A Political Thread pt. 2

[Ragey Erasmus]

With the greatest of respect, you can keep regurgitating the same line about content, but if the content was better I would have lasted more than 1.45, it just isn't credible in my view, it was an algorithmic manipulative explosion of mistruths in under 2 minutes, and I've sealed it away in the same category as Ben Shapiro, Mr Beast and Jake Paul. Good luck to them, I hope they farm views well and get rich off it, but it's not something I'd waste my time with.

"it was an algorithmic manipulative explosion of mistruths in under 2 minutes"

Mistruths you are not stating. Again, you are claiming it is false whilst also claiming you couldn't be bothered with it. Either you watched it and found errors or lies, in which case feel free to point them out, or you didn't watch it and are in no position whatsoever to pass comment on how truthful the content was. Simple as that really.

Your knowledge of the channel is severely limits and based on little more than a few minutes and looking at ***les (including an April fools one).

Yes it's clickbaity, I never argued otherwise. What I'm saying is there is also substance behind the clickbait and that they practice what they preach. When they say they think something is illegal they are actually in court arguing that too, not just on Youtube. Ben Shapiro isn't, Mr Beast isn't, Jake Paul isn't.

I also pointed out the origins of the channel were not anti-Trump and you flat out refuse to recognise that reality and that it was doing a lot before it covered political stuff. I also pointed out I was following it before it became political.

You are passing lots of comments on things you have extremely limited knowledge of and claiming it as absolute fact.

 

[dirty harry]

So again you can't deal with any of the actual content and can't be bothered. I've already pointed out the difference between Legal Eagle, Democracy Docket and the like and Ben Shapiro. The former are practicing lawyers who are literally practicing what they preach in terms of the law. That is their job and the Youtube channel is the side thing. ben Shapiro DOESN'T practice what he preaches, his online persona IS how he makes his existence.

I already pointed out Legal Eagle was not set up as an anti-Trump channel, it used to about analysing legal arguments in movies and stuff and was a perfectly successful channel doing so, something you ignored.

If you're not interested, that is a you problem. It doesn't invalidate the content and I again find it funny that someone who claims to love nuance is so lazy when it comes to tackling information from anything where you decide you don't like the style. If there is no substance to it, then why are 100's of law firms, including Legal Eagle's fighting the federal government right now in the legal system over this? When have the likes of Ben Shapiro done anything to act on their claims? They don't. You have actual practicing lawyers who are literally in courts right now fighting the Trump administration and make videos explaining why and you refuse to look at it because you don't like the style then lazily lump them in with full time internet personalities. But yeah "nuance".

Let's take a hypothetical, if Trump is a rampant lawbreaker, what would content objectively analysing him look like?

Marc Elias makes similar comments on Youtube and he was the one who faced down Trump's election lawsuits in 2020, winning all but one of the cases (which was then overturned in his favour). I guess in your mind though he's simply an anti-Trumper because he had to fight against Trump's frivolous lawsuits right?

Interesting you mention Mark Elias, I find him smart but hysterical. I saw him recently on an MSNBC panel in which he made the direct claim that Trump was deporting US citizen kids with cancer, and that if he can do that no citizen in the country is safe.

He made 0 mention of the context of that case, regarding the mothers of 2 families status, and making the decision to remove the children with them, he used the words 'deporting US children with cancer'. Egregious lack of honesty, the case itself is bad enough, criticise the system Trump is enabling and utilising, deporting illegal mothers with young children looks bad enough, there's no need to reframe it as deporting US citizen children, why not tell the truth and just say the mothers chose to take the children with them, but what options did they have?!

Integrity is hard, and gets few views

 

[Which Tyler]

 

[dirty harry]

'illegal' migration only counts for about 4% of migrants and, as he responded to one of the journos there, there is a separate white paper which will deal with the "smash the gangs" shtick

Is it as high as 4%? Jesus, I thought it would have been much less. What is that as a number 48k?

