Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

[Dan Druff]

Here's the what I was responding to:

Cuomo and Lemon talked about the polls one night and the next day Biden and other Dems finally condemned the summer violence.

It's false. The poll was in August. Biden condemned the violence multiple times in May and June and called for the 'arsonists and anarchists' to be prosecuted in July, all before the poll he claimed was the only reason he 'finally condemned the violence'. This one is clear cut. The facts are the facts.

I think you said something similar about Pelosi in August/September, implying that it was the first time she had come out and condemned the violence.

It's just not true.

I could give you a long list of democrats condemning the violence before that, but what's the point? You could just google it yourself and find the numerous fact checks, but you don't believe fact checkers anymore and even if you did you'd just pivot away from the fact that you're wrong, like Kamala tweeting out the bail fund. Cool, valid criticism. Doesn't make it ok to make a bunch of other shit up.

So Joseph R. Biden, Democratic Presdiential nominee, took until JULY before calling for the arrest and prosecution for rioters? And you're okay with this?

Read that again. These are your own words, yet somehow you think Biden's super-weak avoidance of true condemnation of the rioters for OVER A MONTH was just fine.

Are you really going to sell us the claim that the left and the media were acting appalled by the violence, and loudly calling for it to stop? Because the exact opposite was occurring, and you know it.

[Dan Druff]

"Hey you guys weren't mad enough about the 'BLM riots' so now you don't get to be mad about our attempted insurrection"

"Hey you guys. You praised the burning down of our cities, the violent attacks on government buildings, police officers, and civilians, which occurred for months over the summer. You don't get to feign outrage over an invasion of the Capitol by a small group of people, which caused a tiny fraction of the pain, death, and destruction compared to the BLM riots."

Sounds about right, yes.

[duped_samaritan]

Here's the what I was responding to:



It's false. The poll was in August. Biden condemned the violence multiple times in May and June and called for the 'arsonists and anarchists' to be prosecuted in July, all before the poll he claimed was the only reason he 'finally condemned the violence'. This one is clear cut. The facts are the facts.

I think you said something similar about Pelosi in August/September, implying that it was the first time she had come out and condemned the violence.

It's just not true.

I could give you a long list of democrats condemning the violence before that, but what's the point? You could just google it yourself and find the numerous fact checks, but you don't believe fact checkers anymore and even if you did you'd just pivot away from the fact that you're wrong, like Kamala tweeting out the bail fund. Cool, valid criticism. Doesn't make it ok to make a bunch of other shit up.

So Joseph R. Biden, Democratic Presdiential nominee, took until JULY before calling for the arrest and prosecution for rioters? And you're okay with this?

Read that again. These are your own words, yet somehow you think Biden's super-weak avoidance of true condemnation of the rioters for OVER A MONTH was just fine.

Are you really going to sell us the claim that the left and the media were acting appalled by the violence, and loudly calling for it to stop? Because the exact opposite was occurring, and you know it.

This statement is false:

Dems didn’t condemn the summer riots until polls came out showing the American people were sick of them.

That's what I'm selling you.

What's the point of discussing opinions if you can't even recognize facts.

[nunbeater]

"Hey you guys weren't mad enough about the 'BLM riots' so now you don't get to be mad about our attempted insurrection"

"Hey you guys. You praised the burning down of our cities, the violent attacks on government buildings, police officers, and civilians, which occurred for months over the summer. You don't get to feign outrage over an invasion of the Capitol by a small group of people, which caused a tiny fraction of the pain, death, and destruction compared to the BLM riots."

Sounds about right, yes.

so much pearl clutching

[JimmyG_415]

Hey you guys are getting away from the Thread topic, The hall monitor Carlos Frietas doesn't like that,
(Or I guess just when I do it)

I'm sure w/the Fox "News" 24/7 AOC coverage they covered this, right?
Just went to Foxnews.com, nothing about AOC, yesterday she was on the front page for 2 bad stories.
(That is propaganda, because if don't think everyone at fox saw this last night, you are lying to yourself like RW'ers usually do)

AOC uses her following for good, Trump uses his to grift.
Trump could've done this, or 'Flyin' Ted Cruz, or the one eyed hitman in a porno, etc etc etc.
But they didn't, & AOC did.

