Juicy Smollet Trial

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
Post Reply
K Graham
God
Posts: 1676
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:25 am

Re: Juicy Smollet Trial

Post by K Graham »

ajax18 wrote:
Mon Dec 13, 2021 5:02 pm
Here the liberal media basically admits that they're not really journalist as much as they are left wing activists.
There is no admission to anything of the sort. But you're an idiot who just admitted your own preferred sources are not legit news, but you constantly regurgitate them anyway because you're a hypocrite who cares nothing about actual truth. Can you not see how this makes you the ultimate hypocrite?

Ajax: "Your sources are fake because my sources say so."

Me: "Your sources are fake too"

Ajax: "Yeah, but so what?"


And yes, FOX News has for decades claimed to be the one source for truth, their slogan for years was "Fair and Balanced" and they touted their willingness to host a Democrat along with a Republican in all their panels. But that practice was abandoned years ago and it has gradually become more and more extreme, so much so that their most respected journalists left because they were tired of the political extremism.
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal" - Ajax18
User avatar
ajax18
God
Posts: 2808
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:12 pm

Re: Juicy Smollet Trial

Post by ajax18 »

Ajax: "Your sources are fake because my sources say so."

Me: "Your sources are fake too"

Ajax: "Yeah, but so what?"
Whatever Breitbart said doesn't change the fact that this story among many others proves that CNN is not journalism. It's left wing activism.
And when the Confederates saw Jackson standing fearless like a stonewall, the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
User avatar
Doctor CamNC4Me
God
Posts: 9114
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2020 2:04 am

Re: Juicy Smollet Trial

Post by Doctor CamNC4Me »

https://nypost.com/2021/12/08/blm-backs ... reddit.com
Black Lives Matter is backing Jussie Smollett — who’s on trial for allegedly staging a hate crime attack — because “we can never believe the police,” a founder of the movement said in a statement.

“As abolitionists, we approach situations of injustice with love and align ourselves with our community,” Dr. Melina Abdullah, director of BLM Grassroots and co-founder of BLM Los Angeles, said in a Tuesday statement.

“In an abolitionist society, this trial would not be taking place, and our communities would not have to fight and suffer to prove our worth,” Abdullah said.

“In our commitment to abolition, we can never believe police, especially the Chicago Police Department (CPD) over Jussie Smollett, a Black man who has been courageously present, visible, and vocal in the struggle for Black freedom,” the statement continued.
-_-

- Doc
Hugh Nibley claimed he bumped into Adolf Hitler, Albert Einstein, Winston Churchill, Gertrude Stein, and the Grand Duke Vladimir Romanoff. Dishonesty is baked into Mormonism.
User avatar
Atlanticmike
God
Posts: 2721
Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2021 12:16 pm

Re: Juicy Smollet Trial

Post by Atlanticmike »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Mon Dec 13, 2021 7:05 pm
https://nypost.com/2021/12/08/blm-backs ... reddit.com
Black Lives Matter is backing Jussie Smollett — who’s on trial for allegedly staging a hate crime attack — because “we can never believe the police,” a founder of the movement said in a statement.

“As abolitionists, we approach situations of injustice with love and align ourselves with our community,” Dr. Melina Abdullah, director of BLM Grassroots and co-founder of BLM Los Angeles, said in a Tuesday statement.

“In an abolitionist society, this trial would not be taking place, and our communities would not have to fight and suffer to prove our worth,” Abdullah said.

“In our commitment to abolition, we can never believe police, especially the Chicago Police Department (CPD) over Jussie Smollett, a Black man who has been courageously present, visible, and vocal in the struggle for Black freedom,” the statement continued.
-_-

- Doc
Army of one✊
User avatar
ajax18
God
Posts: 2808
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:12 pm

Re: Juicy Smollet Trial

Post by ajax18 »

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:
Mon Dec 13, 2021 7:05 pm
https://nypost.com/2021/12/08/blm-backs ... reddit.com
Black Lives Matter is backing Jussie Smollett — who’s on trial for allegedly staging a hate crime attack — because “we can never believe the police,” a founder of the movement said in a statement.

“As abolitionists, we approach situations of injustice with love and align ourselves with our community,” Dr. Melina Abdullah, director of BLM Grassroots and co-founder of BLM Los Angeles, said in a Tuesday statement.