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Interesting you mention Mark Elias, I find him smart but hysterical. I saw him recently on an MSNBC panel in which he made the direct claim that Trump was deporting US citizen kids with cancer, and that if he can do that no citizen in the country is safe.

He made 0 mention of the context of that case, regarding the mothers of 2 families status, and making the decision to remove the children with them, he used the words 'deporting US children with cancer'. Egregious lack of honesty, the case itself is bad enough, criticise the system Trump is enabling and utilising, deporting illegal mothers with young children looks bad enough, there's no need to reframe it as deporting US citizen children, why not tell the truth and just say the mothers chose to take the children with them, but what options did they have?!

Integrity is hard, and gets few views

Noting that the mother and child were removed without any due process.

"Egregious lack of honesty" as you say, why did you not mention that there was no due process, they were denied access to their lawyers and were already in the air when the judge requested contact with them?

 

[dirty harry]

Noting that the mother and child were removed without any due process.

"Egregious lack of honesty" as you say, why did you not mention that there was no due process, they were denied access to their lawyers and were already in the air when the judge requested contact with them?

Because according to Homan both mothers had decisions made by judges, and were deported legally with due process. They signed documents requesting their children travel with them.

Now I don't know the ins and outs of the mother situation, I've read they were deported from immigration offices during routine appointments, and the US government made a deal for them and their children to travel together.

But let's say I'm wrong, and there were no judge orders, and the mothers weren't given full due process...

THATS the story, mothers deported without full due process, takes children with them.

Why is that story not enough, why add the mistruth of 'US citizen children aged 2 deported with cancer'?

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

Because according to Homan both mothers had decisions made by judges, and were deported legally with due process. They signed documents requesting their children travel with them.

Now I don't know the ins and outs of the mother situation, I've read they were deported from immigration offices during routine appointments, and the US government made a deal for them and their children to travel together.

But let's say I'm wrong, and there were no judge orders, and the mothers weren't given full due process...

THATS the story, mothers deported without full due process, takes children with them.

Why is that story not enough, why add the mistruth of 'US citizen children aged 2 deported with cancer'?

"According to Homan" this administration is one of the most dishonest in recent history and you're taking his word there? Have you even seen the sort of language that is used on the official department for homeland security website? It's little more than parroting what Trump says at this point. This is the sort of thing they put on their website "The Department of Homeland Security announced that a lawsuit supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which was baseless lawfare against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Department, has been dropped"

I mean really? Official government websites parroting the lawfare bullshit in official government announcements.

" Why is that story not enough, why add the mistruth of 'US citizen children aged 2 deported with cancer'?"

It's not a mistruth though is it? A US citizen child aged 2 with cancer WAS deported without treatment. You may argue it's sensationalist but it isn't a lie. On the flip side, the Trump administration has a a huge list of actual lies they have told.

 

[dirty harry]

Mothers deported by Trump ‘denied’ chance to transfer custody of children, lawyer says

Two women and their children, who are US citizens, held in ‘complete isolation’ before being put on flight to Honduras

www.theguardian.com

This type of reporting is far more up my street, questions can be asked of motives, from the father, mother and ICE, but this at least doesn't run around and scream he's doing it, he's deporting citizen children with cancer, you could be next lol.

 

[dirty harry]

"According to Homan" this administration is one of the most dishonest in recent history and you're taking his word there? Have you even seen the sort of language that is used on the official department for homeland security website? It's little more than parroting what Trump says at this point. This is the sort of thing they put on their website "The Department of Homeland Security announced that a lawsuit supported by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which was baseless lawfare against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Department, has been dropped"

I mean really? Official government websites parroting the lawfare bullshit in official government announcements.

" Why is that story not enough, why add the mistruth of 'US citizen children aged 2 deported with cancer'?"

It's not a mistruth though is it? A US citizen child aged 2 with cancer WAS deported without treatment. You may argue it's sensationalist but it isn't a lie. On the flip side, the Trump administration has a a huge list of actual lies they have told.