EDIT: Wrong tweet, she did get over a million by like 9 pm last night.

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/twt/status/1362561593779892225

[nunbeater]

Hey you guys are getting away from the Thread topic, The hall monitor Carlos Frietas doesn't like that,
(Or I guess just when I do it)

I'm sure w/the Fox "News" 24/7 AOC coverage they covered this, right?
Just went to Foxnews.com, nothing about AOC, yesterday she was on the front page for 2 bad stories.
(That is propaganda, because if don't think everyone at fox saw this last night, you are lying to yourself like RW'ers usually do)

AOC uses her following for good, Trump uses his to grift.
Trump could've done this, or 'Flyin' Ted Cruz, or the one eyed hitman in a porno, etc etc etc.
But they didn't, & AOC did.

EDIT: Wrong tweet, she did get over a million by like 9 pm last night.

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/twt/status/1362561593779892225

if right wingers here didn't whatabout everything arguments would be like 2 pages long

[nunbeater]

Also let me point out again the BLM protests did have some violence and some people died but for the most part they were peaceful protests of people coming together against police brutality. Comparing these to the capitol riots where people wanted to disrupt the democratic process and reinstall fuckhead as prez for life or whatever the fuck bullshit plan they wanted to enact is still disingenuous. Some of you people act like it was the wild west & people got away with looting and arson - no, they arrested over 14000 people. Did they catch every single person that committed an actual crime at the George Floyd protests? Probably not. But there are plenty of people sitting time right now for acting a fool and burning shit down/looting/murder/etc so it's not like anyone got a free pass.

Again, what do you guys think would have happened if the crowd would have reach AOC/Pelosi/Pence?

[dwai]

Also let me point out again the BLM protests did have some violence and some people died but for the most part they were peaceful protests of people coming together against police brutality. Comparing these to the capitol riots where people wanted to disrupt the democratic process and reinstall fuckhead as prez for life or whatever the fuck bullshit plan they wanted to enact is still disingenuous. Some of you people act like it was the wild west & people got away with looting and arson - no, they arrested over 14000 people. Did they catch every single person that committed an actual crime at the George Floyd protests? Probably not. But there are plenty of people sitting time right now for acting a fool and burning shit down/looting/murder/etc so it's not like anyone got a free pass.

Again, what do you guys think would have happened if the crowd would have reach AOC/Pelosi/Pence?

[nunbeater]

Also let me point out again the BLM protests did have some violence and some people died but for the most part they were peaceful protests of people coming together against police brutality. Comparing these to the capitol riots where people wanted to disrupt the democratic process and reinstall fuckhead as prez for life or whatever the fuck bullshit plan they wanted to enact is still disingenuous. Some of you people act like it was the wild west & people got away with looting and arson - no, they arrested over 14000 people. Did they catch every single person that committed an actual crime at the George Floyd protests? Probably not. But there are plenty of people sitting time right now for acting a fool and burning shit down/looting/murder/etc so it's not like anyone got a free pass.

Again, what do you guys think would have happened if the crowd would have reach AOC/Pelosi/Pence?

That's right dwai even your son agrees

[dwai]

That's right dwai even your son agrees

dangit you GOT me

[nightmarefish]

So Joseph R. Biden, Democratic Presdiential nominee, took until JULY before calling for the arrest and prosecution for rioters? And you're okay with this?

Read that again. These are your own words, yet somehow you think Biden's super-weak avoidance of true condemnation of the rioters for OVER A MONTH was just fine.

Are you really going to sell us the claim that the left and the media were acting appalled by the violence, and loudly calling for it to stop? Because the exact opposite was occurring, and you know it.

This statement is false:

Dems didn’t condemn the summer riots until polls came out showing the American people were sick of them.

That's what I'm selling you.

What's the point of discussing opinions if you can't even recognize facts.

