Ukraine War and Politics

[seeker_two]

But only one is replicating Hitler’s nazi behavior.

True....but I don't think Hitler pooped his pants as much as Biden does....

 

[Armybrat]

True....but I don't think Hitler pooped his pants as much as Biden does....

Don’t you mean his Depends?

 

[cycleguy2300]

True....but I don't think Hitler pooped his pants as much as Biden does....

Hitler had more brains then Biden even after April 30...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[studenygreg]

Hitler had more brains then Biden even after April 30...

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Nice. I'm going to steal that one.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

Worth the few minutes to watch:



Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[leVieux]

Worth the few minutes to watch:



Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

<>

Looks to me that the star of this video is a turd.

But, what do I know ?

leVieux

<>

 

[cycleguy2300]

<>

Looks to me that the star of this video is a turd.

But, what do I know ?

leVieux

<>

Ryan McBeth or someone else?

If McBeth please elaborate. He is accurate, fact based and knows his shit.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[leVieux]

Ryan McBeth or someone else?

If McBeth please elaborate. He is accurate, fact based and knows his shit.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

<>

I got that he pushed some leftist ideas.

”Tucker Carlson is a disinformation gift!’’

No, Tucker is a REAL Journalist, who just allowed Putin to state his case without hostile interruptions; as a good Journalist should do.

<>

 

[cycleguy2300]

&lt;&gt;

I got that he pushed some leftist ideas.

&lt;&gt;

What has he pushed that is leftist and how does it discredit his analysis of suspected russian disinformation trolls?

You might as well have stated "he's white" or "gay" or "travels for work". Even if he has leftist leanings, I dont see how that changes the data he presents or the interpretation of it.



Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[leVieux]

What has he pushed that is leftist and how does it discredit his analysis of suspected russian disinformation trolls?



Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Please see above.

I don’t think Carlson generates ‘’disinformation’’.

Indeed, that is a devious leftist term & concept !

 

[cycleguy2300]

Please see above.

I don’t think Carlson generates ‘’disinformation’’.

Indeed, that is a devious leftist term & concept !

Tucker gave a former KGB agent with aspersions of globilist ambitions a platform to spread his lies without any correction or context. That's pretty much generating disinformation, I dont know what else anyone could call it.

Tuckers take on Ukraine and russia is so far off-base, combined with an "interview" of putin that was so flaccid even putin was disappointed makes me question Tucker's take on positions I agree with him on. In short I may agree with Tucker, like what he says and how he presents many arguments but I really don't trust him.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

But putin is a fine Christian gentleman leading a nation of good believers.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[leVieux]

Tucker gave a former KGB agent with aspersions of globilist ambitions a platform to spread his lies without any correction or context. That's pretty much generating disinformation, I dont know what else anyone could call it.

Tuckers take on Ukraine and russia is so far off-base, combined with an "interview" of putin that was so flaccid even putin was disappointed makes me question Tucker's take on positions I agree with him on. In short I may agree with Tucker, like what he says and how he presents many arguments but I really don't trust him.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

<>

So, allowing a controversial person to state their case in their own words is “spreading disinformation”. ?

Gee, I think all should be heard, and let the listener decide. Isn’t that our longstanding tradition?

Remember that Hitler was Time’s 1938 “Man of the Year” ? see: https://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,00.html

<>

 

[cycleguy2300]

&lt;&gt;

So, allowing a controversial person to state their case in their own words is “spreading disinformation”. ?

Gee, I think all should be heard, and let the listener decide. Isn’t that our longstanding tradition?

Remember that Hitler was Time’s 1938 “Man of the Year” ? see: https://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,760539,00.html

&lt;&gt;

It is a journalist ls job not to simply provide a platform for a public figure, controversial or not, but to provide their statements in context of the facts which something Tucker decidedly failed at with putin. Therefore, Tucker, whether by design or ignorance helped legitimize putin's ridiculous lies regarding Ukriane.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

Tucker went to Russia to interview Putin, not debate him. The purpose, from the beginning was just to see what he had to say. So Tucker went over there and let him talk freely. something that most of us actually wish we saw more of with our media.

 

[cycleguy2300]

Tucker went to Russia to interview Putin, not debate him. The purpose, from the beginning was just to see what he had to say. So Tucker went over there and let him talk freely. something that most of us actually wish we saw more of with our media.

If the purpose of a journalist is to simply publish what others say without context or commentary then what purpose do they serve that a platform such as Twitter, Facebook or Instagram does not?

The extent to which some of you will go to pretend Tucker's putin interview was good journalism is approaching the level of KJ-P trying to frame FJB's policies in a favorable way.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[studenygreg]

Tucker gave a former KGB agent with aspersions of globilist ambitions a platform to spread his lies without any correction or context. That's pretty much generating disinformation, I dont know what else anyone could call it.

Tuckers take on Ukraine and russia is so far off-base, combined with an "interview" of putin that was so flaccid even putin was disappointed makes me question Tucker's take on positions I agree with him on. In short I may agree with Tucker, like what he says and how he presents many arguments but I really don't trust him.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

Not allowing the opposition to speak. Man this sounds familiar but I just can't point my finger to it.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[studenygreg]

It always amazes me how quickly people become authoritarian or cry freedom when it suits their needs. Slippery slopes exists and the tides do turn. Be safe out there.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

 

[cycleguy2300]

Not allowing the opposition to speak. Man this sounds familiar but I just can't point my finger to it.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Who suggested the opposition should be denied a platform for speech? Not me.

A journalist's job is to compare and contrast to extend the logic to it's conclusion, to demonstrate the error or truth of the subject's statements, not to become nothing more than a mouthpiece for spreading a dictator's lies. Tucker should have done more research before the interview so he could ask relevent questions, then taken the time to disect the answers to present something resembling the truth before simply broadcasting putin lying.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

 

[Havok1]

If the purpose of a journalist is to simply publish what others say without context or commentary then what purpose do they serve that a platform such as Twitter, Facebook or Instagram does not?

The extent to which some of you will go to pretend Tucker's putin interview was good journalism is approaching the level of KJ-P trying to frame FJB's policies in a favorable way.

Sent from my SM-S918B using Tapatalk

The purpose is so that people like you don’t get your way and have control of the media narrative. If your beliefs about the proxy war are solid then you shouldn’t be concerned with what Putin is able to say.

Interesting that you bring up KJP. First off, she would be the Putin, not the Tucker, in her interviews. Next, the media airs what she says, as well, no matter how much of a liar she is. As usual, you fail to grasp the point. Me supporting tuckers decision to allow the opposing side of the proxy war to speak his mind on the subject does not mean I agree with what he said.