Do Dem/LPOC Cultists Even Understand What Disinformation Is?

[WestCanMan]

It's an established fact that the DNC and FBI were guilty of spreading disinformation and censoring the truth regarding the Hunter laptop, and those two, along with the Cdn gov't, were guilty of spreading covid disinformation and banning specific facts about the covid pandemic. 

Still, when the important topic of disinformation comes up, leftist cultists always refer to imaginary "RUSSIANDISINFORMATION", like the stuff that sucked them in during the collusion investigation and again during the FBI's laptop lying fiasco.

They honestly want to have a serious conversation based on the bogeyman of Russian disinformation while ignoring the far more serious topic of disinformation coming right from the LPOC and DNC, the FBI, and sycophant legacy media outlets like CBS, who went so far as to change Kamala's answers entirely after her recent interview. 

It's not right to have this conversation without including lefties, it would make us no better than them, but where can you find a leftist who will even admit that their gov't lied about things like the Hunter laptop and the BSL4 lab?

Are we at impasse? 

[Dougie93]

16 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Are we at impasse? 

no

the right wing populist counterrevolution has come

the left wing media establishment would not be so hysterical otherwise

the Democrat party traitors to the republic are on the run

chased unto the sea, by Billy Sherman himself, glory, glory, hallelujah

“The American press is a shame and a reproach to a civilized people. When a man is too lazy to work and too cowardly to steal, he becomes an editor and manufactures public opinion.” ~ William Tecumseh Sherman

[robosmith]

The OP doesn't even understand what a legitimate chain of custody for EVIDENCE means.

For one thing, it means that the minute Giuliani got his hands on Hunter's laptop, the chain of custody lost all legitimacy.

Just like when the FBI started screwing around with Kevin Mitnick's laptop before making an image copy of the disk, destroyed the chain of custody for that EVIDENCE. 

[WestCanMan]

52 minutes ago, robosmith said:

The OP doesn't even understand what a legitimate chain of custody for EVIDENCE means.

For one thing, it means that the minute Giuliani got his hands on Hunter's laptop, the chain of custody lost all legitimacy.

Listen to the f'ing id10t who thinks that "anonymous sources close to the president" means "absolutely incontrovertible evidence" trying to discount evidence just because Giuliani got his hands on it.

A bigger problem is that the FBI got their hands on it, f-tard. You know, those guys who lie to the FISA court and then alter evidence when it fits their needs...

And FYI, all of the evidence on the laptop has been verified, as if there was ever any doubt about the Biden family's crimes. 

[robosmith]

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

Listen to the f'ing id10t who thinks that "anonymous sources close to the president" means "absolutely incontrovertible evidence" trying to discount evidence just because Giuliani got his hands on it.

A bigger problem is that the FBI got their hands on it, f-tard. You know, those guys who lie to the FISA court and then alter evidence when it fits their needs...

And FYI, all of the evidence on the laptop has been verified, as if there was ever any doubt about the Biden family's crimes. 

Could NOT have been "verified" without an IMAGE COPY made BEFORE it was dropped off at the repair shop. Duh.

[gatomontes99]

2 hours ago, robosmith said:

Could NOT have been "verified" without an IMAGE COPY made BEFORE it was dropped off at the repair shop. Duh.

Are you dumb enough to think they don't know if someone altered the data and what data was altered? Do you really believe that?

On the stand, FBI agent Erika Jensen confirmed the authenticity of the laptop, along with evidence from Biden’s computer data and excerpts from a memoir he wrote about his addiction battles.

[CdnFox]

You know what they think it means. Anything that they don't want to hear is misinformation or disinformation.

[Fluffypants]

 Disinformation is true information that is inconvenient to them

 

Edited December 11, 2024 by Fluffypants

[WestCanMan]

15 hours ago, robosmith said:

Could NOT have been "verified" without an IMAGE COPY made BEFORE it was dropped off at the repair shop. Duh.

There's no level of evidence that will satisfy you when it comes to charging a Dem, and no lack of evidence that will compel to say that a conservative is guilty. 

