USA politics, recent events.

[Darkwood]

@Midwest

Again you make a leap from me pointing out obvious bias to assuming I think the media is always wrong, at no point have I said that or made that claim, in regards to this topic I have on several occasions expressed that the media chooses the information it puts out and what it ignores, this means a public information source can easily manipulate the consumer to see a person or subject matter from one one angle only, this does not mean the information they provide is wrong simply their coverage lacks balance and thus is bias, now given that the BBC's own internal investigations have shown this on numerous occasions and especially on Brexit it is not merely an accusation but point of fact.

The link you supply is merely evidence of the relentless attempt to bury the story as it could destroy Biden, it is not about whether it is true anymore, we know it is, Joe Biden is on video gloating about it himself, we also must remember that in the USA like the UK particular parties have members that do not agree with their own party direction, in a sense they will vote with the opposition in critical matters, this is common and has no reflection on if something has more substance because a member of his own party went awol, over here we have the party whip to try maintain common direction but in the US they don't.

The link you gave proves clearly my point I have made and the last paragraph is telling, it does not deny the allegations or any of the findings it is complaining it could undermine the recent election and the outcome but ain't that what it should be about, if someone is guilty while in office you cannot really blame the opposition for using it when it favours them the most can you.

 

[Darkwood]

Here is the moment Biden openly admits to abusing his political position of vice president to protect his son in an investigation of corruption.
Watch Biden Brag About Bribing Ukraine To Fire Investigator Of Son's Biz - https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/24/watch-joe-biden-brag-about-bribing-ukraine-to-fire-the-prosecutor-investigating-his-sons-company/

Here is a report that the company has admitted in court it bribed Biden, and that any disputes are simply about the size of the bribe not that it too place or not, I have the actual list of payments and it is more than the stated 50,000 but that info has only been leaked recently so the 50,000 was estimated at the time hence the dispute.

Burisma admits in court that it bribed Joe and Hunter Biden

A developing story about the case of Ukrainian gas holding company Burisma against People’s Deputy of Ukraine Andriy Derkach has revealed that Burisma did, in fact, bribe Joe and Hunter Biden with large cash payments. The only question is how much did these two crooks receive? In its dismissal...

corruption.news

Now I have the transcripts of some of the legal proceedings but these reports by the media simplify the task of translating what is hours of reading, it is clearly published as a statement of fact not an allegation and this must be noted as the publisher would be in a lot of legal trouble if it had made this up.

 

[Midwest]

Your exposé came a few months ago, and the few reports I could be bothered to read, says there is little evidence to support the claims.

If there is, I’m sure it will come out in the wash, you can say I told you so.

 

[nicebutdim]

I don’t see why you are obsessed with the idea that all news/media etc are always wrong and providing false information. You as an individual can’t be providing the sole source of information, for the forum to believe it’s true and factual. You see this report and decide, everything in it is substantial and true.

If a loved is missing or something you care about, and someone tells you they’ve seen them, you want to believe them.

I read & watch the news etc and make my own decision, knowing sometimes the truth can never get in the way of a good story.

On the subject of media bias, I'd point to the video of Trump's speech and how many news outlets had cut short the clip where he called for supporters to "peacefully and patriotically" make their voices heard and instead focused on discussing his edited words.

You had rightly pointed out that transcripts could be edited and seemed to be unaware of the actual words spoken, yet I was able to provide video evidence to confirm those words. What better example could be given of selective reporting, than this very thread demonstrating how your own perception of events had been skewed?


That story about Biden and Ukraine? Would you believe me if I told you that Biden sat on a stage at the Council for Foreign Relations and recounted how he pressured Ukraine's government into firing the prosecutor that was investigating his son? It's out there on the most public of platforms - Youtube.

 

[Midwest]

Yep I’ve seen the vid.

I‘m not sure that shows what you are suggesting. He wanted the authorities to take ‘action’ against their State Prosecutor. So the inference is, he wanted to remove the Prosecutor who was investigating wrong doing by his son, then braggs about it on tv?

Here’s another view;

Does a video show Joe Biden confessing to bribery? No

A reader asked, "How come Joe Biden is on film bragging about getting the Prosecutor investigating Burisma fired and fac

www.politifact.com

 

[nicebutdim]

The inference is that it was all rather convenient that two birds were killed with one stone. Also of interest is the manner in which he tells the story - not a factual summary of events, but bragging about how he dealt with little people. If that had been Trump, the video would have been headline news around the world and we'd have read headlines decrying his arrogance and alleging corruption.


