Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

January 6th - what will happen?


Recommended Posts

It was not fake news at all.  The police were the ones that said they were investigating reports of the officer being hit with a fire extinguisher and being sprayed by pepper spray.   Fox also reported this.

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 7.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The President told MAGA to do it MAGA said they were going to do it MAGA filmed themselves doing it Afterwards, MAGA bragged about it Clearly, it was ANTIFA’s fault

One is an ugly, decrepit wasteland ruled by an assortment of villains hoping to impose their will on peace-loving people everywhere who otherwise just want to be left alone to tend to their gardens.

So they're finally following the CDC guidelines for the pandemic?

7 minutes ago, Godsbrother said:

It was not fake news at all.  The police were the ones that said they were investigating reports of the officer being hit with a fire extinguisher and being sprayed by pepper spray.   Fox also reported this.

 

And the ME still says the events of January 6 contributed to his death and the Capitol Police consider his death to be in the line duty.

Anyone who has an issue with either of those things should take it up with the professionals.

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

What are you doing right now?  Or others?  Using the man's death to push an agenda about the media.

No...I am not wrong.  The original reports cited law enforcement.  That is a fact of what was reported.  If you would like to refute it, do so.  I am defending that they used trusted sources in law enforcement.  I am defending that practice by the media.  It will mean that if not confirmed elsewhere, especially in the heat of moments like that, they will get things wrong.  Think of an active shooting situation...how many times are there reports of more than one shooter pushed?  How often is it true?  Does it make the media liars?  No....it means they are reporting things as it goes on.  From the point things happened, they were being told that an officer was hit with a fire extinguisher...they reported it as such.  If they tied that to Sicknick on their own and lied about...show it as much and yes they would be lying  But I don't believe that is how this played out.  And you can keep claiming I am wrong all you want...but show your work.

 

 

Reported. Spamming the forum with fake news is against the rules. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ekbeats said:

No, they didn't add something.  They spoke about it as accepted fact in their panel discussions.  Many times, for many weeks.  Gotta drive home that Narrative to show that it was a murderous insurrection.

So, it is your position that they did not add in the story that they were told that by law enforcement?  Really, you want to go there?

They spoke it as it was reported to them...didn't they?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stlrams said:

I believe the biggest problem is our media making up stories to fit the narrative.  Let’s start there first.

They make up those stories because you give them your eyeballs when they do :shrug:

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MAC_32 said:

Nah, it's important to know what is being told to the masses. I was informed about this because the mainstream media boogeyman ran a segment on it this morning. I'm sure I'd have found out via my other news means later today though.

Why?  If it's all wrong, why do I need to care what people obsessed with groups that are obsessed with their attention and their attention only?  That seems like the textbook definition of codependency.  The bottom line is, if you're giving them your attention, they're winning and they couldn't care less about anything other than your time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jon_mx said:

The problem is, it ain't that simple.  The entire MSM complex is pushing false narratives and now we have Google, YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook censoring conservatives and favoring these liberal wokist narratives.  You may not believe that or see that, but I guarrentee you 90 plus percentage of conservatives experience this crap everyday.

But hurray, we have a bunch of people expecting a huge murder conviction and they will be grossly disappointed when it probably ends up just being a manslaughter charge or even worse, a hung jury.  Cities will burn, people will die....and it is all because of the divisive false narratives and unrealistic expectations that they set.  But let's blame Trump, white nationalist, or white privilege.

For the point I am making, I can assume the bold is 100% true and it doesn't change a single word of what I said.  And yes, it is that simple.  All they want is your clicks and eyeballs.  

Though I will say, the irony here is rich as you are relying 100% on the "MSM complex" as you have it defined here to be 100% confident of the outcome in the Rittenhouse thread.  You're a walking contradiction on this jon.  This should give you pause, but it won't.  And I will continue to lay blame where it belongs and that is at the feet of the viewers who give this oxygen.  Has nothing to do with Trump, white nationalists or white privilege.  Makes for cute strawman arguments but is pretty nonsensical.  Has everything to do with you giving the MSM exactly what they want...your time/attention.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Commish said:

Why?  If it's all wrong, why do I need to care what people obsessed with groups that are obsessed with their attention and their attention only?  That seems like the textbook definition of codependency.  The bottom line is, if you're giving them your attention, they're winning and they couldn't care less about anything other than your time.

