Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
2 minutes ago, Legato said:

Say what?

Who knows. Eyeball just says crap with no regard for caring about how true it is or not. Then just obfuscates after. 

 

 

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

 

Do you want to go through the list of Biden era lies that y'all never gave a damn about?

 

Don't be such verifiable hypocrites.

 

 

Nobody is right all the time. Not everybody is in agreement on the facts or perspective. Those things don't necessarily undermine trust, unless they are frequent and persistent. 

A lie is making a statement you know not to be false or making things up entirely and stating them as facts.

Instead of being pissed off that Pete Hegseth lied casually about something that had already been confirmed, you want to deflect and make it about someone else. 

That's why this is the post-shame era. As a defender of a POTUS who is a pathological liar and the similarly morally compromised yes-men (and women) he appoints, all you have is deflection. Pathetic.

Edited by Hodad
  • Thanks 1
Posted
Just now, Hodad said:

Instead of being pissed off that Pete Hegseth lied casually about something that had already been confirmed, you want to deflect and make it about someone else. 

What was the lie?

You insist he lied, when it was quite clear he was not in agreement to the terms/spin describing what occurred. 

1 minute ago, Hodad said:

That's why this is the post-shame era. As a defender of a POTUS who is a pathological liar and the similarly morally compromised yes-men (and women) he appoints, all you have is deflection. Pathetic.

What is pathetic is that you know I keep picking apart your inane commentary on this forum so you hide from me. 

 

 

 

Posted
8 minutes ago, Legato said:

Say what?

Says Hegseth...

During his confirmation hearing, Hegseth acknowledged he was “not a perfect person”. He promised senators that he has stopped drinking and would not do so if confirmed as defense secretary. But he would not commit to resigning if he did drink on the job.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/24/pete-hegseth-what-we-know

 

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Nobody is right all the time. Not everybody is in agreement on the facts or perspective. Those things don't necessarily undermine trust, unless they are frequent and persistent. 

A lie is making a statement you know not to be false or making things up entirely and stating them as facts.

Instead of being pissed off that Pete Hegseth lied casually about something that had already been confirmed, you want to deflect and make it about someone else. 

That's why this is the post-shame era. As a defender of a POTUS who is a pathological liar and the similarly morally compromised yes-men (and women) he appoints, all you have is deflection. Pathetic.

No. I said the whole thing was a screw up. I'm on the side of consistent. You are the one that is both decrying and excusing lies depending on the side of the aisle they are on.

  • Like 1

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, gatomontes99 said:

 

Do you want to go through the list of Biden era lies that y'all never gave a damn about?

 

Don't be such verifiable hypocrites.

The hypocrite is YOU.

When it comes to PATHOLOGICAL LYING, Trump is by FAR in a class BY HIMSELF.

Jan 23, 2021  The Washington Post Fact Checker's database of Trump claims, originally launched as a project to track his first 100 days, offers a window ...

 

Jan 20, 2021  The number of falsehoods from Trump reportedly increased exponentially around October with the approach of the presidential election that he ...
Nov 6, 2024  In my 14 years as The Washington Post Fact Checker, nine have been devoted to dissecting and debunking claims made by Donald Trump.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

image.png

image.png

Edited by robosmith
  • Thanks 1
Posted
8 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Says Hegseth...

During his confirmation hearing, Hegseth acknowledged he was “not a perfect person”. He promised senators that he has stopped drinking and would not do so if confirmed as defense secretary. But he would not commit to resigning if he did drink on the job.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/jan/24/pete-hegseth-what-we-know

 

OK great... now what does any of this have to do with the assertion that he was drunk on Fox news?

Or the lies that you tried to defend from Robosmith about 10 people saying this?

 

Just now, robosmith said:

When it comes to PATHOLOGICAL LYING, Trump is by FAR in class BY HIMSELF.

What is your count of lies up to here so far?

 

 

 

Posted
Just now, gatomontes99 said:

No. I said the whole thing was a screw up. I'm on the side of consistent. You are the one that is both decrying and excusing lies depending on the side of the aisle they are on.

Doing it was a screw up. That's a mistake, albeit a monumentally dumb and embarrassing one.

Blatantly lying, denying that it happened, when you know it happened is an entirely different matter. 

