PHP-Photography wrote:
Translation: I don't have anything.

Translation: I'm following the rules as the hidden reply in this very thread proves.  It's a character flaw of mine that will forever ban me from joining the democrat party.

LightDreams wrote:

To be fair to JustHenry, you have to understand that with the TV he watches, he's being fed (over and over again) that there really are TONS of examples of outright election fraud.  And "that no one can reasonably dispute it".

He DOESN'T understand that the Trump lawyers say one thing outside of court and make all sorts of incredible claims, and then they walk into court and say no such thing.  You see there are very strong penalties for lawyers who deliberately and knowingly tell outright lies to a judge.  Which isn't the same as pushing some wild, but reasonably plausible theories about actual evidence presented in court.

The (largely Republican) Judges most frequently point out that the Trump team "didn't even attempt to make any of their key claims IN COURT.  A number of them have asked "then why are we even here?".   Anyone can read the court decisions and the most common theme is that the Trump team "never even suggested any of the (so-called) major issues".

And in the rare case where they did, the (largely Republican) Judge's decisions are absolutely SCATHING.

So JustHenry REALLY BELIEVES that he has all sorts of "well known" (to Fox News viewers) examples, but he doesn't understand that EVERY MAJOR CLAIM seems to just evaporate into thin air when it's time to present it to a Judge.

What makes you think I watch FOX News?  To be honest, I stopped watching all television news sources roughly a year ago. I suppose that was an assumption on your part?  Emphasis on, well you know.

rfordphotos wrote:

Dont try and blame the Mods for your inability to defend a lie. [u]Produce the proof.

I suppose you missed the now deleted reply and reminder posted in this very thread.  So, do you still think I'm whining?

JustHenry wrote:
What makes you think I watch FOX News?  To be honest, I stopped watching all television news sources roughly a year ago. I suppose that was an assumption on your part?  Emphasis on, well you know.

True, I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt.

So please tell us, if you don't watch ANY TV news sources, what are your sources for your news, the ones that you feel are giving you such accurate information?

A simple answer to that, by itself, does not put you in conflict with the policy.  And it will be most enlightening.

JustHenry wrote:
To be honest, I stopped watching all television news sources roughly a year ago.

Reveling in ignorance?

LightDreams wrote:

True, I was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt.

So please tell us, if you don't watch ANY TV news sources, what are your sources for your news, the ones that you feel are giving you such accurate information?

A simple answer to that, by itself, does not put you in conflict with the policy.  And it will be most enlightening.

In the morning, The Tara Show, WORD Radio 106.3FM, you can (and should) stream her live via computer.  Throughout the day I access Internet news sources such as Yahoo's home page (which features articles from Reuters, Bloomberg, AP and other sources) then I follow up on topics I'm interested in via internet searches on my own.  For local news I refer to either WORD's home page or WFFY's home page. I might occasionally watch one of the local TV stations in the early morning if we have a weather event that might be creating traffic snarls, school closures, etc.

Would you like to know my bathroom habits too?

Baanthai wrote:

Reveling in ignorance?

I wasn't aware one had to rely on television for news and information.  Isn't it amazing how many things mankind discovered and invented before television came along?  How did we manage?

JustHenry wrote:

In the morning, The Tara Show, WORD Radio 106.3FM, you can (and should) stream her live via computer.  Throughout the day I access Internet news sources such as Yahoo's home page (which features articles from Reuters, Bloomberg, AP and other sources) then I follow up on topics I'm interested in via internet searches on my own.  For local news I refer to either WORD's home page or WFFY's home page. I might occasionally watch one of the local TV stations in the early morning if we have a weather event that might be creating traffic snarls, school closures, etc.

Would you like to know my bathroom habits too?

Still doling out the crap, I see! 

No.  We've been trying to figure out where you get such a unique set of what you seem to believe are facts.  You've made it quite clear that you have a completely different take on what's happening, and point out that you are not allowed to make those claims.  So what your "sources" for that are, might have been useful in shedding some light on it.  It's as simple as that.