If Biden was on top of it then why are Cuomo and Lemon saying he needs to address the violence in this video? Watch the video ffs. Dems were avoiding talking about it. When polls showed public opinion with changing regarding the riots, the Dems message also changed. Your revisionist history hilarious, like Dems were condemning this shit all along. They wouldn’t even admit the riots were riots, “mostly peaceful” remember? JFC

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020...for-democrats/

[dwai]

This statement is false:

Dems didn’t condemn the summer riots until polls came out showing the American people were sick of them.

That's what I'm selling you.

What's the point of discussing opinions if you can't even recognize facts.

If Biden was on top of it then why are Cuomo and Lemon saying he needs to address the violence in this video? Watch the video ffs. Dems were avoiding talking about it. When polls showed public opinion with changing regarding the riots, the Dems message also changed. Your revisionist history hilarious, like Dems were condemning this shit all along. They wouldn’t even admit the riots were riots, “mostly peaceful” remember? JFC

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020...for-democrats/

bro you're arguing with someone that immediately believed jussie and then when it was clear he made up the whole thing he doubled down.

but you've schooled him on this issue for real

[duped_samaritan]

This statement is false:

Dems didn’t condemn the summer riots until polls came out showing the American people were sick of them.

That's what I'm selling you.

What's the point of discussing opinions if you can't even recognize facts.

If Biden was on top of it then why are Cuomo and Lemon saying he needs to address the violence in this video? Watch the video ffs. Dems were avoiding talking about it. When polls showed public opinion with changing regarding the riots, the Dems message also changed. Your revisionist history hilarious, like Dems were condemning this shit all along. They wouldn’t even admit the riots were riots, “mostly peaceful” remember? JFC

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020...for-democrats/

The real question you should be asking yourself is if Biden condemned the violence multiple times, then why did you think that Biden and other Dems didn't condemn the BLM related violence until August? And why is it so difficult to admit you were wrong on something so obviously clear cut?

I can answer the first one. It's because of this guy:


It's because of the media you consume. You bought into one of Trumps many false narrative being pushed by memes and click bait right wing media that BLM protests are all violent, Biden and the Democrats are glad there was violence, they don't care about your freedom, if you don't vote for Trump they're going to grab your guns and take over the country violently. Socialism!\

You bought into it at the end of the summer, and again after Jan 6th.







https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-f...-idUSKBN25V2O1
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...er/5706355002/
https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...violence-blac/
https://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-jo...164501432.html

[dwai]

UH OH GUYS, THE FACT CHECKERS SIDE WITH HIM, AND CNN AND ABC AND MSNBC AND HOLLYWOOD AND THE ATHLETES AND TWITTER AND FACEBOOK AND AMAZON AND APPLE AND GOOGLE, WOW WOULD YOU LOOK AT THAT

[nightmarefish]

This statement is false:



That's what I'm selling you.

What's the point of discussing opinions if you can't even recognize facts.

If Biden was on top of it then why are Cuomo and Lemon saying he needs to address the violence in this video? Watch the video ffs. Dems were avoiding talking about it. When polls showed public opinion with changing regarding the riots, the Dems message also changed. Your revisionist history hilarious, like Dems were condemning this shit all along. They wouldn’t even admit the riots were riots, “mostly peaceful” remember? JFC

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/2020...for-democrats/

The real question you should be asking yourself is if Biden condemned the violence multiple times, then why did you think that Biden and other Dems didn't condemn the BLM related violence until August? And why is it so difficult to admit you were wrong on something so obviously clear cut?

I can answer the first one. It's because of this guy:


It's because of the media you consume. You bought into one of Trumps many false narrative being pushed by memes and click bait right wing media that BLM protests are all violent, Biden and the Democrats are glad there was violence, they don't care about your freedom, if you don't vote for Trump they're going to grab your guns and take over the country violently. Socialism!\

You bought into it at the end of the summer, and again after Jan 6th.







https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-f...-idUSKBN25V2O1
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...er/5706355002/
https://www.politifact.com/factcheck...violence-blac/
https://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-jo...164501432.html

You're pulling a Gimmick by trying to focus on some irrelevant detail instead of the big picture, thinking it proves your point. I already told you Biden may have made some comments at the very beginning but after he was confirmed June 6th he went dark on the subject for months, he was playing politics. Making a couple comments and taking a firm stance on something to well define your position are two different things.

