and must therefore be swept under the rug.
It doesn’t make any difference, whether these posts report factual events, authentic data, or present opinions by highly experienced experts in their field…. It’s all forbidden “misinformation” and best deleted from public view..
The simple goal is to keep the People as uninformed as possible. (That way, the masses are much easier to control}
When the government tries to keep me misinformed about happenings in Afghanistan, for example, it does not really influence my life a whole lot.
However, when it’s about my own health… I demand transparency and truthful reporting.
I prefer to have all the data available, rather than a streamlined government propaganda, so that I can make an educated decision, right for me.
And this has simply not been happening….. and this new directive makes the situation worse.
I think that a majority would accept an argument that denying the climate crisis is very dangerous talk. It could destroy the human race. What's mpore dangerous than that? How would you feel if that majority started supporting banning such speech from social media, or perhaps even suggesting it be prosecuted?
I know that you are stuck on the idea that by asking supporters to peacefully march on the Capitol, Trump incited a riot, but there is no legal argument to support that, and probably no rational one.
Should an argument such as the above also be banned?
Finally, you seem to have trouble these days completing a sentence without using the word "Trump". You might want to spend a little time thinking about that.
"Finally, you seem to have trouble these days completing a sentence without using the word "Trump". You might want to spend a little time thinking about that."
Tim, thanks for the opportunity for me to elaborate on what's important here.
My objectives, include respectful communication and very importantly, learning from each other based on authentic truths/information. The element of important learning which is completely eluding most in the republican party right now relates to "Trump".
The Big Lie for instance about this last election continues to be embedded in the brains of tens of millions of republicans despite 10 times the needed evidence to prove that its nothing but a big Lie.
The fraudulent Maricopa clown show for instance is totally embarrassing the republicans but continues to be embraced by several here. Trump has already caused unprecedented damage to the republican party, yet he continues to be the front runner of the party for the 2024 election.............with the damage mounting to the republicans and them continuing to lose numbers and the democrats capitalizing on it(no pun intended).
Get it now Tim?
You are still a republican that cares about your party, correct?
I realize that people want to go to places that tell them what they want to hear and read. This is exactly the problem today. You should know by now that this is no echo chamber and I tell you what you NEED to know. The objective truth.
Libs get the objective truth when they are wrong.
Conservatives get the objective truth when they are wrong.
I'm more of a fact checker than a moderator much of the time.
And I can be wrong too. My absolute favorite posts are those that question me. This is the best way for metmike to learn.............using the scientific method. We should always try to prove that we are wrong and failing before gaining confidence that we are right.
You questioning me here gives me an opportunity to think about why I bring up Trump so much here..........which is a correct observation by you and elaborate with an explanation for myself and the forum.
There are far more republicans here than anything else. I can't see anything more important to that party right now than this.
Republicans here would prefer to just have threads bashing Biden and democrats and Fauci and the COVID vaccine or socialism.........while not looking in the mirror to see what's happening to their party that MUST BE fixed if they hope to unite and start representing the entire truth.
Do you get that Tim?
I'm totally ok with all the preferred threads too but if you don't get this tough love medicine from me, where is it going to come from?
Again, I am your friend and absolutely not an adversary.
I understand your intentions are honorable, but you are not addressing the main question here. Fair enough.
But wouldn't be ironic if it turned out that the "big Lie" of the last year was calling claims of election fraud "The Big Lie"?
This is from the guy who coined the phrase "The Most Secure Election in History".
Georgia secretary of state calls for Fulton County elections officials to be fired (msn.com)
that would be hysterically funny Tim if it were not sad. Guy went from alpha to omega and the msm's went right with him every step of the way.....no matter which way he was leaning. What an awful bunch of hypocrites. And no MM this in no way means the election needs to be reversed, just means again, why do we put up with fraud?
Wow…. I had to read timnew’s link more than once.
If somebody showed me something like this from a third-world country, or a dictatorship, I could understand, but I would still be surprised by the audacity of it.
Yes, I understand, these are tiny numbers, when compared to the 81 mill Biden votes. This does not prove that Trump won the election. However, it verifies again that the statement “the most secure election in history” is an absurd statement.
You take this report and add it to all “irregularities” that have been witnessed… and you wonder.
You don’t have to be a Trump supporter to wonder how Biden suddenly became the most popular president in history
So far, for the first 8 months, almost all the many dozens of major election fraud allegations have proven to be false. Some intentionally staged with fake data..........like Mike Lindell's video presentation.
However, as somebody that has shown 10 times more legit/proven election fraud than everybody else combined, I very much look forward to finding out more about this new allegation.
Keep us posted.
While this thread has morphed into several different related areas, I am in agreement on the problem of giving censorship control to entities that will often apply rules using biased political standards because of thats how human beings that act as gatekeepers think........very few can think like robots or without personal bias.
However, mcfarm just gave us the perfect, real world example of exactly the type of thing that should be first in line for censorship.
He read it on the internet.............like millions of others reading it on the internet. Many of them believing it. Some of them using it as ammo to NOT get vaccinated.
We know that some of those NOT getting vaccinate will die from COVID BECAUSE OF NOT GETTING VACCINATED.
This is dangerous stuff and rooted in total anti science, made up(lies), which makes it worthy of being censored/banned in my opinion.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
read it on the internet
7 responses |
Started by mcfarm - July 18, 2021, 1:30 p.m.
"wonder if its close to true...."they were 174 more covid vaccine deaths in the US last week than covid deaths"
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/72388/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++=
mcfarm,
We're still interested in the source of this.
Who thinks it ok to post things like this and why or why not?
I am in a marketing group on Skype. There is guy from NW Iowa on there and he {who knows} a little bit bent towards conspiracy. At any rate he asked the question and I do not know if or where he read it. I have asked him to provide a source and he has not responded yet.
Thanks much! It will be interesting to find out.
The fraud alegations that I dismissed months ago were that the vote machines somehow switched votes. I dismissed that, and Trump, long ago.
What I have been interested in seeing was whether the actual ballots were valid.
We know that there were vulnarabilities. And I have no reason to believe that dems would not take advantage of those vulberabilities. They actually created many of them as a reaction to the pandemic.
In a state where the margin was around 10K+/-. A state that has voted red since after Carter... A state where Stacey Abrams actively encouraged ballot harvesting, scrutiny is more than a good idea.
What happened in Fulton County stinks to high heaven.. And I sincerely doubt that Ga is unique.
Edit:. Clinton carried Ga in 92. Bush I with his "read my lips" statement was devestating and many of us , including me, voted for Perot. I still regret that vote.