I used that example to tie in with Darkwood's point about media bias, but the crux of my post was highlighting the fact that selective reporting by news outlets had left you unaware of the context of Trump's comments on January 6th. Don't you feel let down at having been misled by, what should be, reliable sources of information?

 

[MDJ]

. Don't you feel let down at having been misled by, what should be, reliable sources of information?

Yes but we have been let down over here for years, the BBC for starters only tell half the story as they see it, that's why I and most others look online for lots of sides of the story to build our own conclusion, and Sky is heavily Tory , so news is the same here as the USA, one thing trump is right about and that is fake news, problem is he spouts a lot of it himself as well.

 

[Midwest]

The inference is that it was all rather convenient that two birds were killed with one stone. Also of interest is the manner in which he tells the story - not a factual summary of events, but bragging about how he dealt with little people. If that had been Trump, the video would have been headline news around the world and we'd have read headlines decrying his arrogance and alleging corruption.


I used that example to tie in with Darkwood's point about media bias, but the crux of my post was highlighting the fact that selective reporting by news outlets had left you unaware of the context of Trump's comments on January 6th. Don't you feel let down at having been misled by, what should be, reliable sources of information?

I confess I’d not really listen to his speech, but I’d heard of his tweets etc before and he’d been suspended from some accounts, because he had gone too far. He told his supporters to gather on the 6th Jan, then spoke on and on about fraud election & the steal etc. Which IMO resulted in stirring hysteria and the resultant violent mob.

But you have to confess, that the Biden You Tube thing wasn’t really what you thought it was, was it.

As I said before, if your looking for evidence to support your claim, you sometimes aren’t subjective enough. You see what you want to see.

You guys might have valid points, but you will have to leave it to the experts to investigate. Remember Nixon and the like; they don’t always get away with things.

 

[GBDamo]

I confess I’d not really listen to his speech, but I’d heard of his tweets etc before and he’d been suspended from some accounts, because he had gone too far. He told his supporters to gather on the 6th Jan, then spoke on and on about fraud election & the steal etc. Which IMO resulted in stirring hysteria and the resultant violent mob.

But you have to confess, that the Biden You Tube thing wasn’t really what you thought it was, was it.

As I said before, if your looking for evidence to support your claim, you sometimes aren’t subjective enough. You see what you want to see.

You guys might have valid points, but you will have to leave it to the experts to investigate. Remember Nixon and the like; they don’t always get away with things.

The days of pioneering investigative journalists is gone Westy.

Today we have simpletons with humanities degrees who either quote Twitter as an authoritative source or just regurgitate Associated Press press releases.

Thats without even delving into partiality.

 

[electric al]

Nixon looked like an honest broker compared to Kennedy and you could say he got away with it

 

[Midwest]

The days of pioneering investigative journalists is gone Westy.

Today we have simpletons with humanities degrees who either quote Twitter as an authoritative source or just regurgitate Associated Press press releases.

Thats without even delving into partiality.

Well, perhaps they should get their teeth into Trump. -

 

[electric al]

Do I like Donald Trump on a personal level ? No
Do I think the US needed a president such as a him ? Yes
The thing with trump is he refused to play the politician and diplomat. He was predictably unpredictable and
that kept people on their toes.
Of course he said some stupid stuff but he also cut through the crap at times and got things done. He put a lot of career politicians noses out of joint and his ante establishment brash style of governance made him a hate figure for many.
I do however think that for many he was never going to be given a fair chance and any achievements were going to be scorned , quite simply he polarised opinion. Maybe history will view him in a kinder light.

 

[nicebutdim]

Yes but we have been let down over here for years, the BBC for starters only tell half the story as they see it, that's why I and most others look online for lots of sides of the story to build our own conclusion, and Sky is heavily Tory , so news is the same here as the USA, one thing trump is right about and that is fake news, problem is he spouts a lot of it himself as well.

I don't have Sky, but wouldn't consider Sky news to have a Conservative bias. Kay Burly and Adam Boulton are about as anti-tory as it is possible to be.

