Believe the accuser

[btpag...@gmail.com]

Unless you are a Democrat.

Pathetic.

[unclejr]

On Monday, April 27, 2020 at 7:37:45 AM UTC-5, btpag...@gmail.com wrote:
> Unless you are a Democrat.
>
> Pathetic.

Trumpers accusing Joe Biden of sexual harassment is a bad joke.

And not all Democrats (I'm among them who isn't) are giving Joe Biden a pass on this accusation.

HTH. HAND.

[btpag...@gmail.com]

Talking does not equal action. You guys are a joke if you think so.

[btpag...@gmail.com]

AND I was thoroughly disgusted by that. But if you put up someone talking so disgusting like that with someone that actually did what Joe is alleged to have done, one deserved prison and it isn’t the orange man. Now, there maybe other situations out there where he does too, but nothing with the teeth of what Joe is facing.

[the_andr...@yahoo.com]

C’mon Brent. He’s only accused of forcibly penetrating her.

It’s not like he made some vulgar locker room speech or actual rape-rape.

We gotta get this ineloquent clown out of office and Joe is our guy. Let’s not look our gift horse too closely.

Okay?

[Irish Ranger]

I agree with you Boyo. I encourage the Democrats to stick with Alzheimer Joe and pick the
brilliant Maxine Waters as his running mate. Failing that, the Democrats
must fall back to old Heart Attack Bernie. American voters really want an old Communist,
open borders, more Sanctuary Cities, the elimination of ICE and bigger government and
higher taxes!

Irish Mike

P.S. and Democrats - please do not forget Hillary. The third time is a charm!

[darkst...@gmail.com]

On Monday, April 27, 2020 at 5:37:45 AM UTC-7, btpag...@gmail.com wrote:
> Unless you are a Democrat.
>
> Pathetic.

You're confusing that I'm voting for the son of a bitch.

Mike

[btpag...@gmail.com]

Good point Andrew, it’s not like he jumped on the bed pulled at her clothes and left, 40 years ago. And hey, I know there’s tons or corroboration piling up now, but that means it isn’t a big deal. When nobody remembers it all, that’s when you don’t believe the accuser it’s like raping all rape victims all over again, or whatever that girl said to Flake.

[Con Reeder, unhyphenated American]

On 2020-04-28, btpag...@gmail.com <btpag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Good point Andrew, it???s not like he jumped on the bed pulled at her clothes and left, 40 years ago.

I mean Kavanaugh couldn't be shown by evidence to be even acquainted
with Blasey Ford, which was very damning. Instead it is a matter of
record that Biden had a close association with Reade, which must tend
to exonerate him. Or so the Democrats argue, I guess.

If you wanted to really give Biden some trouble, you could get Julie
Swetnick to reprise her laughable claims.

> And hey, I know there???s tons or corroboration piling up now, but
> that means it isn???t a big deal. When nobody remembers it all,
> that???s when you don???t believe the accuser it???s like raping all

> rape victims all over again, or whatever that girl said to Flake.

And its not like it was rape rape, right?

--
Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently equipped fool. -- unknown

[Tom Enright]

On Monday, April 27, 2020 at 8:37:45 AM UTC-4, btpag...@gmail.com wrote:

> Unless you are a Democrat.
>
> Pathetic.

Unsupported 35 year-old accusations against Kavanaugh? Thousands of stories.

Supported 25 year-old accusations against Biden? Yawn.

Enemy of the people indeed.

-TE

[Eric Ramon]

I believe the stories about Bill Clinton are true. I believe the stories about Kavenaugh are true. I believe the stories about Trump are true. I believe the stories about Biden are true. You probably do, too.

[Tom Enright]

On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 6:41:44 PM UTC-4, Eric Ramon wrote:
> On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 3:19:20 PM UTC-7, Tom Enright wrote:
> > On Monday, April 27, 2020 at 8:37:45 AM UTC-4, btpag...@gmail.com wrote:
> >
> > > Unless you are a Democrat.
> > >
> > > Pathetic.
> >
> > Unsupported 35 year-old accusations against Kavanaugh? Thousands of stories.
> >
> > Supported 25 year-old accusations against Biden? Yawn.
> >
> > Enemy of the people indeed.
> >
> > -TE

> I believe the stories about Bill Clinton are true.

Yep.

> I believe the stories about Kavenaugh are true.

No, not at all. Zero evidence, no corroboration, nothing in his
subsequent behavior to support these charges. They can't even
provide evidence that they ever met.

> I believe the stories about Trump are true.

There's so many, you'd have to be more specific

> I believe the stories about Biden are true.

Yep.

> You probably do, too.

Kind of.

My comment is less about the relative guilt of the individuals, just how
completely corrupt the media in this country is. CNN Ran 700+ stories about
those absurd allegations against Kavanaugh, 2 on Biden. By last count...