Joe Biden's own admission should have been enough to sink his battleship:

• Shokin was investigating Burisma corruption, he had just won court orders to seize Zlochevsky's assets right before Biden fired him. Zlochevsky was Hunter Biden's boss - he had inexplicably and randomly hired Hunter Biden and paid hum $83K/m when he doesn't speak any of the languages of that region and he had no experience in the energy sector
• Joe Biden unilaterally got Shokin fired, and "put a solid guy in his place", and that solid guy let Hunter Biden's boss off the hook
• Joe Biden and Hunter Biden both lied repeatedly about Joe's knowledge of Hunter's overseas business dealings, and especially about Joe's involvement with Hunter's partners at those businesses. Joe was actually right in the thick of things.
• The amount of evidence tying Joe Biden to Hunter's overseas business partners, where all of the shady dealings happened, is unquestionable. Joe Biden was a huge cog in all of Hunter Biden's overseas dealings. There are eyewitnesses to that, phone records, email records, and evidence from Hunter's laptop. Oh, plus Joe's id10tic confession. 

The evidence of Joe's guilt is like Mt Kilimanjaro rising from the desert. 

There was no evidence found of Russian collusion after a 3-yr investigation. Not one speck.

Trump: "Look at that mountain there, rising like a leopress [sic] above the Serengeti". 

FBI: "We don't see nothin'. There's no mountain there."

Trump: "You don't see that thing, right there, blocking most of the horizon?"

FBI: "We see a bit of a hill maybe."

Trump: "That 'hill' has a name. "Mt. Kilamoanjaro." It's right here on the map beside the X that says "You are here". See? The X, where we are, and then Mt Kilamanjaro, right there beside the X."

FBI: "There's nothing to talk about. This BS about a mountain is just Russian disinformation. Now shut up or you'll get kicked off of social media again."

[impartialobserver]

"Disinformation" is subjective mostly. If we have issue x and I post an opinion that person X disagrees with... that is disinformation according to most. 

[CdnFox]

31 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

"Disinformation" is subjective mostly. If we have issue x and I post an opinion that person X disagrees with... that is disinformation according to most. 

It tends to spread beyond that though. The left has passionately argued that even if something is factually true they can still call it disinformation If they feel that it should have context. And then they will use the idea of context to try and alter the truth or mitigate its damage to parties they like. For example if somebody prints that biden raised taxes as a true statement the left might say it's not true because it lacks the context of the fact that trump lower taxes too much to begin with and therefore it was necessary.

The original statement was perfectly true. But they claim it is untrue or "needs context" so that they can argue the point. 

So does become less subjective. Fact checking orgs are notorious for being dishonest

[WestCanMan]

On 12/13/2024 at 10:48 AM, impartialobserver said:

"Disinformation" is subjective mostly.

That's a very real problem among leftists.

They think that they can feel the truth in their precious little hearts, but when the truth is in plain sight, there's no subjectivity involved. It's called "lying". Whether that's lying to themselves, or just lying to other people, it makes no difference. It's still lying. 

Either the FBI lied and committed crimes or they didn't. The judge was pretty clear on what really happened though. 

Either Clinton and Lynch had a highly inappropriate and clandestine meeting on the tarmac or it was one of the biggest coincidences of the century. 

Protests were either generally peaceful or they weren't, and the fires didn't start themselves. People and cops didn't beat themselves up and kill themselves when they saw the rioters coming. TVs and jewelry didn't flee the stores. The retarded kid didn't partially scalp himself. 

Either there was some evidence that no one has ever shown us why healthy 25-yr-olds needed a covid jab or they were forced to take the jab for no reason.

The laptop story was 100% accurate, and the FBI had that laptop in their possession for 11 months before it came out. The FBI knew it was not "Russian disinformation". Biden himself admitted to most of that story in his funny anecdote. Again, like with the tarmac thing, the chances of Hunter randomly getting hired by a company in a country in eastern Europe where his dad was just about to randomly help get its criminal CEO exonerated are 1 in 50,000,000,000. And then there's the issue of why Hunter and Joe lied about Joe's involvement in that company. 

There's nothing subjective about any of that. If you have an IQ over 70, you G-d well know what's up.