Leftists Attack Trump Supporter Whose Daughter Was Killed In Shooting

[WTF]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

It was the whole truth: "lib-retards attacked the man because they thought he was a Trump supporter." That they attacked him is apparent in their posts. There's nothing at all "untrue" in stating that "lib-retards attacked the man because they thought he was a Trump supporter." That statement is true even if there had only been two tweets, but there were more than two. SNOPES had to fabricate, insert and then attack a wholly irrelevant issue that wasn't in the original article which makes their ruling a lie.

Two things can be true.

Yes some attacked him.

Yes is was very few.

I like the context or the whole truth.

Be like lustylad calling a fart a Syrian Gas attack!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by WTF

Two things can be true.

Yes some attacked him.

Yes is was very few.

I like the context or the whole truth.

Be like lustylad calling a fart a Syrian Gas attack!

That's pure equivocation. When a newspaper headline reads, "Robbers robbed the bank!" That statement is either true or not true based on the single factual element of whether a robbery occurred or did not occur. And it remains true as long as at least two or more robbers were involved to justify the plural. Beyond that, the actual number is wholly irrelevant to discerning the truth of the statement. However, it would be a lie to claim, like SNOPES and those who believe SNOPES are doing, that the headline is not true because the patrons and the employees in the bank at the time didn't participate in the robbery.

No where in the article is there a claim that "every lib-retard attacked the Trump supporter" or even "most lib-retards attacked the Trump supporter." Hence, there's no justification for why SNOPES should introduce "number" as a reason to claim that any part of the article is untrue. SNOPES lied.

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

That's pure equivocation. When a newspaper headline reads, "Robbers robbed the bank!" That statement is either true or not true based on the single factual element of whether a robbery occurred or did not occur. And it remains true as long as at least two or more robbers were involved to justify the plural. Beyond that, the actual number is wholly irrelevant to discerning the truth of the statement. However, it would be a lie to claim, like SNOPES and those who believe SNOPES are doing, that the headline is not true because the patrons and the employees in the bank at the time didn't participate in the robbery.

HOVEL BUILDER'S "comprehension " issues appear to be further aggravated by his thrice daily " spitroasting " by his GENTE down at the 'holes .

[WTF]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

That's pure equivocation. When a newspaper headline reads, "Robbers robbed the bank!" That statement is either true or not true based on the single factual element of whether a robbery occurred or did not occur. And it remains true as long as at least two or more robbers were involved to justify the plural. Beyond that, the actual number is wholly irrelevant to discerning the truth of the statement. However, it would be a lie to claim, like SNOPES and those who believe SNOPES are doing, that the headline is not true because the patrons and the employees in the bank at the time didn't participate in the robbery.

Liberals rob a bank...but if only two liberals robbed the bank out of millions of liberals and the rest of the liberals turn the liberal bank robbers in,the headline just as easily could have been liberals turn in bank robbers.

The headline could have just as easily read , "Liberals overwhelming support Trump supporter whose daughter was murdered."

That is wht Snopes rated it as it did.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by WTF

Liberals rob a bank...but if only two liberals robbed the bank out of millions of liberals and the rest of the liberals turn the liberal bank robbers in,the headline just as easily could have been liberals turn in bank robbers.

The headline could have just as easily read , "Liberals overwhelming support Trump supporter whose daughter was murdered."

That is wht Snopes rated it as it did.

It's not within SNOPES' purview to change the headline, but you are right. They did CHANGE the headline to make their ruling. SNOPES lied.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

It's not within SNOPES' purview to change the headline, but you are right. They did CHANGE the headline to make their ruling. SNOPES lied.

Their purview is to get the whole truth out there.

That is why I use them.

And the whole truth was that very few people gave this Dad a hard time for being a Trump supporter.

Not nearly as bad as the original version tried to make it out to be.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by WTF

Their purview is to get the whole truth out there.

That is why I use them.

And the whole truth was that very few people gave this Dad a hard time for being a Trump supporter.

Not nearly as bad as the original version tried to make it out to be.

No. It's their self described mission to rule on what was said: not rewrite what was said and then make a ruling. You've already conceded the point that they did, indeed, rewrite what was said in order to justify their ruling; hence , they lied by ruling on something that wasn't said in the original article.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

No. It's their self described mission to rule on what was said: not rewrite what was said and then make a ruling. You've already conceded the point that they did, indeed, rewrite what was said in order to justify their ruling; hence , they lied by ruling on something that wasn't said in the original article.

Adding context is not rewriting what was said.

Their job is to tell the whole truth.

It is like the difference between a movie and a trailer about the movie.

Better to watch the whole movie and then decide if it is in fact like the trailer presents the movie.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by WTF

Adding context is not rewriting what was said.

Their job is to tell the whole truth.

It is like the difference between a movie and a trailer about the movie.

Better to watch the whole movie and then decide if it is in fact like the trailer presents the movie.

The article was the whole, unadulterated article containing the narrative written and presented as the authors intended. Your "movie" was a bad remake of the article wherein SNOPES changed the narrative into something the original article never was. SNOPES lied.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

the narrative written and presented as the authors intended.

Well we agree on that!

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by bamscram

Looked like another "cherry picked" sampling of only the negative posts, and most of them were blaming Trump.
It is a sampling of the division in this country.

That's what it's all about on the political front "Divide and Conquer". Propagate lies and misinformation to get people to oppose one another. Countries never fail from the outside it always happens from within. That's why I question everything the media puts out.

Jim

[bamscram]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

That's what it's all about on the political front "Divide and Conquer". Propagate lies and misinformation to get people to oppose one another. Countries never fail from the outside it always happens from within. That's why I question everything the media puts out.

Jim

It is why Russia has been so successful with social media. Lots have given up on fake news and get their news from Facebook ect.