JustHenry wrote:
In the morning, The Tara Show, WORD Radio 106.3FM, you can (and should) stream her live via computer.  Throughout the day I access Internet news sources such as Yahoo's home page (which features articles from Reuters, Bloomberg, AP and other sources) then I follow up on topics I'm interested in via internet searches on my own.  For local news I refer to either WORD's home page or WFFY's home page. I might occasionally watch one of the local TV stations in the early morning if we have a weather event that might be creating traffic snarls, school closures, etc.

Would you like to know my bathroom habits too?

WYRD-FM, known on-air as 106-3 WORD, The Upstate's Talk Station, is a news/talk-formatted radio station in the Greenville-Spartanburg area of Upstate South Carolina.

Affiliation: Fox News Radio

The Tara Show:  "Tara's Tirade - The media’s biased coverage of Trump is bigger than Watergate."
Tara Servatius dives deep into the 2020 presidential election  this election could change the way Americans live FOREVER.  Who pulls the strings?  What is their agenda?

Rush Limbaugh  (No further introduction is needed.)

Ground Zero with Clyde Lewis- "reporting about cover ups and conspiracies"

The Mark Levin Show (biased moderately to strongly toward conservative)
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/conservative-review/
Mark Levin is a conservative lawyer, author, and radio personality. He is the host of "The Mark Levin Show on the radio and "Life, Liberty & Levin" on Fox News.

etc., etc..

https://www.radio.com/1063word/shows

Seriously Henry?  You get your insights from talk radio?  No conspiracy is too far fetched on talk radio as long as it bashes the left.  Lots of anger in that medium.  Not a lot of facts.

Okay, it is established you get your news from Faux News and sources closely aligned with the genre, but not by watching the television. 

You have already established your bathroom habits.  No need to share any more about them.

JustHenry wrote:
I wasn't aware one had to rely on television for news and information.  Isn't it amazing how many things mankind discovered and invented before television came along?  How did we manage?

You are reveling in your ignorance. Expected. Hunter’s post established that you pretty much get your news from right-wing talk radio. A fact everyone already knew.

But I digress. Let’s quickly examine your proud refusal to be an informed citizen and not watch tv. You would have missed the following:

1. You would have missed live coverage of the Apollo 11 mission to the moon. Blast off, landing on the moon, returning to Earth. But I guess you were fiddle fucking your radio dial while the rest of the world sat spellbound to history unfolding in real time before them.

2. Coverage of the JFK assasination. Again, a nation watched in real time as historic events unfolded. You could have watched live as little Jon Jon stepped up and saluted his father’s caisson. Nope, watching a video tape later ain’t even close to watching live.

3. You’ve never seen an Olympics, World Series or any sporting event. Again, watching a sporting event after it’s happened is like watching a porno and claiming its the same as the real thing.

4. You didn’t watch the 2020 election unfold in real time with specific vote counts coming in from the county level, real time interviews with local election officials, reporters from every single news outlet stationed at vote counting centers looking for problems. You missed election officials explaining in real time what votes had been counted and what needed to be counted. You missed in real time reporters getting raw vote totals from county officials and on-air calculating the vote break down. You missed in real time that no real problems occurred Election Night and everything transpired as advertised.

Shame on you! You’re too lazy to even watch the election in real time, but then call it a fraud afterward. You do revel in your ignorance and display it without the slightest shame. Too much kool-aid for you.

JustHenry wrote:
Isn't it amazing how many things mankind discovered and invented before television came along?

You think Trump would be a president without TV ?

PHP-Photography wrote:

Pence will be president before that and he will pardon Trump.

trump can still be charged with state crimes. The NY AG is patiently waiting until Jan 21st.

