Facebook and Twitter reducing distribution of New York Post Hunter Biden story [merged threads]

[Dashinka 24,731]

2 minutes ago, laylalex said:

Actually my recollection is that mainstream media referred to those particular parts as being "salacious" and "unfounded." 

The entire dossier was "unfounded" and the work of a political campaign.  Sounds like they were splitting hairs.

[laylalex 7,300]

Just now, Dashinka said:

The entire dossier was "unfounded" and the work of a political campaign.  Sounds like they were splitting hairs.

You were referring specifically to the pee pee tapes' description in the mainstream media, so that's what I was addressing. Now maybe on the Daily Kos they thought the tapes were real, but I think we've established that isn't mainstream. It's a biased blog. Like other biased blogs.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

3 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

The entire dossier was "unfounded" and the work of a political campaign.  Sounds like they were splitting hairs.

That the FBI leaked to a news source so that they could then use that information THEY LEAKED in order to get a FISA warrant

[Dashinka 24,731]

1 minute ago, moxy said:

I have several thoughts.

1) Twitter and Facebook are private companies. They are allowed to control the content on their website in the same way VJ is. It's not a violation of the first amendment as the president and so many others claim.

2) The Hunter Biden story has failed the smell test multiple times. You will probably disagree, but isn't it strange that now that the election is over, the president and his allies haven't said boo about it. In any case, Twitter and Facebook are locking those stories out because they spread debunked misinformation.

3) The far right is so concerned about Hunter Biden trading on his dad's name (and there does seem to be some truth to this, although to my knowledge it's not illegal) but have nothing at all to say about the president filling key jobs with his children and the family of his political allies. Pardon me if I don't really buy into all the pearl-clutching.

Yes, but these companies enjoy a level of protection not afforded to others when it comes to making editorial decisions.  As to the story passing the smell test, that is a matter of opinion, but it is interesting to see one story meet that criteria with even less public evidence.  As to the third point, I was never a big fan of Ivanka, or Jarrod being there although Jarrod was quite productive in the ME, but don't most Presidents fill positions with political allies?  As to pearl clutching, not really into that, just providing the same level of respect to Joe and his corruption as others have provided to Trump.

[moxy 1,051]

Just now, Cyberfx1024 said:

That the FBI leaked to a news source so that they could then use that information THEY LEAKED in order to get a FISA warrant

You're kinda moving the goal posts here. You had thoughts on the MSM reporting the pee tape.

[Dashinka 24,731]

1 minute ago, laylalex said:

You were referring specifically to the pee pee tapes' description in the mainstream media, so that's what I was addressing. Now maybe on the Daily Kos they thought the tapes were real, but I think we've established that isn't mainstream. It's a biased blog. Like other biased blogs.

I was not, and if you had read my history you would know I have had a problem with the entire political hit piece paid for by the Hillary campaign, created through the use of foreign agents, and then used as the main reason to issue FISA warrants against USCs. 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

2 minutes ago, moxy said:

You're kinda moving the goal posts here. You had thoughts on the MSM reporting the pee tape.

Not really because I am telling you what actually happened. Aaron Mate has done a few really good pieces on this. 

[moxy 1,051]

3 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

Yes, but these companies enjoy a level of protection not afforded to others when it comes to making editorial decisions.  As to the story passing the smell test, that is a matter of opinion, but it is interesting to see one story meet that criteria with even less public evidence.  As to the third point, I was never a big fan of Ivanka, or Jarrod being there although Jarrod was quite productive in the ME, but don't most Presidents fill positions with political allies?  As to pearl clutching, not really into that, just providing the same level of respect to Joe and his corruption as others have provided to Trump.

I'm not necessarily pointing to you or anyone specific about pearl clutching. But in general the president's supporters and his allies are screaming about the splinter in the Bidens eyes, while ignoring the log in their own. And I get that politics is politics, but in this case (as is the case with so many of Trump's grievances) it's gone way beyond that.

 

Twitter and Facebook enjoy the same protections as VJ does. The same protections as partisan blogs enjoy. Granted, Facebook and Twitter have a crapton of money and lawyers that VJ probably doesn't have access to, but I think a criticism of capitalism is out of scope of this conversation.

 

The Hunter Biden story isn't really a matter of opinion. It's just a case of "show me the evidence."

[laylalex 7,300]

3 minutes ago, Dashinka said:

I was not, and if you had read my history you would know I have had a problem with the entire political hit piece paid for by the Hillary campaign, created through the use of foreign agents, and then used as the main reason to issue FISA warrants against USCs. 

 

I assumed you were focusing on the part of cyberfx's post that you bolded. Which was about the pee pee tapes being real. If it was about the whole universe of the dossier, that just wasn't clear to me because of the bolding. Also more than a couple of the claims in the dossier and ones raised in the investigation have been shown to be true (the Mueller report makes that clear), so it's not right to say all of it was bullpuckey. 

 

Just my opinion. 

[Prizm123 1,086]

for the record, i dont know anyone who took the idea of pee pee tapes seriously, we all thought it was a joke and were laughing about how absurd something like that would even be.

[Dashinka 24,731]

Just now, moxy said:

I'm not necessarily pointing to you or anyone specific about pearl clutching. But in general the president's supporters and his allies are screaming about the splinter in the Bidens eyes, while ignoring the log in their own. And I get that politics is politics, but in this case (as is the case with so many of Trump's grievances) it's gone way beyond that.

 

Twitter and Facebook enjoy the same protections as VJ does. The same protections as partisan blogs enjoy. Granted, Facebook and Twitter have a crapton of money and lawyers that VJ probably doesn't have access to, but I think a criticism of capitalism is out of scope of this conversation.

 

The Hunter Biden story isn't really a matter of opinion. It's just a case of "show me the evidence."

My only point is the way the MSM covered the Trump "dossier" leading to the Mueller probe, and how they are covering the potential corruption from Biden's political career.  You want to defend the MSM, but the Biden corruption evidence is even more so with actual sources coming forward showing not only Hunter's involvement, but laying out the money flowing directly to Joe.  Whether it is true or not is not for me to decide, but it is clearly something that deserves the same level of coverage as the "dossier" Russian/Collusion narrative.

[moxy 1,051]

1 minute ago, Prizm123 said:

for the record, i dont know anyone who took the idea of pee pee tapes seriously, we all thought it was a joke and were laughing about how absurd something like that would even be.

Same here. I mean, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if there really was a pee tape, but most people I know don't take it seriously. And that's pretty much my recollection of how the pee tape was handled by the MSM.

[Dashinka 24,731]

3 minutes ago, Prizm123 said:

for the record, i dont know anyone who took the idea of pee pee tapes seriously, we all thought it was a joke and were laughing about how absurd something like that would even be.

And yet FISA warrants against USCs were applied for based on the dossier including the pee pee stories.  For the record, I don't think there were actual tapes.

[laylalex 7,300]

But it's not evidence of anything if it's not true, and you yourself say it might not be true and would need to be decided.

[Dashinka 24,731]

5 minutes ago, laylalex said:

 

I assumed you were focusing on the part of cyberfx's post that you bolded. Which was about the pee pee tapes being real. If it was about the whole universe of the dossier, that just wasn't clear to me because of the bolding. Also more than a couple of the claims in the dossier and ones raised in the investigation have been shown to be true (the Mueller report makes that clear), so it's not right to say all of it was bullpuckey. 

 

Just my opinion. 

I was reading into the OPs use as a method to display the entire "unfounded" dossier.