• 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!

Dos Chris Hayes Challenge Schiff?

We can now add "journalists" to the professional (expert?) lying class along side politicians, lawyers, salesmen and advertisers.
And yet we must differentiate truth from falsity if we're going to thrive as a nation It has been a problem since the invention of politics, so I sympathize.
I didn't see Chris lying, nor did I see Schiff lying in this particular case. The OP however did misrepresent the malevolent claim. Make of that what you will.
 
And yet we must differentiate truth from falsity if we're going to thrive as a nation It has been a problem since the invention of politics, so I sympathize.
I didn't see Chris lying, nor did I see Schiff lying in this particular case. The OP however did misrepresent the malevolent claim. Make of that what you will.

I agree with the need for seeking truth and questioning BS, but why be so selective when (not?) doing so?

 
I agree with the need for seeking truth and questioning BS, but why be so selective when (not?) doing so?
Perspective. Out of dozens of legit arguments against Trump, I keep seeing this same De Blasio video in response. It's cherry-picked AND not about Trump..its a red herring.

Reminds me of Trump's 20K lies (I lost track of what the current number is).
Right wingers would say "but you can keep your doctor" in response to all 20K. Just like the De Blasio video response.

You do see the false equivalence there? 100 vs 1 failure, out of 150. Both "fail", and yet we can use our brains to determine that 100 failures is far, far, far worse than 1.
It's like reputation. It matters.

so yes, if I see one failure among a hundred, that later was indeed walked back, I will not post it as a response to 100 other real accusations and claim the "both sides" false equivalency.

You can look up how many people were indicted and charged in presidential administrations too, for example. Both sides have criminals.
Democrats have like 2-3 over years. Republicans some much bigger number..80+ (you can look up specifics I'm just making the broad point). You know...proportions matter. Reputation matters.

indeed, the stellar employee with a great reputation blunders, I call them into the office, ensure they found the root cause of the problem and fixed it, and took responsibility, and I don't make a big deal of it...why not? Reputation..how they handled the error, etc.
but if a consistently troubled employee makes another in a long line of errors, and gets defensive about it...they will be dealt with more harshly.

Why the different treatment ttwtt? Same reason.
 
Oh HELL NO!!



Hayes gives Schiff the intro, Schiff blames the death of 50,000 Americans on Trump's "narcissism, incompetence and malevolence", then Hayes just goes on like it's all axiomatic.

Yeah, this is PURE propaganda television.


Not sure why anyone watches these Sunday shows. I gave them up 15-20 years ago. Some entertainer asks a question,the politician gives a non-responsive answer. Rinse and repeat. What does anyone get out of these shows other than getting ticked off?
 
Perspective. Out of dozens of legit arguments against Trump, I keep seeing this same De Blasio video in response. It's cherry-picked AND not about Trump..its a red herring.

Reminds me of Trump's 20K lies (I lost track of what the current number is).
Right wingers would say "but you can keep your doctor" in response to all 20K. Just like the De Blasio video response.

You do see the false equivalence there? 100 vs 1 failure, out of 150. Both "fail", and yet we can use our brains to determine that 100 failures is far, far, far worse than 1.
It's like reputation. It matters.

so yes, if I see one failure among a hundred, that later was indeed walked back, I will not post it as a response to 100 other real accusations and claim the "both sides" false equivalency.

You can look up how many people were indicted and charged in presidential administrations too, for example. Both sides have criminals.
Democrats have like 2-3 over years. Republicans some much bigger number..80+ (you can look up specifics I'm just making the broad point). You know...proportions matter. Reputation matters.

indeed, the stellar employee with a great reputation blunders, I call them into the office, ensure they found the root cause of the problem and fixed it, and took responsibility, and I don't make a big deal of it...why not? Reputation..how they handled the error, etc.
but if a consistently troubled employee makes another in a long line of errors, and gets defensive about it...they will be dealt with more harshly.

Why the different treatment ttwtt? Same reason.