 

[nicebutdim]

I confess I’d not really listen to his speech, but I’d heard of his tweets etc before and he’d been suspended from some accounts, because he had gone too far. He told his supporters to gather on the 6th Jan, then spoke on and on about fraud election & the steal etc. Which IMO resulted in stirring hysteria and the resultant violent mob.

But you have to confess, that the Biden You Tube thing wasn’t really what you thought it was, was it.

As I said before, if your looking for evidence to support your claim, you sometimes aren’t subjective enough. You see what you want to see.

You guys might have valid points, but you will have to leave it to the experts to investigate. Remember Nixon and the like; they don’t always get away with things.

I'm posting for myself and not as a representative of any 'guys'. I'm not looking for evidence to support any claims, but pointing out that much news is selectively reported.

The Biden video shows what I suggested it did: that Joe Biden sat on a stage and recounted how he'd pressured Ukraine into firing the prosecutor that was investigating his son. This is 100% factually correct, regardless of whether you believe it was coincidental or by design.

I'm not sure how to reconcile you statement that "resulted in stirring hysteria and the resultant violent mob.", when in the same paragraph you admit to 'not really' having listened to his speech. Those conflicting statements could be construed as meaning you accepted news reports (that you now know to have carefully selected what they were reporting) at face value.


On a different note; Trump's twitter ban didn't actually result from him having gone too far, but was actually implemented after a surprisingly innocuous tweet. I'm not claiming that Trump didn't tweet a lot of contentious comments, but making the point that those weren't actually the reason for his ban.

 

[nicebutdim]

Maybe history will view him in a kinder light.

They say that history is written by the victors. On that basis I'm not sure how history will record his presidency, given that many people flatly refuse to acknowledge anything that might be considered remotely positive.

I'm not sure when debate spirraled to such a partisan low point, but a considerable number of people refuse to accept issues in any terms other than black and white. For people of that mindset nuance does not exist.

 

[MDJ]

I don't have Sky, but wouldn't consider Sky news to have a Conservative bias. Kay Burly and Adam Boulton are about as anti-tory as it is possible to be.

?

 

[electric al]

It may not be long into the Biden administration before some realise trump wasnt that bad after all

 

[Darkwood]

Sky is a funny cookie tbh, European Sky news is very EU centric and is anti-brexit and often sides with left wing policies and views, if you were to duck down under and watch Aussie Sky news then you would see reporting that reflects the long running coalition which hovers around centre right since 2013.

It's quite a contradictory affair if you watch EU Sky and Aussie Sky, you can often see the opposite in reporting direction on the same matter, if we take Trump for example, EU Sky always seem to have a negative skew on any Trump story whereas in contrast Aussie Sky has a positive skew even on the same matters.
This simple example with the same company goes a long way to show why you should never accept these news channels are balanced and unbiased, they are simply serving the biggest financiers from that area.

 

[MDJ]

Sky is a funny cookie tbh, European Sky news is very EU centric and is anti-brexit and often sides with left wing policies and views, if you were to duck down under and watch Aussie Sky news then you would see reporting that reflects the long running coalition which hovers around centre right since 2013.

It's quite a contradictory affair if you watch EU Sky and Aussie Sky, you can often see the opposite in reporting direction on the same matter, if we take Trump for example, EU Sky always seem to have a negative skew on any Trump story whereas in contrast Aussie Sky has a positive skew even on the same matters.
This simple example with the same company goes a long way to show why you should never accept these news channels are balanced and unbiased, they are simply serving the biggest financiers from that area.

Sky UK is definitely a Rupert Murdoch pro Tory Channel and the earlier comment from nicebutdim was so hilarious I have still not stopped laughing, to suggest Adam Bolton was not a Tory is the most hilarious post I have ever seen, a brilliant bit of Comedy from the guy pmsl hahaha. as for Kay Burley she should be sacked for going to South Africa and then having to isolate when getting home for breaking the rules, the 6 month suspension is a farce, we have the BBC who are Left wing and Sky right wing, hence my comment about Fake news over here, one thing Trump has got right about the media

 

[MDJ]

It may not be long into the Biden administration before some realise trump wasnt that bad after all

I doubt it, the Yanks may think it Pal but everyone else in the world will know otherwise, Biden is already back into the Climate situation with us all and is trying to get Iran back on board, he is also actually giving a rubbish about corona virus and not playing golf instead, he needs time, but surely cannot be worse than the big orange buffoon.