I mean no, the 2 year old was NOT deported, the mother made a choice, wrote it down and spoke to the farther on the phone before the family left together. Officially the mother and 11 year old non citizens were deported, the 2 year old was not and can return whenever she wants, I think Rubio just made that comment about the 2 year old being collected by the father and returning home.

But this is my point, your not going to beat Trump by embellishing the story, that plays into his hands, a few weeks ago there was a record market crash and all banks were going to collapse, we were all going to die, Trump was also going to wipe his arse with the constitution and demand a 3rd term, Elon Musk was going to become the lord emperor Nazi of the USA... how are those sensationalist stories turning out?

No 3rd term by Trump's words, markets recovering, and Musk always had a deadline and left. Every one of these stories, added to story's like the poor Maryland man, all just add to Trump's base.

You beat Trump by being honest, reporters lobbing aggressive questions about these stories are easy to home run, Homan proved that recently laughing at a reporter who claimed the 2 year old was deported, it gave him the 'we have never and would never deport US citizens' sound bite.

This is why I bang on about the stories being set up by Trump, he's so psychotic it wouldn't surprise me if he leaks the cancer kid deported story before mocking those who attack him for it.

 

[Reiser99]

Top UK Special Forces general oversaw blocking of Afghan 'war-crime' witnesses to Britain

Gen Sir Gwyn Jenkins oversaw a process where Afghan special forces were prevented from settling in the UK.

www.bbc.co.uk

He should be fired immediately and if possible jailed. Obstruction of justice?

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

I mean no, the 2 year old was NOT deported, the mother made a choice, wrote it down and spoke to the farther on the phone before the family left together. Officially the mother and 11 year old non citizens were deported, the 2 year old was not and can return whenever she wants, I think Rubio just made that comment about the 2 year old being collected by the father and returning home.

But this is my point, your not going to beat Trump by embellishing the story, that plays into his hands, a few weeks ago there was a record market crash and all banks were going to collapse, we were all going to die, Trump was also going to wipe his arse with the constitution and demand a 3rd term, Elon Musk was going to become the lord emperor Nazi of the USA... how are those sensationalist stories turning out?

No 3rd term by Trump's words, markets recovering, and Musk always had a deadline and left. Every one of these stories, added to story's like the poor Maryland man, all just add to Trump's base.

You beat Trump by being honest, reporters lobbing aggressive questions about these stories are easy to home run, Homan proved that recently laughing at a reporter who claimed the 2 year old was deported, it gave him the 'we have never and would never deport US citizens' sound bite.

This is why I bang on about the stories being set up by Trump, he's so psychotic it wouldn't surprise me if he leaks the cancer kid deported story before mocking those who attack him for it.

That will remain to be seen in court.

By Trump's own words he said he wouldn't do something... You know that is completely meaningless as Trump lies like he breathes and will deny on Tuesday what he claimed on Monday. Trump is already wiping his arse with the Constitution so not sure how you can act like somehow that isn't happening. He wiped his arse with it in his first term too. He's the only president to have not overseen a peaceful transfer of power.

As for Musk, let's just pretend the guy didn't decimate every agency he touched, has removed all the people who were investigating him and his agencies and hasn't walked away with mountains of personal tax information then... Sure, it was all hunky-dory and absolutely zero evidence of any wrong-doing.

You don't beat Trump by being honest, it's abundantly clear that's not the case. Actual facts and evidence barely enter the equation when it comes to Trump. Look at the vast number of his supporters who are convinced 2020 was rigged and tell me they give even the tiniest **** about evidence.

 

[dirty harry]

That will remain to be seen in court.

By Trump's own words he said he wouldn't do something... You know that is completely meaningless as Trump lies like he breathes and will deny on Tuesday what he claimed on Monday. Trump is already wiping his arse with the Constitution so not sure how you can act like somehow that isn't happening. He wiped his arse with it in his first term too. He's the only president to have not overseen a peaceful transfer of power.

As for Musk, let's just pretend the guy didn't decimate every agency he touched, has removed all the people who were investigating him and his agencies and hasn't walked away with mountains of personal tax information then... Sure, it was all hunky-dory and absolutely zero evidence of any wrong-doing.