Political lean mostly. That is what bias in the media is all about. You see this as "defending Trump" which is not at all what I am doing. What I am dong is pointing out that folks expressing exactly the same idea (no need to shutdown "just yet") are treated vastly differently based on who made that statement - one is said to have intentionally lied and caused deaths while another is said to have made an honest mistake in judgement which was later reversed/corrected.
 
Political lean mostly. That is what bias in the media is all about. You see this as "defending Trump" which is not at all what I am doing. What I am dong is pointing out that folks expressing exactly the same idea (no need to shutdown "just yet") are treated vastly differently based on who made that statement - one is said to have intentionally lied and caused deaths while another is said to have made an honest mistake in judgement which was later reversed/corrected.

Just as I said. You can't easily point to the long and torrid list of terrible, intentional, malevolent deeds of De Blasio that's in the national media, because most of us know nothing about him. Trump on the other hand, is the PRESIDENT, actually is in charge of the federal response, does in fact help "lead" the state responses in terms of bully-puplit, etc.

We treat De Blasio different because who the **** is De Blasio and what terrors has he inflicted on the nation for 3 years? I honestly have no ****ing clue ttwtt. but Trump as PRESIDENT has been front and center in our lives, BY HIS OWN CHOOSING...remember he's giving all those tweets and pressers intentionally...its not the media.

So yes, I treat Trump way, way, way differently than :"who the **** is De Blasio". Also, was De Blasio getting his queues from Trump? I'd have to investigate that. But given its not my state, I don't care nearly as much as the federal response.

Trump has a reputation, and his blundering of CV19 is consistent with that long reputation of incompetence, idiocy, cover-ups, lying, rambling, spreading misinformation that is harmful, malevolently attacking others, etc . And for De Blasio you have a video on one topic...
 
Only someone with no conscience would do and say what Schiff does and says while feeling self-justified doing and saying it. The man's evil through and through.

Where do place Schiff's counterpart, Devin "The Dunce" Nunes, on the Evil spectrum? More evil or less evil?
 
Just as I said. You can't easily point to the long and torrid list of terrible, intentional, malevolent deeds of De Blasio that's in the national media, because most of us know nothing about him. Trump on the other hand, is the PRESIDENT, actually is in charge of the federal response, does in fact help "lead" the state responses in terms of bully-puplit, etc.

We treat De Blasio different because who the **** is De Blasio and what terrors has he inflicted on the nation for 3 years? I honestly have no ****ing clue ttwtt. but Trump as PRESIDENT has been front and center in our lives, BY HIS OWN CHOOSING...remember he's giving all those tweets and pressers intentionally...its not the media.

So yes, I treat Trump way, way, way differently than :"who the **** is De Blasio". Also, was De Blasio getting his queues from Trump? I'd have to investigate that. But given its not my state, I don't care nearly as much as the federal response.

Trump has a reputation, and his blundering of CV19 is consistent with that long reputation of incompetence, idiocy, cover-ups, lying, rambling, spreading misinformation that is harmful, malevolently attacking others, etc . And for De Blasio you have a video on one topic...

Many very good reasons not to increase the power and expense of the federal government, but this thread is about media bias, not the relative power of a Mayor and the POTUS. Either one questions the judgement of an elected official's (past?) position or they do not. You seem stuck in the orange man bad mode and are thus unable to discuss the obvious difference the media takes with two people both expressing the same idea.
 
Where do place Schiff's counterpart, Devin "The Dunce" Nunes, on the Evil spectrum? More evil or less evil?

Well, given both were exposed to the same information about FBI surveillance back in 2018, and judging by what we now know about the accuracy of the Nunes and Schiff Intel Committee reports (remember them?) it should be clear that Adam Schiff and his report got
lying sack of schiffs award.jpg.

That would mean Schiff bounces up against the limits on the evil spectrum.
 
Last edited:
Oh HELL NO!!



Hayes gives Schiff the intro, Schiff blames the death of 50,000 Americans on Trump's "narcissism, incompetence and malevolence", then Hayes just goes on like it's all axiomatic.

Yeah, this is PURE propaganda television.