Well, it isn't all wrong. Like any of us, each form of media has its own bias. That's what they deliver because it's what we demand. Recognizing that I expose myself to multiple different sources to try and attain balance. If the average consumer did that then I would probably consume information via a different means, but we're a society of simple minded dullards that wants to be told what to think. I adapted because the average person doesn't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, MAC_32 said:

Well, it isn't all wrong. Like any of us, each form of media has its own bias. That's what they deliver because it's what we demand. Recognizing that I expose myself to multiple different sources to try and attain balance. If the average consumer did that then I would probably consume information via a different means, but we're a society of simple minded dullards that wants to be told what to think. I adapted because the average person doesn't.

This is exactly my point and I have no earthly idea why I should care about any of those willing to set their bar there.  There are plenty of news sources out there that still have reporting integrity.  There are even sources out there external to the US media machine that report facts and facts alone when reporting on the US.  They are infinitely better than what this country provides it's robots.  People will say "I don't get enough details/information from those sources"...no, you get plenty, what you don't get is all the :hophead: hot take nonsense that is required to fill the other 23 hours in a day of the 24 hour "news" networks.  That's what you're missing.

Edited by The Commish
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, The Commish said:

They make up those stories because you give them your eyeballs when they do :shrug:

 

I don’t believe they will stop based on limited viewership or lack thereof. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, The Commish said:

This is exactly my point and I have no earthly idea why I should care about any of those willing to set their bar there.  There are plenty of news sources out there that still have reporting integrity.  There are even sources out there external to the US media machine that report facts and facts alone when reporting on the US.  They are infinitely better than what this country provides it's robots.  People will say "I don't get enough details/information from those sources"...no, you get plenty, what you don't get is all the :hophead: hot take nonsense that is required to fill the other 23 hours in a day of the 24 hour "news" networks.  That's what you're missing.

...do you expect me to convince you that you should care what the average dope is being told to think? It's fine if you don't find the value in it. I do - primarily because then I have a point of reference to draw back to if human being X starts talking about a particular subject. For example, what prompted my initial comment earlier today - as I was scrolling through here over my first cup of coffee, NBC was running a segment on Sicknick...and the person you responded to suggested (in jest?) that network (MSNBC, to be fair) should be banned because of their coverage on the subject. Comedy is 90% timing, so I found that whole sequence worthy of a good morning chuckle.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, stlrams said:

I don’t believe they will stop based on limited viewership or lack thereof. 

They can't survive without it :shrug: 

That's the business model.  If you take away the business model, they HAVE to change..will it be for the better or the worse?  All depends on what you and I demand.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MAC_32 said:

...do you expect me to convince you that you should care what the average dope is being told to think? It's fine if you don't find the value in it. I do - primarily because then I have a point of reference to draw back to if human being X starts talking about a particular subject. For example, what prompted my initial comment earlier today - as I was scrolling through here over my first cup of coffee, NBC was running a segment on Sicknick...and the person you responded to suggested (in jest?) that network (MSNBC, to be fair) should be banned because of their coverage on the subject. Comedy is 90% timing, so I found that whole sequence worthy of a good morning chuckle.

My engagement with you on this was over your comment that it was important.  If it's important because that's your source of comedy, then I can get on board with that.  Though, I find my comedy elsewhere...mainly in those pissing and moaning about the media they happily support with their attention.  And the best part about that is, I don't even have to know what those sources are saying.  The "logic" there is more than enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Commish said:

My engagement with you on this was over your comment that it was important.  If it's important because that's your source of comedy, then I can get on board with that.  Though, I find my comedy elsewhere...mainly in those pissing and moaning about the media they happily support with their attention.  And the best part about that is, I don't even have to know what those sources are saying.  The "logic" there is more than enough.

Nah, it's not important for comedic purposes; that's just what happened this morning. I find value in what all different opinion and news sources (within reason) are reporting because 1- I want to know what each biased source is telling their target audience and 2- it achieves my goal of balance. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MAC_32 said:

Nah, it's not important for comedic purposes; that's just what happened this morning. I find value in what all different opinion and news sources (within reason) are reporting because 1- I want to know what each biased source is telling their target audience and 2- it achieves my goal of balance. 

Help me understand this.  I can't wrap my head around this notion that one has to watch MSNBC and FoxNews equally to assure themselves that they are taking in equal amounts of obviously liberal and obvious conservative bias.  Why not just ignore the fringes altogether and live in the middle?  It's not like you aren't going to be forced to hear those viewpoints.  We are slammed by them in this very forum.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Commish said:

Help me understand this.  I can't wrap my head around this notion that one has to watch MSNBC and FoxNews equally to assure themselves that they are taking in equal amounts of obviously liberal and obvious conservative bias.  Why not just ignore the fringes altogether and live in the middle?  It's not like you aren't going to be forced to hear those viewpoints.  We are slammed by them in this very forum.

