Politics Forum
|
List All Forums | About |
![]() ![]() Section 4: President & Congress Subject: news media Msg# 1193316
|
||||||
Everyone:
When we are posed a question like Doug's, and you reply by simply listing question numbers and your yes-or-no after each number, the rest of us get very little out of it because we are unlikely to remember what was question one, or six, or thirteen. It is dead simple to copy/paste the original question into your reply, then answer at the end of each question. Simply highlight or change color of the original question (see my reply to Doug) to make clear the original questions versus your reply. REALLY more helpful to the rest of us asking what the heck you are answering when you simply list 1-2-3-4, etc., then a yes or no. Yes, we can go back, find the original question, open it in a new tab, split the screen but why should we all have to do that when YOU can make it simple for everyone. I think it's simply being thoughtful. |
||||||
|
||||||
For reference, the above message is a reply to a message where: Mark and all, Please forgive me, but Mark and I and others here have been exchanging ideas for awhile, and maybe we can "take the plunge" a bit. Let's talk about what everyone is talking about.... If you think I am asking for too much I will understand. To be totally honest I think this might be fun. It seems to me that lurking behind all this are some crucial issues, and maybe its worth bringing them to light. First the topic of election integrity ONE Do you believe that cheating is a significant factor in presidential elections? TWO Do you believe that cheating happens but its too small of a thing to impact the outcome? THREE Do you believe that cheating can and has affected the outcome of POTUS elections? FOUR Do you credit the claims by Trump and Giuliani and some others that without cheating Biden would not be sitting in the Oval office right now? Now that we've covered that, let's talk January 6. (Didn't I say that this would be fun?) ONE Did Trump truly break the law so severely that he earned the attention of the subsequent impeachment trial and then later the January 6 committee led by Ms. Cheney? TWO If we focus on the question of Trump's verbal remark that the 2020 election was "stolen" does that in and of itself constitute a punishable and significant crime? THREE If we focus on Trump's comments to the crowd regarding what actions they might take, is he punishable for inciting a crowd to violent acts? FOUR Let's forget about Trump and let's forget about the actual events of the date itself. When Tucker Carlson discussed January 6 on his program he strongly suggested that those who entered the halls and offices of the congressmen were not really committing serious crimes at all. Never mind whether Tucker is right or wrong about this, does he have the right to suggest this interpretation on the airwaves? FIVE More on Tucker Carlson. As we know, Tucker was let go by FOX NEWS not too long after the broadcast in which he made the arguments discussed above in FOUR. Is there any connection - however tenuous and indirect - between Tucker's failure to follow the mainstream line about January 6 and the fact that FOX NEWS let him go? Mar a Lago raid and Biden "Evil MAGA" speech Question ONE: Was the FBI raid on Mar a Lago justified or was itself stretching the law and abusing the rights of Mister Trump? Mister Biden's famous "MAGA is evil" speech - Sept 2022. He didn't just say "Trump is a bad guy" which would not be a surprising comment.. He didn't just say "January 6 protestors are bad guys" which would not be a surprising comment. For all intents and purposes, he was telling us "All those who didn't vote Biden in 2020 are bad people and a threat to the USA." There was *nothing* in his speech to distinguish a run of the mill person who voted for Trump from members of the group he was calling evil. Question TWO: Why should we not consider this outrageous when a POTUS labels all those who voted against him as terrorists? Thanks for listening! Yours, Doug |