What were you expecting him to challenge him on?

You're a rabid twump supporter. Objective reality is anathema to people who support that clown.
 
Many very good reasons not to increase the power and expense of the federal government, but this thread is about media bias, not the relative power of a Mayor and the POTUS. Either one questions the judgement of an elected official's (past?) position or they do not. You seem stuck in the orange man bad mode and are thus unable to discuss the obvious difference the media takes with two people both expressing the same idea.

Repeated the 'orange man bad' meme is essentially admitting that you have no arguments.
 
What were you expecting him to challenge him on?

You're a rabid twump supporter. Objective reality is anathema to people who support that clown.

So Trump can put America first.
 
Well, given both were exposed to the same information about FBI surveillance back in 2018, and judging by what we now know about the the accuracy of the Nunes and Schiff Intel Committee reports (remember them?) it should be clear that Adam Schiff and his report got
View attachment 67279066.

That would mean Schiff bounces up against the limits on the evil spectrum.

Reality Alert! Devin "The Dunce" Nunes lies a lot more than Adam Schiff.

 
You were expecting something else? You can get the same on Fox News...

The main difference is Fox blatantly invents things. This is not invention. It can be argued that it is slanted, but Schiff's comments are mostly true.
 
I don't know about that. I can't think of any FOX host that wouldn't challenge a claim that implied a political opponent had "malevolent" intent and caused the death of 50,000 Americans. I mean, that's a pretty hairball claim to make.

Fox not only would not challenge, but would full throated endorse and embrace. Seen it many, many times.
 
twump never has and never will.

Only made one electable miscalculation, that giving a trillion dollars a year to the rich on the credit card could ever build anything for the people.

Fortunately we have the coronavirus to remind us what we're doing is fiscally irresponsible and we don't have to wait to around the next election to find out what Reprobate tax cut guarantees: and which case it will be? In time for election or to be blamed on the Demoncrap.
 
twump never has and never will.

No-one is all good or all bad.

Everyone has their purpose and imperfections.

Trump is doing a pretty good job of what he said as a pretty poor and very bad President.
 
twump is objectively evil.

Evil has a purpose.

Again I say only one mistake, because who wants to double the debt or hand over a crisis gambling on how rich people will spend their money that wasn't theirs, because it belonged to Caesar. (So you were counted penniless in that life).
 
I noted Schiff's lies as documented by the DOJ IG.
You posted a Mika and Joe segment. Doesn't that strike you as kind of out of balance?

Anyway, it appears that it was a Nunes staffer who had the bulk of contacts with Parnas. At least that's what WAPO seems to be saying. https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/01/16/parnas-nunes-ukraine/

Last I checked, Nunes, not Schiff, already faced one ethics investigation and might face another. Also, to the best of my knowledge, nothing in the Horowitz Report led to a censure, indictment, formal punishment or a loss of rank in the House to Adam Schiff.

Accept some more truth: Trump, King Clown, runs a circus with lots of clowns. Not my circus, not my clowns!
 
Oh HELL NO!!



Hayes gives Schiff the intro, Schiff blames the death of 50,000 Americans on Trump's "narcissism, incompetence and malevolence", then Hayes just goes on like it's all axiomatic.

Yeah, this is PURE propaganda television.


A Fox loyalist talking about propaganda?

:lamo
 
Last I checked, Nunes, not Schiff, already faced one ethics investigation and might face another. Also, to the best of my knowledge, nothing in the Horowitz Report led to a censure, indictment, formal punishment or a loss of rank in the House to Adam Schiff.

Accept some more truth: Trump, King Clown, runs a circus with lots of clowns. Not my circus, not my clowns!

Nunes was cleared.
You expect the House under Nancy Pelosi to censure Adam Schiff?
Did the Horowitz report confirm the Schiff report?
Or did the Horowitz report confirm the Nunes report?
Hey, remember the notorious Schiff retelling of the Ukraine phone call? Was that accurate? If the call itself was so damaging, why lie about what was said on it?
 
Back
Top Bottom