Who cares about every newspaper? Let's just look at all the major dailies and the networks. Afraid I'm right, huh?
Media Bias
- Thread starter wkmac
- Start date
refineryworker05
Well-Known Member
Look at your logic. You are pretending that this all boiled down to one person, but it can’t.
This would require many, many, many other people to carry out.
The idea that this investigation was stopped because of one person pleading the fifth when so many others would have had to have been involved makes no sense.
Please stop pretending that one person was the key to this whole thing when factually that would be impossible.
Please stop pretending that the only way to prove someone committed a crime is if they admit to it.
you gather evidence against someone and this crime would contain massive amounts of evidence and witnesses, and paper work, and everything.
But you limit it to one person pleading the fifth and not saying I broke the law through email as to why the investigation lead no where. Come on.
She directed her employees to do so and they did as ordered. Do you think they're going to voluntarily say they participated in a fraud? Why was the head of that field office in constant touch with the White House? Why did she plead the 5th when directly asked why were all those PAC's denied tax exempt status, effectively shutting them down before the 2012 election?
refineryworker05
Well-Known Member
I don’t care to discuss if I think the media is fair because obviously my personal biases would influence my judgement. So what would be the point?
I’m just trying to get you to see that republicans make an insane claim that the media is out to get them.
I’ll tell what it would take for me to believe that insanity.
I’d have to see no republicans in the media. I’d have to see only Democrats or others talking. That’s it.
If republicans can show me how they are I unrepresented in the media, that they are cut out of the media, I’d give their insane claim some weight.
But what I see everyday on every political show is republicans speaking for themselves.
Again a media that was out to get republicans would not allow this.
refineryworker05
Well-Known Member
If you don’t get every newspaper, then you don’t get the actual newspaper that most Americans read.
Most Americans read the major dailies. Small town newspapers print the articles written by the Associated Press(as do the majors) and by major dailies. Show me the endorsements by these papers as well as the major networks. You can't. How lopsided was the support for Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama, and Clinton? No comparison.
It will be fine
Well-Known Member
Van, the fact that you believe demonstrably false conspiracy theories is all the evidence needed to know there is plenty of conservative media.
refineryworker05
Well-Known Member
Yeah, why wouldn’t they say that? People who break the law turn on each other all the time. So why wouldn’t that apply in this case?
Plus investigators don’t need people to admit to they broke the law in order to prove they broke the law.
Your basic conception is that unless criminals admit to their crimes, investigations can’t prove that someone broke the law.
Again, such a crime would have required massive amounts of coordination and paper work, and witnesses, and evidence.
You limit it to one person because then you can in your mind justify why the story is still true that the irs is out to republicans but nothing could be proven.
This is an illogical perspective.
Well there you go. And if accurate then why aren't they being prosecuted?
refineryworker05
Well-Known Member
This is not true. There are state and city and local papers that exist independent of other newspapers.
But this is all moot. I explained my thinking on the newspaper endorsement thing. I think it is a logical a solid explanation. So I’m not gonna look up newspaper endorsements for that reason.
Why would it require massive amounts of paperwork? Are you saying these people are so stupid that they wouldn't cover themselves? The fact is that it happened! There's no guesswork here, almost all applications by conservative PAC's were denied while liberal PAC's were approved. Period. And we're talking a lot of groups, not two or three.
You don't seem to know how things work anymore. Ever hear of Gannett? They own USA Today and dozens of other papers. They publish the same articles across the board. The AP sends articles to papers all over the country because most small town, small city papers have limited staff. They have an editorial page, sure, but even that is often full of syndicated columnists. They exist to provide advertising for local businesses while supplying the latest local news, sports, and weather. But the national stage? They print AP and major daily articles.
It will be fine
Well-Known Member
Can't argue with a reputable source like Zero Hedge? What the hell website is that?
Demonstrate it then.
refineryworker05
Well-Known Member
I guess you should ask the Republican Congress, or the department of justice, or the Treasury Inspector General who all investigated this and found nothing.
Let me guess, they were all out to get republicans too so that’s why they found nothing.
refineryworker05
Well-Known Member
Man it requires massive amounts of paper to coordinate anything. especially if you want someone to pick out certain organizations and leave in others. That would require some kind of formal official justification for why these organizations were picked and how they violated being a charity, and then it would require explaining the identifying characteristics of the organizations you wanted to block and why you were blocking them because you’d be allowing other organizations that seemingly break the rules within the official explanation alone.
So, you’d have to tell people we are leaving them in because they aren’t republicans. And then when people objected and said I’m not breaking the law for you and I’m going to your supervisor.... I don’t know what that one person could have done to hold it all together. She must have blackmailed all those people to force them to break the law. Or maybe you believe that all of them would have done it cause they are out to get republicans as well.
Then you’d have to monitor every person doing the blocking to make sure they were getting the right organizations. It would require corrections and more explantations for those corrections. It would have required micromanaging on an epic scale and all by one person according to you.
Yeah there would have been a huge paper trail, a lot of witnesses and plenty of evidence.
The fact that they found nothing.... and all you can come up with is one person pleading the fifth and not admitting to breaking the law through email as being able to stop this investigation makes no logical sense.
They found plenty. They aren't going to jail someone on a theory of why they did what they did. Unless someone admits that yes they purposely sought to deny citizens their constitutional rights what can you do? BUT AGAIN, FOR THE LAST TIME BECAUSE I've GOT TO GET READY FOR WORK, MOST OF THOSE PACS, ALMOST ALL OF THEM, WERE DENIED TAX EXEMPT STATUS. THE HEAD OF THAT OFFICE, JOYCE LERNER, WAS ASKED UNDER OATH WHY THAT HAPPENED AND SHE REFUSED TO ANSWER. LOOK IT UP. IT'S NO CONSPIRACY THEORY, IT HAPPENED. YOU SAY NO ONE IS OUT TO GET REPUBLICANS SO EXPLAIN WHY THAT HAPPENED?
refineryworker05
Well-Known Member
Well I guess a person who loves government bureaucracy would believe that to be so. All it would take is the people tasked to look at those applications to take the ones they believed to be from conservative groups to the boss and get a yea or nay. This isn't a loan process, a contract bid, or some such. And if she placed loyal Democrats in charge of reviewing....