“In an abolitionist society, this trial would not be taking place, and our communities would not have to fight and suffer to prove our worth,” Abdullah said.

“In our commitment to abolition, we can never believe police, especially the Chicago Police Department (CPD) over Jussie Smollett, a Black man who has been courageously present, visible, and vocal in the struggle for Black freedom,” the statement continued.
-_-

- Doc
People like K Graham still believe that Michael Brown had his hands up and was shot while surrendering to Officer Darren Wilson.
And when the Confederates saw Jackson standing fearless like a stonewall, the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
K Graham
God
Posts: 1676
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:25 am

Re: Juicy Smollet Trial

Post by K Graham »

ajax18 wrote:
Mon Dec 13, 2021 6:41 pm
Ajax: "Your sources are fake because my sources say so."

Me: "Your sources are fake too"

Ajax: "Yeah, but so what?"
Whatever Breitbart said doesn't change the fact that this story among many others proves that CNN is not journalism. It's left wing activism.
This story proves no such thing, and feel free to link us to the many examples where CNN calls itself "Objective News." You just admitted that your source is a biased rag and not real news, yet it is your primary source for just about everything you post here.
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal" - Ajax18
K Graham
God
Posts: 1676
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:25 am

Re: Juicy Smollet Trial

Post by K Graham »

ajax18 wrote:
Mon Dec 13, 2021 7:57 pm
People like K Graham still believe that Michael Brown had his hands up and was shot while surrendering to Officer Darren Wilson.
Maybe he did maybe he didn't, I wasn't there but there were certainly witnesses who said he did. Why does it upset you so much to think maybe he did? It isn't as if the point of police brutality towards black people hasn't been a well established fact for decades now. Whether his hands were up or down doesn't change the established fact that cops all over the country and trigger happy when it comes to unarmed black kids. Oh, and while you're moaning about media getting it wrong, the Right Wing media got it wrong when they said Brown "robbed a store" and that this was the reason why the cop stopped him. That turned out to be complete horse crap and all the media reported on this, except for FOX and Brietfart. https://www.cnn.com/2017/03/14/us/micha ... index.html

When news outlets report what witnesses say they are doing their job. But your sources don't believe anything anyone says if that runs contrary to a preferred political narrative. Especially if that person is black.
Last edited by K Graham on Tue Dec 14, 2021 12:10 am, edited 1 time in total.
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal" - Ajax18
K Graham
God
Posts: 1676
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2021 6:25 am

Re: Juicy Smollet Trial

Post by K Graham »

ajax18 wrote:
Mon Dec 13, 2021 5:02 pm
What's funny is K Graham thinks that reporting on stories that turn out to be false is good journalism. How people can trust his words with such a prejudiced set of beliefs is beyond partisan.
That isn't what I said you dishonest piece of human garbage. I said it is good journalism to report eye witness accounts as they're provided, and that is what CNN did in these instances. The fact that those accounts turned out to be incorrect or questionable doesn't reflect poorly on CNN, because CNN states from the outset that the account is "according to this witness." That's good journalism. By comparison, FOX would likely just create an entire narrative based on nothing more than rumors or complete BS they make up from whole cloth. That's what your side does on a DAILY basis, so your "time and time again" rant about CNN is hilariously off the mark since virtually all of the examples you provide are like what I just described, all the while you gladly turn a blind eye to the fact that your sources are literally making crap up as they go. You like it because it makes you feel good.

Your reliance on discredited charlatan James O'Keefe is nothing short of hilarious. Time and time again this guy breaks the law to come up with some "video" undercover which he then deceptively edited in order to manufacture fresh outrage among the racists like yourself.
"I am not an American ... In my view premarital sex should be illegal" - Ajax18
User avatar
ajax18
God
Posts: 2808
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:12 pm

Re: Juicy Smollet Trial

Post by ajax18 »

What's funny is K Graham thinks that reporting on stories that turn out to be false is good journalism. How people can trust his words with such a prejudiced set of beliefs is beyond partisan.
because CNN states from the outset that the account is "according to this witness."
Like according to their single anonymous source in the many retractions of their lies about Trump.