Hunter  GWPB wrote:
WYRD-FM, known on-air as 106-3 WORD, The Upstate's Talk Station, is a news/talk-formatted radio station in the Greenville-Spartanburg area of Upstate South Carolina.

Affiliation: Fox News Radio

The Tara Show:  "Tara's Tirade - The media’s biased coverage of Trump is bigger than Watergate."
Tara Servatius dives deep into the 2020 presidential election  this election could change the way Americans live FOREVER.  Who pulls the strings?  What is their agenda?

Rush Limbaugh  (No further introduction is needed.)

Ground Zero with Clyde Lewis- "reporting about cover ups and conspiracies"

The Mark Levin Show (biased moderately to strongly toward conservative)
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/conservative-review/
Mark Levin is a conservative lawyer, author, and radio personality. He is the host of "The Mark Levin Show on the radio and "Life, Liberty & Levin" on Fox News.

etc., etc..

https://www.radio.com/1063word/shows

Seriously Henry?  You get your insights from talk radio?  No conspiracy is too far fetched on talk radio as long as it bashes the left.  Lots of anger in that medium.  Not a lot of facts.

Okay, it is established you get your news from Faux News and sources closely aligned with the genre, but not by watching the television. 

You have already established your bathroom habits.  No need to share any more about them.

I only listen to about an hour of Tara's show in the morning as I'm returning emails and prepping for my client calls.  I don't listen to Rush or any of the others you detailed.  You will note I specifically mentioned her show.  It appears you are still having reading comprehension problems.  I'm working during the rest of the day and don't have time to listen to talk radio or watch TV.

By saying I get my opinions from talk radio I see that you chose to ignore my mention of Yahoo News whose contributors included; AP, Reuters, Bloomberg, The Wall Street Journal, The Moley Fool (Financial Gurus), The Charlotte Observer, The Miami Herald and HuffPo just to name a few that come to mind.  I see that in addition to reading comprehension problems you are also cherry picking, again.

JustHenry wrote:
[...]

I saying I get my opinions from talk radio I see that you chose to ignore my mention of Yahoo News whose contributors included; AP, Reuters, Bloomberg, The Wall Street Journal, The Moley Fool (Financial Gurus), The Charlotte Observer, The Miami Herald and HuffPo just to name a few that come to mind.  I see that in addition to reading comprehension problems you are also still cherry picking.

Curious---- Which of the sources you list above promotes the "massive voting fraud story" you claim went on?
AP?---nope
Reuters? nope
Bloomberg? nope
The WSJ? nope
etc etc etc....

or your talk show host???

Fox News Radio's "The Tara Show:  "Tara's Tirade - The media’s biased coverage of Trump is bigger than Watergate."

You say ---we--- are "cherry picking". LOL You might want to re-examine that position.

You choose to follow some obscure talk radio host in a secondary (at best) market---- and ignore the national news organizations---the ones with DECADES of award winning journalism behind them, spanning many many administrations. How many Pulitzers did you say Tara had?

SayCheeZ!  wrote:
One of the biggest symptoms of a cult is that the followers will NEVER say anything NEGATIVE about their leader.
NEVER!

With any other political leader, as much as I may have liked them I could always find a few things that I disagree with and let it be known.  Most other people were the same way.

Out of the millions of his cult followers, I've literally only heard a handful of people EVER say anything against Trump.  When he spouts his lies and totally idiotic 'alternative facts' his minions either find excuses in an attempt to rationalize Trumps claims or they just stay silent.

Ignorance and apathy are a dangerous combination.

The only criticism of Trump I've heard from his supporters is "I wish he wouldn't tweet so gosh darn much." Which means nothing at all and means a lot at the same time.

rfordphotos wrote:

Curious---- Which of the sources you list above promotes the "massive voting fraud story" you claim went on?
AP?---nope
Reuters? nope
Bloomberg? nope
The WSJ? nope
etc etc etc....

or your talk show host???