I limit my consumption and engagement in this forum, so I don't feel slammed by viewpoints in here. I approach MSNBC, Fox, and any other place I go for news and opinions similarly. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, The Commish said:

For the point I am making, I can assume the bold is 100% true and it doesn't change a single word of what I said.  And yes, it is that simple.  All they want is your clicks and eyeballs.  

Though I will say, the irony here is rich as you are relying 100% on the "MSM complex" as you have it defined here to be 100% confident of the outcome in the Rittenhouse thread.  You're a walking contradiction on this jon.  This should give you pause, but it won't.  And I will continue to lay blame where it belongs and that is at the feet of the viewers who give this oxygen.  Has nothing to do with Trump, white nationalists or white privilege.  Makes for cute strawman arguments but is pretty nonsensical.  Has everything to do with you giving the MSM exactly what they want...your time/attention.  

Lol...I have no idea what your point is except to criticize me.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

Lol...I have no idea what your point is except to criticize me.

I'm not surprised.

Edited by The Commish
Better more accurate response
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, MAC_32 said:

I limit my consumption and engagement in this forum, so I don't feel slammed by viewpoints in here. I approach MSNBC, Fox, and any other place I go for news and opinions similarly. 

This is what makes you better than me.  This is pretty much the only place I come stateside outside NPR for some of their information shows and podcasts.  Based on my readings here we have a pretty good accumulation of viewpoints from "the sides" and how they "hate" the "liberal" or "conservative" media outlets....all while they sit and willfully consume them for quite a long time each day it seems.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Commish said:

This is what makes you better than me.  This is pretty much the only place I come stateside outside NPR for some of their information shows and podcasts.  Based on my readings here we have a pretty good accumulation of viewpoints from "the sides" and how they "hate" the "liberal" or "conservative" media outlets....all while they sit and willfully consume them for quite a long time each day it seems.  

:lol: I wouldn't go that far! I agree with you about the population that exists in this forum. I know this place drives Joe nuts, but compare it to other places on the internet and it is arguably in a top tier. That's intended to both speak (relatively!) positively about this community and negatively about our political climate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/15/2021 at 7:27 AM, sho nuff said:

He died from a stroke?  Medical examiners have not released that on Sicknick...have they?

And you have zero clue if he would have had such an event if not in that position...you know that.

So yes...Im really going there.  The event caused deaths that would have most likely not happened with out the event.  It caused many injuries that would not have happened without the event.  It caused damage that would not have happened without the event.

:lmao:  You went there alright. 

Many injuries, LMAO.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MAC_32 said:

I know this place drives Joe nuts, but compare it to other places on the internet and it is arguably in a top tier.

Couldn't agree more.  While this place can be maddening sometimes some other places I check out can make your skin crawl, and I'm not talking about what way the majority leans politically.  So many of the comments in those places signify the worst of what the internet provides.    

Edited by dkp993
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, tonydead said:

:lmao:  You went there alright. 

Many injuries, LMAO.

You dont think there were many injuries that day?

Hell the ME agreed with me that the events played a role.

But thanks for the mocking bump.  My post them was spot on accurate to the facts as known at the time.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, stlrams said:

I don’t believe they will stop based on limited viewership or lack thereof. 

I take this post as you are saying it's not about business, it's about choosing to report in a certain way (ie have an agenda).  Ratings and clicks drop in half, and they don't change their business model? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Commish said:

My engagement with you on this was over your comment that it was important.  If it's important because that's your source of comedy, then I can get on board with that.  Though, I find my comedy elsewhere...mainly in those pissing and moaning about the media they happily support with their attention.  And the best part about that is, I don't even have to know what those sources are saying.  The "logic" there is more than enough.

I think I would find more humor if most discussions didn't start breaking down to #####ing about CNN and MSM.   It a mix of funny and tiresome having people fight about the same 3-4 channels that most seem to agree aren't that great to get news from.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

I take this post as you are saying it's not about business, it's about choosing to report in a certain way (ie have an agenda).  Ratings and clicks drop in half, and they don't change their business model? 

 

Yes - thought I read that cnn ratings have drop 60% since January.  The cable news outlets are just an extension of the political parties.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, stlrams said:

Yes - thought I read that cnn ratings have drop 60% since January.  The cable news outlets are just an extension of the political parties.  

