Storming the Capitol

[Lineandinitial]

Define fake news.

Misleading information put out by anyone under the guise of (what used to be called) "News".
Of course, that is an Objective definition. The left wingers will be around momentarily to bash Trump, the GOP, etc.

Whatever it takes to distance themselves from an actual, objective response will be forthcoming..........

 

[The Driver]

Like declaring that the Wuhan lab leak origin theory is disproven?

Who used those exact words?

 

[Lineandinitial]

Rejecting facts and reality is easy for the donald crowd. They just call it fake news.

One day you'll wake up and wonder how the months slipped away.
You probably can't resist the brainwashing. You don't know that though.........

 

[Sportello]

Like declaring that the Wuhan lab leak origin theory is disproven?

Dis-proven or unproven?

 

[The Driver]

Dis-proven or unproven?

Black and white, non-dialectical thinking. Typical for a Trump sycophant such as @DriveInDriveOut.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Who used those exact words?

Dis-proven or unproven?

The Washington Post declared the lab origin scenario to be a debunked conspiracy theory.

Now they've changed the headline of that article a year and a half later.

 

[zubenelgenubi]

With all due respect, that just sounds like someone saying that the graph needs to align with one’s own views to make for it to be credible. If that’s the case, who or what can be said to be objective?

But I get it. It’s convenient to rail against “left wing media” if you can shift everything that you don’t like to the political alignment that you don’t like.

Oh, I don't find those things to be credible anyway. Labeling media organizations on a political spectrum is absurd. Everyone's own opinion is, ultimately, all that matters to anyone. If you accept this graph as is, all that means is you agree with the views of the person who put it together, or you are deferring to their judgment. Either is fine, but both are fundamentally meaningless.

The question is, who can ever be truly objective? My goal is not to balance my intake of different media, my goal is to not take anything for granted, particularly that what I'm being told is true. I'm skeptical of any new or unvetted information, even if it confirms my bias, because I don't dismiss the notion that someone could be trying to exploit a particular bias in order to mislead people, or force a particular agenda.

 

[Lineandinitial]

The Washington Post declared the lab origin scenario to be a debunked conspiracy theory.

Now they've changed the headline of that article a year and a half later.

The version of history their handlers implanted reads differently........

Dearest Uncle (Ho) Joe and his sidekick "Don't Come Kumela" started from the far left of zero and they're going to save the day!!!

THAT'S their reality until the next activation message tells them differently...

 

[The Driver]

The Washington Post declared the lab origin scenario to be a debunked conspiracy theory.

Now they've changed the headline of that article a year and a half later.

The Washington Post wrote a story that the WHO claimed the lab leak theory was a debunked conspiracy theory. How much you wanna bet that’s the case.

Far different than the paper just declaring one thing to be absolutely true. This is the problem with you wingnuts.

 

[Sportello]

The Washington Post declared the lab origin scenario to be a debunked conspiracy theory.

Now they've changed the headline of that article a year and a half later.

The Washington Post on Tuesday corrected a 2020 article which criticised Republican Sen. Tom Cotton for defending the claim that the COVID-19 virus may have escaped from a laboratory in Wuhan China.

The article had described the claim as "debunked" and a "conspiracy theory."

• The original headline of the February 2020 story read: "Tom Cotton keeps repeating a coronavirus conspiracy theory that was already debunked"
• The headline was corrected on Tuesday to read: "Tom Cotton keeps repeating a coronavirus fringe theory that scientists have disputed."

In a note explaining the corrections, editors wrote: "Earlier versions of this story and its headline inaccurately characterized comments by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) regarding the origins of the coronavirus. The term 'debunked' and The Post's use of 'conspiracy theory' have been removed because, then as now, there was no determination about the origins of the virus."

 

[Sportello]

The story in question:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/02/16/tom-cotton-coronavirus-conspiracy/

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

The term 'debunked' and The Post's use of 'conspiracy theory' have been removed because, then as now, there was no determination about the origins of the virus."

Yup they declared it debunked.
Now they're admitting it wasn't debunked.
Fake news from the Washington Post.

 

[Box Ox]

The Washington Post wrote a story that the WHO claimed the lab leak theory was a debunked conspiracy theory. How much you wanna bet that’s the case.

Far different than the paper just declaring one thing to be absolutely true. This is the problem with you wingnuts.

Let’s be honest here. The “educated” left wing media couldn’t get down on all fours and swallow the WHO’s “science” fast enough until pretty recently. Whatever the WHO said was as good as gold for the vast majority of the press.

 

[The Driver]

Let’s be honest here. The “educated” left wing media couldn’t get down on all fours and swallow the WHO’s “science” fast enough until pretty recently. Whatever the WHO said was as good as gold for the vast majority of the press.

Then the reporting should be that the WHO is suspect, which it is. Nothing is static. Reporting is what reporters do.

 

[fishtm2001]

Let’s be honest here. The “educated” left wing media couldn’t get down on all fours and swallow the WHO’s “science” fast enough until pretty recently. Whatever the WHO said was as good as gold for the vast majority of the press.

And the right wing never saw a conspiracy it didn't love.

 

[Box Ox]

And the right wing never saw a conspiracy it didn't love.

Indeed. But the lab leak “conspiracy theory” being true isn’t a good look for Democrats, the WHO or the media.

 

[The Driver]

Indeed. But the lab leak “conspiracy theory” being true isn’t a good look for Democrats, the WHO or the media.

It’s not been proven true.

 

[Box Ox]

It’s not been proven true.

You might need several peer-reviewed studies for confirmation like Fauci does but I think we all know where this thing is headed due to both the genetic makeup of the virus and the backstory regarding lab worker illnesses upon release.

 

[The Driver]

You might need several peer-reviewed studies for confirmation like Fauci does but I think we all know where this thing is headed due to both the genetic makeup of the virus and the backstory regarding lab worker illnesses upon release.

Could very well be the case. I don’t deny it’s possible. Getting the CCP to budge on release of information will be damned near impossible.

 

[Ou812fu]

Look at this folks.
Judge in Georgia ruled that the ballots 🗳 appear to be filled in by a xerox machine!!