-TE

“Every time I wonder why Trump still holds these daily briefings, I see the media being so damned stupid, biased, petty, irresponsible, gullible, and ignorant, and suddenly it all makes sense to me.”

[Eric Ramon]

On Tuesday, April 28, 2020 at 3:54:43 PM UTC-7, Tom Enright wrote:

>
> My comment is less about the relative guilt of the individuals, just how
> completely corrupt the media in this country is. CNN Ran 700+ stories about
> those absurd allegations against Kavanaugh, 2 on Biden. By last count...

it would be interesting to compare that to Fox's coverage of the two. I'm with you on media corruption.

[btpag...@gmail.com]

You don’t think Fox covered Kavanaugh ad nauseum? Seriously?

[Eric Ramon]

On Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 7:42:26 AM UTC-7, btpag...@gmail.com wrote:
> You don’t think Fox covered Kavanaugh ad nauseum? Seriously?

no, I don't know. I don't watch cable news, I just read what people say about it. I watch the press briefings on youtube, as much as I can stand. Were they friendly towards him? As antagonistic as CNN or MSNBC must have been?

[btpag...@gmail.com]

Why would they be antagonistic toward him? Why would any of the outlets? Think about what you just said.

[Eric Ramon]

On Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 10:41:53 AM UTC-7, btpag...@gmail.com wrote:
> Why would they be antagonistic toward him? Why would any of the outlets? Think about what you just said.

so they were totally neutral?

[btpag...@gmail.com]

Depends on the story and who was doing it, Eric. I know it’s popular to believe Fox paints one side and CNN another, but the truth is Fox provides both. Not all the time, but far more often than the rest of the news media who trot out Republicans that hate Trump and claim they have provided the conservative viewpoint.

The egregious thing Fox has going is the constant editorializing during their reporting and it’s unwatchable and unlistenable for that reason. But On Kavanaugh, I’m not sure what would satisfy you as to neutral coverage. At one time, following the principle of due process sand reporting the facts would have been considered neutral. I fear today that would be considered pro-Kavanaugh which is pretty scary to me.

And BTW Joe deserves due process too, but trying to cover for him, tank the stories and not report is not that. The amount of corroboration is weakening that resolve however, as it should.

[Eric Ramon]

Just chatting here, no actual politics involved...

I gave up on MSNBC a long time ago. I liked Rachel Maddow when she was going after Bush who, you know, lied about Iraq. But then Obama got in and there was nothing he could do that would be wrong! I know I've said this many times, whenever Obama did something awful Maddow would say "but that's not good enough for the Republicans!", as if somehow Obama hadn't done it, it was the Repubs! He was just being nice to them by doing some what they wanted. That was it!

Fox was disqualified for me by their promotion of stupid conspiracy theories.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/obama-birth-record-definitely-fraudulent-sheriff-joe-arpaio-says

And CNN has, ever since the excuse for Hillary's emails and subsequent loss was created in 2016, pushed "Russia!!".

Meanwhile we have the New York Times covering for Biden, downplaying crazy things Trump says. You might dislike them for the Biden thing, I dislike them for both.

Which leaves us what? as actual news sources? I'm spending a lot of time reading between the lines since nobody really gives it straight, except unusual sources like Matt Taibbi or Caitlin Johnstone.

[btpag...@gmail.com]

Eric it sounds like we do about the same though our view may differ as to which things are credible.

[Eric Ramon]

On Wednesday, April 29, 2020 at 1:47:39 PM UTC-7, btpag...@gmail.com wrote:
> Eric it sounds like we do about the same though our view may differ as to which things are credible.

interestingly, there's this at the CNN site.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/29/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-new-york-times/index.html

where Chris Cillizza goes after the Biden campaign pretty directly and makes me hate Stacey Abrams in one go.

[michael anderson]

is their a market for that though?

You have to remember that news channels are a *business*. Doing a "just the facts maam" type of coverage without tons of spin isn't going to sell.....businesses that focus on something that don't sell won't be in business long.

If there was more of a desire for what you want(hint- there isn't), you would see more outlets like that. But people want to hear what they *want* to believe, root for, etc.....

[michael anderson]

keep in mind nowhere in a reporter's job description does it say anything about being unbiased, 'finding the truth', being fair, etc....in fact those may be unfavorable qualities in a reporter.

[Damon Hynes, Cyclone Ranger]

Whenever I’ve heard Maddow talking about anything other than politics, I’ve found her to be extremely personable.

Politics brings out the worst in people; it really does.

[Damon Hynes, Cyclone Ranger]

Eric: We know who FOX’s bomb throwing lefties are—Williams, Wallace and formerly Shep.

Who are CNN’s bomb throwing righties? If you say Jennifer Rubin, you’re wrong. (I’m totally puzzled about S. E. Cupp...)