• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Confessions of a voter fraud: I was a master at fixing mail-in ballots

JMR said:
If you recall, every item that Deep Throat gave up was double and triple checked before it went to print. That does not seem to be the NY Post's operating standard.
Click to expand...
How could it be double and triple checked if his identity was to be kept secret?
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
How could it be double and triple checked if his identity was to be kept secret?
Click to expand...

I will give you the simplest possible example in the pious hope that it will be understood.

On the condition that they remain anonymous, "A" tells "B" that "C" who isn't supposed to have "D" does, in fact, have "D" and has it hidden in their backpack.

"B" then approaches "C" and asks "C" to remove their backpack.

"B" then searches that backpack and discovers "D".

"C", in fact, is not supposed to have "D".

The anonymous statement that "C", who isn't supposed to have "D" does, in fact, have "D" and has it hidden in their backpack has been confirmed.
​
 
JMR said:
I understand that you repeat your party's line, but you cannot point out any articles at the NYTs or WaPo that have been shown to be false.
Click to expand...

Surely you jest...
 
JMR said:
I understand that you repeat your party's line, but you cannot point out any articles at the NYTs or WaPo that have been shown to be false.
Click to expand...

Surely you jest...
 
Fred C Dobbs II said:
How could it be double and triple checked if his identity was to be kept secret?
Click to expand...

The two journalists had many sources in the government and white house. They would ask a knowledgable source if they could confirm a fact from Deep Throat. Didn't you read the book a long time ago?
 
JMR said:
The two journalists had many sources in the government and white house. They would ask a knowledgable source if they could confirm a fact from Deep Throat. Didn't you read the book a long time ago?
Click to expand...

I believe that the "officially approved" response to your position runs along the lines of

"What?!? You propose to "verify" what an anonymous (and therefore untrustworthy) source says by taking the word of another anonymous (and therefore untrustworthy) source? You HAVE to be kidding."
​
 
JMR said:
The two journalists had many sources in the government and white house. They would ask a knowledgable source if they could confirm a fact from Deep Throat. Didn't you read the book a long time ago?
Click to expand...
Yes, I did.
 

Anonymous sources are not untrustworthy when the information they provided is vetted and verified by other sources. It comes down to the reputation of the news organization and whether they bother to stand behind what they publish.
 
JMR said:
Anonymous sources are not untrustworthy when the information they provided is vetted and verified by other sources. It comes down to the reputation of the news organization and whether they bother to stand behind what they publish.
Click to expand...
And you feel that the NY Post has a solid reputation?
 
JMR said:
Anonymous sources are not untrustworthy when the information they provided is vetted and verified by other sources. It comes down to the reputation of the news organization and whether they bother to stand behind what they publish.
Click to expand...

And I didn't say that they were. What I DID say was

I believe that the _"officially approved"_ response to your position runs along the lines of

"What?!? You propose to "verify" what an anonymous (and therefore untrustworthy) source says by taking the word of another anonymous (and therefore untrustworthy) source? You HAVE to be kidding."
​

(_emphasis_ added)​

and I stand by that.
 

Is it really so hard to grasp that the majority of U.S. voters are not receptive to Trump messaging, which is what this is, delivered via the print version of Trump TV, a limitless Murdoch Corp. partisan campaign contribution? Dab a hankey over your crocodile tears.

Second example, the majority is not worried about outbreaks of urban violence if Biden is elected because Biden is the obvious solution to Trump stoked urban violence.


The NC republican candidate nailed for this sort of lawbreaking was exposed by his son. The DOJ had knowledge and had done
nothing to attempt to stop it.


Mark Harris had knowingly hire McCrae Dowless....

A year later, "The Wing" attempts to pull a "Flynn II" OP!

 
Last edited:

Silly games. Have fun.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…