Fox News Radio's "The Tara Show:  "Tara's Tirade - The media’s biased coverage of Trump is bigger than Watergate."

You say ---we--- are "cherry picking". LOL You might want to re-examine that position.

You choose to follow some obscure talk radio host in a secondary (at best) market---- and ignore the national news organizations---the ones with DECADES of award winning journalism behind them, spanning many many administrations. How many Pulitzers did you say Tara had?

I never said "massive voter fraud".  That discussion is off limits here.  Remember, I'm the one playing by the rules here rather than dancing around them.

So again you choose to ignore the fact that I READ news articles from numerous liberal sources but you assume my opinions are not self generated after analyzing opinions from numerous sources but come only from talk radio.  How you arrive at that non-logic is baffling.

I also find it telling that rather than debate me on the issues you continually try to question my character, intelligence and degrade me as a human being.  That is very telling in and of itself as it is a page directly from Rules For Radicals.

JustHenry wrote:
[...]

I also find it telling that rather than debate me on the issues you continually try to question my character, intelligence and degrade me as a human being.  That is very telling in and of itself as it is a page directly from Rules For Radicals.

I am not the one criticizing other people's reading comprehension. You are.

Havent said a word about your intelligence or your character. If you feel "degraded" by this conversation---that is on you, not me.

"Rules for Radicals" ---really?  I have been a conservative centrist republican for more than 45 years---- I dont think I fit the "radical" image very well.

Issues?

You mean like the LONG string of failed lawsuits attempting to prove voter fraud? The ones both republican and democratic judges LAUGHED out of court?

You mean like "your side" calling for the SUSPENSION of the Constitution---to overthrow a legitimate election?

You mean the hypocrisy of Trump calling his 306 electoral votes a "LANDSLIDE" in 2016, and a "travesty" when Biden got the same in 2020?

which issues would you like to discuss?


edit to add:

JustHenry wrote:
So again you choose to ignore the fact that I READ news articles from numerous liberal sources but you assume my opinions are not self generated after analyzing opinions from numerous sources but come only from talk radio.  How you arrive at that non-logic is baffling.

How did I come to that conclusion? Name one of the sources you listed---other than your talk radio host--- that is promoting the "voter fraud" (massive or otherwise).

doesnt take a genius to figure out where the idea came from.

JustHenry wrote:
I only listen to about an hour of Tara's show in the morning as I'm returning emails and prepping for my client calls.  I don't listen to Rush or any of the others you detailed.  You will note I specifically mentioned her show.  Still having reading comprehension problems I see.  I'm working during the rest of the day and don't have time to listen to talk radio or watch TV.

I saying I get my opinions from talk radio I see that you chose to ignore my mention of Yahoo News whose contributors included; AP, Reuters, Bloomberg, The Wall Street Journal, The Moley Fool (Financial Gurus), The Charlotte Observer, The Miami Herald and HuffPo just to name a few that come to mind.  I see that in addition to reading comprehension problems you are also still cherry picking.

Yeah, right Henry.  Your communication skills are lacking, so it must be my reading comprehension that is the problem.  Right.  You said you listen to Tara.  You didn't say you only listened to one hour of a four hour show.  You didn't say you listen to a little bit of Tara.  You said you listen to Tara.  Please learn to say what you mean because you certainly didn’t say in your first comment about Tara, what you said in your second post about her.   

You listen to one show on WORD 106.3 and the other shows on that station have nothing to do with the content that you absorb?  In that hour you listen to Tara, not one caller nor host or guest ever parrots the other stuff they hear on 106.3 or the other sources for trump minions?   You never get into a car during the day when the radio is already on 106.3 and get a little bit of this and that from the station?  Do you understand that a station that is airing Rush Limbaugh has a consistent tone and themes through the programing schedule?  Really, Rush Limbaugh being on the station says everything anyone needs to know about the station.   I did take the time to check into some of the shows that are the top billing.  There is nothing there but the ultra right bull.  Regardless of how much you listen to the programing of that station, it is reasonable to conclude what the content of the station's programing is by the write ups the station itself presents. Consequently, you misinterpret the reason for listing the various programs marketed by your radio host in response to your list of sources.  It isn't about what you listen to, it is about what your station provides.  And you question my reading comprehension? 