You don't beat Trump by being honest, it's abundantly clear that's not the case. Actual facts and evidence barely enter the equation when it comes to Trump. Look at the vast number of his supporters who are convinced 2020 was rigged and tell me they give even the tiniest **** about evidence.

This is.exactly why he's winning though, he doesn't have to look credible to you, who hate him regardless, he just needs to look targeted and politically attacked by your team, and he's done a great job of that to be fair to him. Your team will lob every half story on the 'Trump is literally Hitler' pile, regardless of truth, facts or integrity. His supporters will put the exact same story on the 'see they are after him' pile, and both your team and your enemies team will dig their heels in, where he wins is the rational neutral, and currently the anti Trumpers are viewed as a bigger threat than MAGA.

Sensationalism around Trump has become laughable, 3 stories a week literally calling him Hitler, it all turns into a blur.

Let's take Jan 6th, why do you think MAGA supporters don't care about it? Why do you think his support base grew in 2024 after an 'insurrection'?

 

[McTallshort]

Seriously can we have a separate thread for American politics?

 

[Ragey Erasmus]

This is.exactly why he's winning though, he doesn't have to look credible to you, who hate him regardless, he just needs to look targeted and politically attacked by your team, and he's done a great job of that to be fair to him. Your team will lob every half story on the 'Trump is literally Hitler' pile, regardless of truth, facts or integrity. His supporters will put the exact same story on the 'see they are after him' pile, and both your team and your enemies team will dig their heels in, where he wins is the rational neutral, and currently the anti Trumpers are viewed as a bigger threat than MAGA.

Sensationalism around Trump has become laughable, 3 stories a week literally calling him Hitler, it all turns into a blur.

Let's take Jan 6th, why do you think MAGA supporters don't care about it? Why do you think his support base grew in 2024 after an 'insurrection'?

I don't "hate him regardless", I hate him because he has proven himself to be hateful. I give the benefit of the doubt to these people when they first take power and the fact they then prove my views correct in how they act is why I hate them. I spoke to a colleague of mine that I didn't think Trump would leave office peacefully if he lost the election last time and was told I was just being hysterical. Jan 6th followed a few months later. So yeah, my views about Trump are based on his actions and are pretty on point. I also said he would keep denying the results if he lost and he did.

Are you suggesting Trump isn't held to account when he engages in criminal activity because it allows him to play martyr to his cultists who don't give a **** about facts? "half story", the man literally said he didn't care if his Vice president was murdered by a baying mob ffs! Seriously man, you are talking such bullshit, Trump doesn't win with rational people because every criticism you make about what people do to him, he does more to others. You are trying to claim people hate lies and persecution so will instead go with the biggest liar, cheat, criminal and con artist in the government and somehow that makes sense to you?

"Let's take Jan 6th, why do you think MAGA supporters don't care about it? Why do you think his support base grew in 2024 after an 'insurrection'?"

Why don't they care about it? Because they were the instigators ffs. That's like asking why don't gang members care about gang crime? Honestly that is such a stupid take. I gave you a chance but bloody hell you are talking such crap and I'm not giving you another one.

 

[Ddanno]

I don't "hate him regardless", I hate him because he has proven himself to be hateful. I give the benefit of the doubt to these people when they first take power and the fact they then prove my views correct in how they act is why I hate them. I spoke to a colleague of mine that I didn't think Trump would leave office peacefully if he lost the election last time and was told I was just being hysterical. Jan 6th followed a few months later. So yeah, my views about Trump are based on his actions and are pretty on point. I also said he would keep denying the results if he lost and he did.

Are you suggesting Trump isn't held to account when he engages in criminal activity because it allows him to play martyr to his cultists who don't give a **** about facts? "half story", the man literally said he didn't care if his Vice president was murdered by a baying mob ffs! Seriously man, you are talking such bullshit, Trump doesn't win with rational people because every criticism you make about what people do to him, he does more to others. You are trying to claim people hate lies and persecution so will instead go with the biggest liar, cheat, criminal and con artist in the government and somehow that makes sense to you?