Cuomo/Lemon, in the segment on 8/25/20, asked him to address the riots head on because the dems avoiding it was showing up as a negative in polling. Biden made a statement on video the very next day, 8/26/20, and did exactly that. You honestly think that's a coincidence? And Biden wasn't the only one many Dems did the same thing starting 8/26/20, they got the memo that the previous approach on dealing with the riots wasn't working. If he had taken that stance before, why would Cuomo/Lemon be on tv asking him to (have you watched it yet)? Why are you avoiding this question? They would have said something along the lines of, well Biden as been very strong and clear against the violence from the beginning but we need him to do more.

[dwai]

You're pulling a Gimmick by trying to focus on some irrelevant detail instead of the big picture, thinking it proves your point.

[Dan Druff]

You're pulling a Gimmick by trying to focus on some irrelevant detail instead of the big picture, thinking it proves your point. I already told you Biden may have made some comments at the very beginning but after he was confirmed June 6th he went dark on the subject for months, he was playing politics. Making a couple comments and taking a firm stance on something to well define your position are two different things.

Cuomo/Lemon, in the segment on 8/25/20, asked him to address the riots head on because the dems avoiding it was showing up as a negative in polling. Biden made a statement on video the very next day, 8/26/20, and did exactly that. You honestly think that's a coincidence? And Biden wasn't the only one many Dems did the same thing starting 8/26/20, they got the memo that the previous approach on dealing with the riots wasn't working. If he had taken that stance before, why would Cuomo/Lemon be on tv asking him to (have you watched it yet)? Why are you avoiding this question? They would have said something along the lines of, well Biden as been very strong and clear against the violence from the beginning but we need him to do more.

It's worse than that.

duped is refusing to address the fact that Biden's early "condemnations" weren't actual condemnations. It was more of the, "C'mon, man, don't burn things down!" variety. He did not call for the arrest and prosecution of those rioting. That part didn't come until more than a month later (in July), because of mounting pressure upon him from the nervous DNC. The fact that Biden took over a month to ACTUALLY condemn the rioting speaks volumes. This should be something that happens on day 1.

duped posting all of the highly-biased "fact checks" about the matter won't change that.

duped, all of the major fact-checking organizations are exclusively staffed by people as far left as you. They refuse transparency, and in fact none of them can name a single true right-winger on their staff. None will disclose their process or how they are able to check on political matters without a bias getting in the way. It's a complete joke. I would hate it if fact checkers were all right wingers, because I wouldn't ever get the truth. Why are you okay with these left wing fact checkers having a monopoly on determining "facts"?

[duped_samaritan]

You're pulling a Gimmick by trying to focus on some irrelevant detail instead of the big picture, thinking it proves your point. I already told you Biden may have made some comments at the very beginning but after he was confirmed June 6th he went dark on the subject for months, he was playing politics. Making a couple comments and taking a firm stance on something to well define your position are two different things.

Cuomo/Lemon, in the segment on 8/25/20, asked him to address the riots head on because the dems avoiding it was showing up as a negative in polling. Biden made a statement on video the very next day, 8/26/20, and did exactly that. You honestly think that's a coincidence? And Biden wasn't the only one many Dems did the same thing starting 8/26/20, they got the memo that the previous approach on dealing with the riots wasn't working. If he had taken that stance before, why would Cuomo/Lemon be on tv asking him to (have you watched it yet)? Why are you avoiding this question? They would have said something along the lines of, well Biden as been very strong and clear against the violence from the beginning but we need him to do more.

It's worse than that.

duped is refusing to address the fact that Biden's early "condemnations" weren't actual condemnations. It was more of the, "C'mon, man, don't burn things down!" variety. He did not call for the arrest and prosecution of those rioting. That part didn't come until more than a month later (in July), because of mounting pressure upon him from the nervous DNC. The fact that Biden took over a month to ACTUALLY condemn the rioting speaks volumes. This should be something that happens on day 1.

duped posting all of the highly-biased "fact checks" about the matter won't change that.

duped, all of the major fact-checking organizations are exclusively staffed by people as far left as you. They refuse transparency, and in fact none of them can name a single true right-winger on their staff. None will disclose their process or how they are able to check on political matters without a bias getting in the way. It's a complete joke. I would hate it if fact checkers were all right wingers, because I wouldn't ever get the truth. Why are you okay with these left wing fact checkers having a monopoly on determining "facts"?

