537
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 Oct 2024
537 points (99.4% liked)
politics
19148 readers
2042 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
"in contradiction of history" is just a fancy way of saying that he lied. Call him a fucking liar like he is.
Journalistically, I think "lying" implies willfullness, and a reporter cannot 100% prove that a false statement was made willfully, with knowledge that the statement was false.
What the reporter can do is point out that the statement was false, with evidence that demonstrates that, even including statements to the contrary by the person making the false statement before and after. But you can't know for sure in the moment a false statement is being made that the person believed it was false as they were making it.
This journalistic concept is part of the reason the couch fucker meme took off. AP (was it AP?) published a story about how "No, JD Vance did not have sex with a couch," and then retracted it. Why? Because while there's no evidence that JD Vance did have sex with a couch, and there's plenty of evidence that JD Vance having sex with a couch was just a joke, there isn't any proof that JD Vance didn't have sex with a couch.
And yet Fox News will run a dozen stories on how Walz "lied" about his time in China.
That was bizarre and I have no idea what it was truly about. Seemed personal. On the other hand, just the other week Vance told some lies and brought terrorism to a community because of it. Which one is more important?
Walz was in China around the time of the Tiananmen Square protests but not at the time of the actual massacre.
Lol, you think Fox "News" is actually news? They've successfully argued in court that they're an entertainment company, so anyone who thinks their name means they have anything more than a tenuous connection to the truth is either dumb as fuck or just not paying any attention.
So the core Faux Lies viewer base.