Remember how there was 'no evidence' that the Trump campaign was wiretapped?

[Tijuana]

The two quotes. Your "evidence" that Youtube favours TYT was that as soon as videos are uploaded, they go to trending. When I explained how viewcounts work you said "Yeah but old videos too" (which btw doesn't change how viewcounts work, old or new, if there's a sudden increase in views, they're not immediately considered legitimate, to prevent bots from artificially inflating views and likes)


Oh, I'm not offended, just bemused by your sudden reluctance to discuss what we were discussing, instead shifting to "You're a librul" and "You can't speak for yourself" and now "You're just upset because your ego is so fragile" "You're butthurt" etc.... The only reason I point it out is to highlight the fact you've abandoned the original discussion, not because I'm upset




Yeah, it's gotten pretty off-topic. I'll stop responding since the conversation has devolved to the "you're butthurt" level.

No, that is not at all how the conversation went. You made a point and I refuted it. It does not conflict with what I said, in any way.

I never shifted from anything. You made some shitty points, and I refuted them. Some of my points, you refuted. What are you on about? What point did I not address?

[Attackrabbit]

When have I ever asked for a source

I have asked numerous posters to provide sources that my sig is wrong. So far nothing...

Although you'll no doubt come out and say

I never said I have NEVER asked for a source

again but the first bit I quoted is essentially you saying you never ask for sources

[Tijuana]

Although you'll no doubt come out and say again but the first bit I quoted is essentially you saying you never ask for sources

You are failing hard at some nuance. REALLY HARD.

The two things are not the same thing. One is denial of facts without proof, and the other is an issue of not having public access to the facts. Two people can disagree and provide different facts, which can be sorted out by comparing the data. But what you are asking for, is data that NOBODY in the public has. It's not the same thing. Privileged information is not the same thing as judging the credibility of information.

[Orbitus]

Remember when a BLM member used a sniper rifle to kill several police officers in Texas? I do.

I don't remember that, because that didn't FUCKING HAPPEN. How many fucking times do I have to link it to ignorant people like you. The guy that shot cops in Dallas was kicked out of the New Black Panther Party AND BLM for being TOO RADICAL. Something your side doesn't do, your side fucking elects them to fucking office.

- - - Updated - - -

What wiki? And I mean...why would you grab the shield of a white supremacist group, and conveniently be dressed in the same shirt/slacks as the rest of them, if you weren't involved with them?

This is some really low effort shit, dude.

He's just trying to be a white supremacist apologist. Not entirely surprising coming from a Putin/Trump bot.

- - - Updated - - -

Have some more Kool-Aid man.

@Edge- just destroyed your comment using Fox FUCKING News of all places, and you are STILL trying to die for a cause that was dead and buried long before you took up the defense.

- - - Updated - - -

Its also not only a problem that they're targeting anything anti-SJW, but the fact that google (alphabet corp) has a near complete monopoly on the internet (i sense anti-trust coming soon). They are literally able to control the content 99% of people see on the internet, and the fact that they prop up SJW content, and trend it, even if no ones watching, should be a huge concern to everyone.

Have any evidence for this? Or does your ass hurt from pulling that bullshit from it?

- - - Updated - - -

You are failing hard at some nuance. REALLY HARD.

The two things are not the same thing. One is denial of facts without proof, and the other is an issue of not having public access to the facts. Two people can disagree and provide different facts, which can be sorted out by comparing the data. But what you are asking for, is data that NOBODY in the public has. It's not the same thing. Privileged information is not the same thing as judging the credibility of information.

Look at @Skroe's sig, he will tell you exactly what you need to see to prove that of the 4, the 2 right wingers are the only ones under FBI investigation. Hillary hasn't been since before the election, Bernie wasn't his wife was, and that was all over hearsay, Vladimir Putin WILL ALWAYS BE under investigation. And then last but always the least, Trumplethinskin is very much under FBI investigation and so is the rest of his campaign, including imminent indictment of his campaign manager Paul Manafort.