Check out this retraction where they claimed Trump was bullying Georgia to fabricate voter fraud evidence.

https://money.cnn.com/2017/06/26/media/ ... index.html

Check you this retraction on the Steele Dossier by the Washington Compost.
The Washington Post on Friday took the unusual step of correcting and retracting portions of two articles, published in 2017 and 2019, that relied on the now-discredited, Trump-bashing Steele dossier.

Sally Buzbee, the executive editor for the Washington Post, revealed the newspaper was unable to stand by the accuracy of their reporting regarding source Sergei Millian — former president of the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce — noting the recent indictment filed by Special Counsel John Durham this month.

“The original version of this article published on March 29, 2017, said that Sergei Millian was a source for parts of a dossier of unverified allegations against Donald Trump. That account has been contradicted by allegations contained in a federal indictment filed in November 2021 and undermined by further reporting by The Washington Post. As a result, portions of the story and an accompanying video have been removed and the headline has been changed,” the editor’s note in the 2017 article read.

“The original account was based on two people who spoke on the condition of anonymity to provide sensitive information. One of those people now says the new information ‘puts in grave doubt that Millian’ was a source for parts of the dossier. The other declined to comment,” it continued.

Durham indictment is ‘bad news’ for mainstream media on Steele dossier reporting: critic

In the 2019 article, titled “Belarus-born businessman sought proximity to Trump’s world in 2016” the editors noted that any references to the 2017 article had been removed.

The Washington Post’s original reporting had identified Millian as “Source D” — an unnamed source who contributed to extreme allegations included in the dossier complained by former British spy Christopher Steele.

Among the many debunked claims Millian alleged was that Russian security services possessed a tape of Donald Trump in a Moscow hotel room with prostitutes who were urinating on a bed where then-President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama had previously stayed.

Earlier this week, prominent press critic with the Washington Post Erik Wemple warned media outlets that they face a “steep journalistic challenge” to back up their initial reporting on the Steele dossier in the wake of Durham’s most recent indictment.

Wemply cited the Washington Post’s reporting directly and urged them — along with several other outlets — to retract the stories.

“The sourcing for the Post’s reporting about Millian’s alleged conversation is unclear, while ABC News attributes its primary assertion to ‘a person familiar with the raw intelligence provided to the FBI,” Wemple wrote.

“These news outlets now face a steep journalistic challenge — that of returning to their source(s) in an effort to back up the original claims that Millian was an unwitting source for the dossier,” Wemple added. “If that effort doesn’t produce enough evidence to surmount the allegations in the indictment, there’s only one option: Retract the stories. Allowing one version of events to sit awkwardly alongside another — and leaving it to the reader to decide — won’t cut it.”

Friday’s retractions come over a week after Igor Danchenko, another key source for information in the dossier, was arrested. Danchenko, a Russian citizen living in Virginia, pleaded not guilty on Wednesday to five counts of making false statements to the FBI.

Among those charges, the FBI claims Danchenko lied about having a phone call in July 2016 with Millian, who told him about a “well-developed conspiracy of co-operation” between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin.

“In truth and fact, and as Danchenko well knew, Danchenko never received such a phone call or such information,” the indictment reads. “Danchenko fabricated these facts.”
https://nypost.com/2021/11/12/washingto ... e-dossier/

What you tout as good journalism is just partisan

FAKE NEWS
And when the Confederates saw Jackson standing fearless like a stonewall, the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
User avatar
ajax18
God
Posts: 2808
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2020 9:12 pm

Re: Juicy Smollet Trial

Post by ajax18 »

Maybe he did maybe he didn't, I wasn't there but there were certainly witnesses who said he did.
It'd be interesting to poll how many people on the left still believe the witnesses who claim Michael Brown had his hands up and was surrendering to officer Darrin Wilson when Wilson shot him. It appears Ben Shapiro was right about there being people who still believe this and K Graham is certainly one of them even though Brackite demonstrated though the ballistics evidence that what the witnesses stated was undeniably false. But I'm sure in the mind of these partisan BLM activists they really did perceive Michael Brown with his hands up surrendering when he was shot even though that wasn't even close to what happened in reality. What they saw was what people with a biased, CNN fed visual cortex, would see, which should be a lesson for us when it comes to the weight eye witness testimony should carry.
And when the Confederates saw Jackson standing fearless like a stonewall, the army of Northern Virginia took courage and drove the federal army off their land.
Post Reply