In a subsequent post you specifically mention the liberal stuff you read from those sources you listed, but I question if you read any liberal stuff.  Just because you brand these publications as liberal doesn’t make it so.  My first source is the Washington Post and neither you or I would consider it conservative.  However, there are conservative commentators there.  My experience regarding what many conservatives regard as liberal is anything they don’t like, where as most of it is main stream.  A left bias doesn’t make it liberal.   And why is your second reading list different from your first reading list?  Did you realize how shallow it was?

You list other sources like you pick around and read what you come across.  You didn't list anything as a trusted source other than Tara.  That seems rather limiting especially consider the format:"all news/talk morning show" 4 hours a day (1 for you).  You didn't mention sources like the Washington Post and New York Times.  Why is that?  The really good and honest reporting disrupts your world perception too much? You might read and hear other stuff which means you are probably picking what you want to read per what fits your ideology.  Its okay.  Perfectly normal and to a post, you come back with the right wing corrupted versions of quotes that fit the extremist right agenda and go straight down the rabbit holes with the right wing anti-American rhetoric.  You can't read too much of the opposing view points or the honest news or put much thought into the opposing points of views and make such homogeneous posts using right wing ideology.  If you were open to anything other than the Faux News genre, it would show up in your posts once in a while.  Have you made a post where you have disagreed with the trump line?

Oh, and thank you very much for the permission to start pointing out all of the stuff you cherry pick.

Focuspuller wrote:
Have to sympathize with the MAGATS here. The only thing consuming The Loser at all is the fake stolen election conspiracy, and they cannot support that here. They cannot defend this insane clown show.

...

And even the MAGATS have to admit, NOBODY could have predicted Bill Barr turning out to be a Deep State mole all these years, waiting to be activated to deliver a fatal blow to the Lost Cause. Et tu, Bill?

🤣 Deep State lmao.

But hey, how's Obamagate working out for you good old boys? 🤣👍

Camera Buff wrote:
Thank goodness for those Republicans who have the courage to speak out and say enough is enough, things have to STOP!

https://www.news.com.au/world/north-ame … ce3f1f8f62

Yeah, well, it is mainly the republican foot soldiers involved in State vote-counting who are being savaged by their bloated, braying leader. Thanks to one-way loyalty, they are being sacrificed to the mercies of the mad dogs calling for their families' violent deaths. That is really what they have had enough of. They did their job, and are getting punished for it by their own.

The national republican leadership? With the possible exception of Mitt Romney, who is clearly positioning himself for a possible trump-free party future, the republican party is still mainly the craven enabler it has been for four years.

JustHenry wrote:
It's a character flaw of mine that will forever ban me from joining the democrat party.

Having blind faith in a proven liar, someone who knew the full extent of the coronavirus and it's potential before it even hit your nation, then lied to the people telling them it was just like a bad flu and then, "like a miracle, it would just disappear". Someone who claimed to have put a total travel ban on China, but then let more than 40,000 people back in from China, under no quarantine conditions whatsoever. Someone who said 100,000 to 200,000 deaths would be a "very good job", but now that number has long surpassed, he resorts back to claiming he "saved millions of lives", due to his faux travel bans. Someone who denies science, yet claims to "take no responsibility at all". And someone, contrary to the real world opinion, claims the world admires the great job he's done with the virus.

trump IS a convicted conman and racketeer, do even stop to consider it MAY be a reflection of his true character.
I mean, come on man, when is enough BS enough? ...and are you sure that's your only major character flaw??

Rik Williams wrote:
I mean, come on man, when is enough BS enough?