You guys can try all you want to justify spreading misinformation. It doesn't change the actual facts.

If you want to be taken seriously and discuss the way Democrats handled violence over the summer with someone who disagrees with you, don't base your argument on a lie. Otherwise, enjoy your echo chamber.

"Biden didn't condemn the violence until after the polls were released in August"

*confronted with multiple examples of Biden condemning the violence before August*

"stop trying to focus on some irrelevant detail!"
"fact checkers are bias!!!!"

give me a break

[dwai]

It's worse than that.

duped is refusing to address the fact that Biden's early "condemnations" weren't actual condemnations. It was more of the, "C'mon, man, don't burn things down!" variety. He did not call for the arrest and prosecution of those rioting. That part didn't come until more than a month later (in July), because of mounting pressure upon him from the nervous DNC. The fact that Biden took over a month to ACTUALLY condemn the rioting speaks volumes. This should be something that happens on day 1.

duped posting all of the highly-biased "fact checks" about the matter won't change that.

duped, all of the major fact-checking organizations are exclusively staffed by people as far left as you. They refuse transparency, and in fact none of them can name a single true right-winger on their staff. None will disclose their process or how they are able to check on political matters without a bias getting in the way. It's a complete joke. I would hate it if fact checkers were all right wingers, because I wouldn't ever get the truth. Why are you okay with these left wing fact checkers having a monopoly on determining "facts"?

You guys can try all you want to justify spreading misinformation. It doesn't change the actual facts.

If you want to be taken seriously and discuss the way Democrats handled violence over the summer with someone who disagrees with you, don't base your argument on a lie. Otherwise, enjoy your echo chamber.

"Biden didn't condemn the violence until after the polls were released in August"

*confronted with multiple examples of Biden condemning the violence before August*

"stop trying to focus on some irrelevant detail!"
"fact checkers are bias!!!!"

give me a break

I imagine you're a real treat at parties, god what an insufferable faggot you are

[nightmarefish]

It's worse than that.

duped is refusing to address the fact that Biden's early "condemnations" weren't actual condemnations. It was more of the, "C'mon, man, don't burn things down!" variety. He did not call for the arrest and prosecution of those rioting. That part didn't come until more than a month later (in July), because of mounting pressure upon him from the nervous DNC. The fact that Biden took over a month to ACTUALLY condemn the rioting speaks volumes. This should be something that happens on day 1.

duped posting all of the highly-biased "fact checks" about the matter won't change that.

duped, all of the major fact-checking organizations are exclusively staffed by people as far left as you. They refuse transparency, and in fact none of them can name a single true right-winger on their staff. None will disclose their process or how they are able to check on political matters without a bias getting in the way. It's a complete joke. I would hate it if fact checkers were all right wingers, because I wouldn't ever get the truth. Why are you okay with these left wing fact checkers having a monopoly on determining "facts"?

You guys can try all you want to justify spreading misinformation. It doesn't change the actual facts.

If you want to be taken seriously and discuss the way Democrats handled violence over the summer with someone who disagrees with you, don't base your argument on a lie. Otherwise, enjoy your echo chamber.

"Biden didn't condemn the violence until after the polls were released in August"

*confronted with multiple examples of Biden condemning the violence before August*

"stop trying to focus on some irrelevant detail!"
"fact checkers are bias!!!!"

give me a break

Why are Cuomo/Lemon on tv 8/25/20 saying Biden needs to address the violence head on if he was already doing so? Why did he listen to them the very next day? Why do you keep avoiding this question?

I'll help you with the answer, from June to August public support for the protests/rioting dropped 10 points according to polls that came out that day and dems acting weak regarding the situation was hurting them. Cuomo and Lemon pointed this out and Biden listened.

LMFAO at you trying to act like Biden or anyone on the left was tough on the rioters from the beginning. They were supporting them for the most part, Harris was helping bail them out of jail.