 

And no, I've done no such thing. You throwing up a Gish gallop of shit media clips is neither conversation nor debate, and I did not watch or remark on that nonsense.  

Posted
5 minutes ago, robosmith said:

The hypocrite is YOU.

When it comes to PATHOLOGICAL LYING, Trump is by FAR in class BY HIMSELF.

Jan 23, 2021  The Washington Post Fact Checker's database of Trump claims, originally launched as a project to track his first 100 days, offers a window ...

 

Jan 20, 2021  The number of falsehoods from Trump reportedly increased exponentially around October with the approach of the presidential election that he ...
Nov 6, 2024  In my 14 years as The Washington Post Fact Checker, nine have been devoted to dissecting and debunking claims made by Donald Trump.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

image.png

image.png

Lmao.. 3 links, all from a lwnj that hated Trump. Now, here is why the article itself is a lie. The 4 year period he portends.to have counted the "lies" is 1460 days. That would have meant Trump lied 21 times a day. He didn't even make 21 statements a day. Somehow, your lwnj, desguised as a "journalist", counted more lies than statements.

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
10 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Doing it was a screw up. That's a mistake, albeit a monumentally dumb and embarrassing one.

Blatantly lying, denying that it happened, when you know it happened is an entirely different matter. 

 

And no, I've done no such thing. You throwing up a Gish gallop of shit media clips is neither conversation nor debate, and I did not watch or remark on that nonsense.  

Both are screw ups and those clips are an extremely small example of left wing lies. None of which have you ever spoken out against.

If Pete is lying (and it is likely he is) then he needs to stop, own it and move on. It'll serve him well.

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, gatomontes99 said:

Both are screw ups and those clips are an extremely small example of left wing lies. None of which have you ever spoken out against.

If Pete is lying (and it is likely he is) then he needs to stop, own it and move on. It'll serve him well.

No, they are very much a Gish gallop of deflection. If you want to debate some specific claim, feel free to raise a topic elsewhere. 

Likely lying? No, blatantly. Well, unless he got blackout drunk and forgot that he did those things.

And he's unlikely to learn anything. As part of the Fox News machine he's been casually lying to you people for years without consequence, so he's unlikely to find a conscience now. 

Edited by Hodad
  • Thanks 1
Posted
1 hour ago, User said:

OK great... now what does any of this have to do with the assertion that he was drunk on Fox news?

Or the lies that you tried to defend from Robosmith about 10 people saying this?

It had to do with your assertion that without any names there were no sources. I simply pointed out there were, the whistleblowers that journalists interviewed.

Whatever the number, Hegseth's corroboration is the clincher. 

No one is lying. It's simply your head going boom.

 

A government without public oversight is like a nuclear plant without lead shielding.

Posted
1 hour ago, Hodad said:

Gish gallop

You keep using that term incorrectly. Nothing I said was misleading and the videos are not misleading. The videos illustrate a series of lies. To be a Gish Gallup, you have to make up a bunch of misleading or untrue statements.

1 hour ago, Hodad said:

No, they are very much a Gish gallop of deflection. If you want to debate some specific claim, feel free to raise a topic elsewhere. 

Likely lying? No, blatantly. Well, unless he got blackout drunk and forgot that he did those things.

And he's unlikely to learn anything. As part of the Fox News machine he's been casually lying to you people for years without consequence, so he's unlikely to find a conscience now. 

Yes, he's likely lying. However, there also appears to be a misunderstanding of terms. War plans are detailed. From what I've seen, the Signal messages are generic and broad. So Hegseth is probably telling the truth there. But he did say the messages didn't happen, and that is a lie. I will not firmly decide the full extent of my opinion until I see all of the information. It will be a bit before all of that is out.

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
59 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It had to do with your assertion that without any names there were no sources. I simply pointed out there were, the whistleblowers that journalists interviewed.

Whatever the number, Hegseth's corroboration is the clincher. 

No one is lying. It's simply your head going boom.

 

That was not my assertion though. You need to read better. 

Hegset did not corroborate anything, you have offered no argument to this effect. 

Robosmith has repeatedly lied and now he runs away like usual. 

