Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said Biden administration officials would “scream” and “curse” at his employees when they disagreed with the government’s takedown requests over pandemic-related content. …
I don’t need proof, because I believe him. And I have a feeling, even if he did provide proof, you’d be quick to say stuff like, “Well of course that’s easy to fake…” :)
No, if he had a record of the call/meeting. If there is an uninvested third party witness, etc. then I will take the claims seriously. Like I said, I do not doubt that the Biden admin, or any other presidential administration, has exercised undue influence over the media. It is indisputable that there is a history of it. However, I still want evidence before I go any further than “given the history, it could be true”.
I do not operate on faith, and you should not either, even though you will continue to do so. You also should probably drop the shit tier rags you post all the time, like the daily mail. If something is out there, a better outlet will have it.
Posting garbage simply because it shits on the party they have a deep bias against, doesn’t mean you are actually countering some narrative, garbage is garbage, be it pro democrat, pro gop, whatever.
The daily mail, NY Post, The militant. This makes up most of what you have been posting. daily, and post, are barely outside of being tabloids. While I have some respect for the SWP, and generally support them because there is so little actual leftist stuff in the US, the militant has a history of posting unsourced claims, straight up stuff that is wrong, and, while I can understand the desire for anonymity for the owners of a leftist circulation in the US, the lack of transparency is always suspect. While you can’t really just trust news, you can at least not primarily post the bottom feeders.
We know he is saying things you believe, and so you like it, and agree with it. Without proof though, it isn’t uncovering anything, just rage bait.
I don’t need proof, because I believe him. And I have a feeling, even if he did provide proof, you’d be quick to say stuff like, “Well of course that’s easy to fake…” :)
No, if he had a record of the call/meeting. If there is an uninvested third party witness, etc. then I will take the claims seriously. Like I said, I do not doubt that the Biden admin, or any other presidential administration, has exercised undue influence over the media. It is indisputable that there is a history of it. However, I still want evidence before I go any further than “given the history, it could be true”.
I do not operate on faith, and you should not either, even though you will continue to do so. You also should probably drop the shit tier rags you post all the time, like the daily mail. If something is out there, a better outlet will have it.
I like the Daily Mail. Thanks! :)
I mean, that is obvious, you post them frequently. Garbage in, garbage out.
I don’t think they’re garbage. Thanks!
You are free to be wrong
As are you. Thanks!
Posting garbage simply because it shits on the party they have a deep bias against, doesn’t mean you are actually countering some narrative, garbage is garbage, be it pro democrat, pro gop, whatever.
The daily mail, NY Post, The militant. This makes up most of what you have been posting. daily, and post, are barely outside of being tabloids. While I have some respect for the SWP, and generally support them because there is so little actual leftist stuff in the US, the militant has a history of posting unsourced claims, straight up stuff that is wrong, and, while I can understand the desire for anonymity for the owners of a leftist circulation in the US, the lack of transparency is always suspect. While you can’t really just trust news, you can at least not primarily post the bottom feeders.
Also, your profile just screams martyr complex