Just odd that people complain about CNN changing from a source of decent news to something like Fox - so evidently they can and do change.   I guess I am not sure if ratings dictated that change, or you are more right than I am.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KarmaPolice said:

I think I would find more humor if most discussions didn't start breaking down to #####ing about CNN and MSM.   It a mix of funny and tiresome having people fight about the same 3-4 channels that most seem to agree aren't that great to get news from.  

That, apparently they watch often....it's mind numbing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, stlrams said:
1 hour ago, KarmaPolice said:

I take this post as you are saying it's not about business, it's about choosing to report in a certain way (ie have an agenda).  Ratings and clicks drop in half, and they don't change their business model? 

 

Yes - thought I read that cnn ratings have drop 60% since January.  The cable news outlets are just an extension of the political parties.  

:confused: Wait...your honest belief is that these outlets are in place to push political narratives OVER making money?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, The Commish said:

:confused: Wait...your honest belief is that these outlets are in place to push political narratives OVER making money?

The people who work there....absolutely 100 percent.  

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, The Commish said:

:confused: Wait...your honest belief is that these outlets are in place to push political narratives OVER making money?

They can accomplish both but your theory that if people just stop watching cable networks they would change.  Cnn ratings down 60% with no change insight.  Then you have cnn employee admitting on camera the network was on Biden’s side and promoted stories to help him. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, The Commish said:

That, apparently they watch often....it's mind numbing.

I swear from the posts around here 2/3rds of what conservative outlets report on is what CNN is reporting on.  ;) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, stlrams said:
10 hours ago, The Commish said:

:confused: Wait...your honest belief is that these outlets are in place to push political narratives OVER making money?

They can accomplish both but your theory that if people just stop watching cable networks they would change.  Cnn ratings down 60% with no change insight.  Then you have cnn employee admitting on camera the network was on Biden’s side and promoted stories to help him. 

Sure, they CAN...but they aren't.  I don't know if what you're saying is true or not with this 60% down, but if it was, they clearly aren't accomplishing both.  Most of the time they have to choose and you're saying they will choose the politics (and run out of money) instead of the money to keep the machine going.  I'm curious about what sort of historical, meaningful evidence you use to make that assumption.  That goes against everything "capitalism" in this country and what shareholders demand.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, KarmaPolice said:

I swear from the posts around here 2/3rds of what conservative outlets report on is what CNN is reporting on.  ;) 

I'll take the over

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

ALL news channels are way down.  It's not that CNN has a smaller piece of the pie.  The pie itself is smaller since the last administration ended.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, The Commish said:

Sure, they CAN...but they aren't.  I don't know if what you're saying is true or not with this 60% down, but if it was, they clearly aren't accomplishing both.  Most of the time they have to choose and you're saying they will choose the politics (and run out of money) instead of the money to keep the machine going.  I'm curious about what sort of historical, meaningful evidence you use to make that assumption.  That goes against everything "capitalism" in this country and what shareholders demand.

It’s just my opinion but believe the cable networks have come the conclusion that news is everywhere today so they have become niche news (?} organizations.  They aren’t going to garner local or national followings so they cater to the fringe left and right.  These people are voracious consumers of political information and best yet you can feed them almost anything and they’ll believe it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

NY Freedom Fighter and Super Genius is nabbed after telling Bumble match that why yes, he did storm the Capitol!

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/ny-man-arrested-after-posting-on-dating-app-that-he-did-storm-the-capitol-during-riot/3014862/

If you are wondering what that interaction on Bumble might have looked like, good news, here's a screenshot.

https://twitter.com/jsrailton/status/1385416545308925954

:wub:

 

From further down that thread:

Bumble removed its political filter after people said they used it to lure conservatives who were at the Capitol riot into sending incriminating evidence

Dang

Edited by massraider
  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, massraider said:

NY Freedom Fighter and Super Genius is nabbed after telling Bumble match that why yes, he did storm the Capitol!

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/ny-man-arrested-after-posting-on-dating-app-that-he-did-storm-the-capitol-during-riot/3014862/

If you are wondering what that interaction on Bumble might have looked like, good news, here's a screenshot.

https://twitter.com/jsrailton/status/1385416545308925954

:wub:

 

From further down that thread:

Bumble removed its political filter after people said they used it to lure conservatives who were at the Capitol riot into sending incriminating evidence

Dang

"I know a friend of a friend who changed her preference on Bumble to Conservative. She’s matching with MAGA bros and they’re bragging and sending her pics and videos of them in the Capitol. She’s sending them to the FBI."