"Let's take Jan 6th, why do you think MAGA supporters don't care about it? Why do you think his support base grew in 2024 after an 'insurrection'?"

Why don't they care about it? Because they were the instigators ffs. That's like asking why don't gang members care about gang crime? Honestly that is such a stupid take. I gave you a chance but bloody hell you are talking such crap and I'm not giving you another one.

Ragey, stop. Just let him shout into his own arsehole. It's a total waste of your time, effort and inclination otherwise. Plus, the rest of us occasionally have to uncover and read his drivel to understand what's happening in the discussion

 

[dirty harry]

I don't "hate him regardless", I hate him because he has proven himself to be hateful. I give the benefit of the doubt to these people when they first take power and the fact they then prove my views correct in how they act is why I hate them. I spoke to a colleague of mine that I didn't think Trump would leave office peacefully if he lost the election last time and was told I was just being hysterical. Jan 6th followed a few months later. So yeah, my views about Trump are based on his actions and are pretty on point. I also said he would keep denying the results if he lost and he did.

Are you suggesting Trump isn't held to account when he engages in criminal activity because it allows him to play martyr to his cultists who don't give a **** about facts? "half story", the man literally said he didn't care if his Vice president was murdered by a baying mob ffs! Seriously man, you are talking such bullshit, Trump doesn't win with rational people because every criticism you make about what people do to him, he does more to others. You are trying to claim people hate lies and persecution so will instead go with the biggest liar, cheat, criminal and con artist in the government and somehow that makes sense to you?

"Let's take Jan 6th, why do you think MAGA supporters don't care about it? Why do you think his support base grew in 2024 after an 'insurrection'?"

Why don't they care about it? Because they were the instigators ffs. That's like asking why don't gang members care about gang crime? Honestly that is such a stupid take. I gave you a chance but bloody hell you are talking such crap and I'm not giving you another one.

A stupid take? There were what 1k arrests, mostly for trespassing, obstruction and other similar crimes, since then millions more people decided to vote for him, his popularity INCREASED! Why do you think that is, becoming more popular after an 'insurrection?

So your telling me those millions of people were the instigators of Jan 6th, they just decided not to vote for him in 2020?

Listen to how hysterical you are, claiming 80 million people are gang members who instigated Jan 6th! The question was clearly not about those who went in the capitol against Trump's say so.

It's like your learning nothing from Trump, the tactics used against him havnt changed since 2015, and he only gets more popular, and gains more control, at what point do you think about switching things up?! He's laying the foundations for a generation of Republican control, and you just don't seem to understand that tugging your testicles and crying into the air about every half story embellished to ridiculous level, won't actually solve the problem!

Mind you I also believed Obama was ushering in a generation of Democrat control also lol

 

[dirty harry]

Ragey, stop. Just let him shout into his own arsehole. It's a total waste of your time, effort and inclination otherwise. Plus, the rest of us occasionally have to uncover and read his drivel to understand what's happening in the discussion

That's right ignore the one person challenging the hysterical narrative, this is an anti Trump thread, for anti Trump people, who only want to complain about him in the correct anti Trump ways, the ways that have beaten him so far hahaha

 

[Which Tyler]

Poland to close Russian consulate in Kraków over Warsaw fire

Ministers say investigation proves Russian intelligence services were behind shopping centre blaze last year

www.theguardian.com

 

[Welsh Exile]

That's right ignore the one person challenging the hysterical narrative, this is an anti Trump thread, for anti Trump people, who only want to complain about him in the correct anti Trump ways, the ways that have beaten him so far hahaha

Well look, if you can come up with any pro Trump arguments other than he's tee total and is apparently a good dad then go for it. We're all waiting.

 

[Ddanno]

Well look, if you can come up with any pro Trump arguments other than he's tee total and is apparently a good dad then go for it. We're all waiting.

Apart from noncing over his daughter....