That's my exact sentiment for the democrat party.

JustHenry wrote:
That's my exact sentiment for the democrat party.

This absolutely proves your level of wilful ignorance with regard to trump. If you can compare any one democrat President to a man who robs from charity, cheats on his wives, pays off porn stars, runs a fraudulent university, grabs pussy, praises murderous dictators, gasses protestors, cages children, extorts allies, evades taxes, obstructs justice & lies about a pandemic. (With the same level of proof we already have for trump) I would be willing to admit I am over reacting, but sadly with trump, if fried chicken ain't going in, lies be coming out.
Perhaps you should consider lifting your standards a little, or at least your willingness to accept reality.

Seriously dude, thousands of people are dying everyday from Covid and what is trump doing about it? Zero, absolutely nothing except whinging daily about losing the election by fraud with no evidence to back his outrageous accusations.
Just because a conspiracy theory appeals to your mindset, it doesn't automatically make it fact.

...is this making any sense to you at all?

Rik Williams wrote:
Just because a conspiracy theory appeals to your mindset, it doesn't automatically make it fact.

Which conspiracy theory?

JustHenry wrote:
Which conspiracy theory?

Typical, ignore the facts and cherry pick for a pitifully weak comeback.


...Well done, I'm now convinced trump is innocent 
(why do I feel the need to let you know I'm now being sarcastic)

Rik Williams wrote:
what is trump doing about it?

I have slightly off topic question for you.

What was the reaction in Australia when
the Ballart, Victoria lady got arrested in front of her kids
and taken to jail for discussing anti lockdown
on the internet?

nwprophoto wrote:
I have slightly off topic question for you.

What was the reaction in Australia when
the Ballart, Victoria lady got arrested in front of her kids
and taken to jail for discussing anti lockdown
on the internet?

I believe she was arrested for incitement and will appear in court come January.
The majority of the population think she was being more nieve than malicious, but most still think the police did the right thing.
A much smaller portion of the population were behind her and donated around $8000 to a legal defence go fund me page, but I think the page was taken down.
All the same, most people could see how stupid she was being and stood behind the authorities decision to arrest her, especially so after hearing her version of how well the police treated her during and after the arrest.
No doors were kicked in, no guns were drawn, the police didn't even raise their voices. In fact she later went on to compliment the police on their calm professionalism.
Personally I hope she gets off lightly, because she clearly didn't know any better.

LightDreams wrote:
Oh, and for those with short memories, 2016 also involved a massive conspiracy to steal the election from Trump, except he  quit claiming that after he unexpectedly won...

Don't shortchange Loser. He most certainly did not quit:

"TRUMP FALSELY CLAIMS 'MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WHO VOTED ILLEGALLY' COST HIM POPULAR VOTE."

https://www.cnn.com/2016/11/27/politics … index.html

Rik Williams wrote:
The majority of the population think she was being more nieve than malicious, but most still think the police did the right thing.

Interesting. It sure got a lot of attention in the international press.
Was curious about the political/cultural divide.
More than I would have thought.

You do drive on the wrong side of the road though

LightDreams wrote:
As yes.  One person arrested in Australia is a REAL scandal!   Not like what's happening in the U.S.... 

The only one that made big news in the international press anyway.
Maybe Rik would know more.

nwprophoto wrote:
Interesting. It sure got a lot of attention in the international press.
Was curious about the political/cultural divide.
More than I would have thought.

You do drive on the wrong side of the road though

We had minor protests on the lockdown, maybe less than a thousand people each time.
There's no doubt about it, being on hard lockdown with an 8pm curfew was a sh!tty thing to experience, but most of us could see why they were put in place at the time. We haven't had a covid case in our state for the last month and with most obeying the current government issued covid guidelines, hopefully it will stay that way for a while.

...and yeah, this time of the year we mostly drive in the middle of the road to avoid all the goannas and killer croc's out for mating season