12:33 AM · Jan 8, 2021

  • Like 2
  • Love 1
  • Laughing 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Amused to Death said:

"I know a friend of a friend who changed her preference on Bumble to Conservative. She’s matching with MAGA bros and they’re bragging and sending her pics and videos of them in the Capitol. She’s sending them to the FBI."

12:33 AM · Jan 8, 2021

:thumbup:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Florida Man drives from Ocala to DC, storms the Capitol, thinks he's in the White House, family member turns him in.  The End.  

LINK

Quote

The relative supplied screenshots of texts and pictures from Kelly, according to investigators, which read “Inside White house (sic) via breaking in windows” and, “Patriots stormed the White House, broke in while Senate (with a little s) was in sessiondenating (sic) Arizona. The were hiding under ther (sic) desks. Forced into recess. Patriots took back our capitol today.”

 

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, massraider said:

Florida Man drives from Ocala to DC, storms the Capitol, thinks he's in the White House, family member turns him in.  The End.  

LINK

 

That is one confused patriot.

I'll add that this is an example of why I'm less upset at the dress up/make believe patriots who defiled the capital and more upset at the majority of house Rs who chose to decertify later that same day. 

Edited by kwille
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
19 hours ago, Sinn Fein said:

From the start of his candidacy, Trump has had the magic ability to convince his followers to turn against institutions, people, and beliefs that conservatives used to habitually support -- the police, the military, free trade, fellow Republicans, etc. Basically, wherever Trump leads, conservatives follow. It's either a credit to Trump's persuasiveness, or a discredit to conservative fortitude, not sure which.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2021 at 1:24 AM, Sea Duck said:

From the start of his candidacy, Trump has had the magic ability to convince his followers to turn against institutions, people, and beliefs that conservatives used to habitually support -- the police, the military, free trade, fellow Republicans, etc. Basically, wherever Trump leads, conservatives follow. It's either a credit to Trump's persuasiveness, or a discredit to conservative fortitude, not sure which.

It's all discredit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/7/2021 at 2:24 AM, Sea Duck said:

From the start of his candidacy, Trump has had the magic ability to convince his followers to turn against institutions, people, and beliefs that conservatives used to habitually support -- the police, the military, free trade, fellow Republicans, etc. Basically, wherever Trump leads, conservatives follow. It's either a credit to Trump's persuasiveness, or a discredit to conservative fortitude, not sure which.

The BLM/Antifa insurrectionists supported by the left all say "Hi!  Remember us?"

Get outta' here with your nonsense.

Edited by BladeRunner
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

The BLM/Antifa insurrectionists supported by the left all say "Hi!  Remember us?"

Get outta' here with your nonsense.

To claim BLM/Antifa insurrectionists have the support of the left is utterly ridiculous.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, BladeRunner said:

The BLM/Antifa insurrectionists supported by the left all say "Hi!  Remember us?"

Get outta' here with your nonsense.

Instead of playing the whataboutism/deflection game, feel free to address the following:

Trump has had the magic ability to convince his followers to turn against institutions, people, and beliefs that conservatives used to habitually support -- the police, the military, free trade, fellow Republicans, etc.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Sea Duck said:

Instead of playing the whataboutism/deflection game, feel free to address the following:

Trump has had the magic ability to convince his followers to turn against institutions, people, and beliefs that conservatives used to habitually support -- the police, the military, free trade, fellow Republicans, etc.

I think that's way too sweeping. Your average guy with the blue line in his flag was a Trump voter, overwhelmingly. The military has not come in for distrust among the average Trump voter. Heck, Trump almost appealed to the military to "oversee" the proper electoral outcome. Dick Cheney stepped in with a big, "#### no you won't."

The institutions that got turned against? It depends on which ones they are. The media and academia? Sure, but they discredited themselves in the conservative mind many, many years prior. Like since '68. Churches? Certainly not getting questioned from the right these days. Trump rode evangelicals to power. Questioning church institutions has always been the province of the left, and still is.

Free trade wasn't necessarily Trump. It was Buchanan in the '92 primaries and has a long social conservative critique of it. Anti-free trade sentiments were then echoed by Perot and the Reform Party, of which Trump was once a member.

I think you've got an unwieldy thesis on your hands. It's a lot more complicated than just that.

  • Love 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...