 

 

Posted

It was also fun watching Gabbard squirm as she tried to explain why Canada wasn't on her own departments list of major fentanyl imports and how that contradicted the rhetoric coming from Trump.  All she could so was talk about Mexico. F*cking amateurs.

Posted
4 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

 

Do you want to go through the list of Biden era lies that y'all never gave a damn about?

 

Don't be such verifiable hypocrites.

 

 

Those so-called “lies” are not even close terms of scale or frequency or obviousness compared to huge and tiny lies MAGAs tell dozens of times a day

Posted
3 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Those so-called “lies” are not even close terms of scale or frequency or obviousness compared to huge and tiny lies MAGAs tell dozens of times a day

Lmao...ok Beev.

  • Haha 1

The Rules for Liberal tactics:

  1. If they can't refute the content, attack the source.
  2. If they can't refute the content, attack the poster.
  3. If 1 and 2 fail, pretend it never happened.
  4. Everyone you disagree with is Hitler.
  5. A word is defined by the emotion it elicits and not the actual definition.
  6. If they are wrong, blame the opponent.
  7. If a liberal policy didn't work, it's a conservatives fault and vice versa.
  8. If all else fails, just be angry.
Posted
8 hours ago, User said:

What Hegseth was denying was that "war plans" or top secret documents were being shared, it was the characterization of the discussion he was disputing. 

 

 

Suuuuure…it was top secret military information regarding an active combat mission but Hegspeth had a level 5 meltdown into a unhinged foaming at the mouth tirade about fake news conspiracies because he thinks the wrong technical term was used.
 

He doesn’t care about strict laws and protocols about sharing the highest level of military secrets he’ll go apeshit ballistic over proper technical terminology LMAO do you really believe that?

Posted
3 hours ago, Hodad said:

Instead of being pissed off that Pete Hegseth lied casually about something that had already been confirmed, you want to deflect and make it about someone else. 

 

This thread could have been titled “But her emails”

  • Thanks 1
Posted
14 minutes ago, BeaverFever said:

Suuuuure…it was top secret military information regarding an active combat mission but Hegspeth had a level 5 meltdown into a unhinged foaming at the mouth tirade about fake news conspiracies because he thinks the wrong technical term was used.
 

He doesn’t care about strict laws and protocols about sharing the highest level of military secrets he’ll go apeshit ballistic over proper technical terminology LMAO do you really believe that?

It is not about what I believe, it is simply an observation of what occurred. 

You want to engage in this silly extreme generalization game like "highest level of military secrets"

Yes, when someone asks him questions loaded with that kind of language, he is going to reject it. 

 

 

Posted
12 hours ago, gatomontes99 said:

You keep using that term incorrectly. Nothing I said was misleading and the videos are not misleading. The videos illustrate a series of lies. To be a Gish Gallup, you have to make up a bunch of misleading or untrue statements.

 

I am indeed using the term correctly. The claims needn't be untrue, the galloper simply has to not care about the truth of the claims because volume is the point, not substance. You didn't vet the claims. You didn't even watch the videos. You simply Googled "Biden lies" or some dumb shit and threw up some links. And you know that's true so stop pretending that you were making a serious or principled argument. You were just making noise. And I take it as such.

Quote

Yes, he's likely lying. However, there also appears to be a misunderstanding of terms. War plans are detailed. From what I've seen, the Signal messages are generic and broad. So Hegseth is probably telling the truth there. But he did say the messages didn't happen, and that is a lie. I will not firmly decide the full extent of my opinion until I see all of the information. It will be a bit before all of that is out.

🙄

Posted
10 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

This thread could have been titled “But her emails”

I did include it in the OP. lol

The "lock her up" crowd were foaming at the mouth over a private server--half the people on that Signal chat called her a criminal--but now that they've been caught in a far more compromising situation it's a "tsk tsk."  

  • Thanks 1
Posted
12 hours ago, BeaverFever said:

How iut of touch are you?  White House already admitted it was true

See? They've acknowledged the mishap and are moving on. You should move on too. I know I already have. ;) 

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  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.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,914
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    MDP
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • MDP earned a badge
      Dedicated
    • MDP earned a badge
      First Post
    • DrewZero earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • BlahTheCanuck went up a rank
      Explorer
    • derek848 earned a badge
      First Post
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...