ChiefsPlanet Mobile
Page 8 of 11
« First < 45678 91011 >
Washington DC and The Holy Land>'60 MINUTES' BUSTED DECEPTIVELY EDITING RON DESANTIS IN HIT PIECE
petegz28 10:13 AM 04-05-2021
'60 MINUTES' BUSTED DECEPTIVELY EDITING RON DESANTIS IN HIT PIECE

https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/ro...tis-60-minutes
[Reply]
LiveSteam 01:12 PM 04-06-2021
?onger

Did you step in it again?

Obviously, you never played a game of Hopscotch as a kid.
[Reply]
Donger 01:14 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by LiveSteam:
?onger

Did you step in it again?

Obviously, you never played a game of Hopscotch as a kid.
I haven't stepped in anything.
[Reply]
lawrenceRaider 02:01 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by eDave:
I still remember when everyone right was scared to death of Hillary. Let's see it DeSanto's gets equal treatment.
DeSantis is a screaching harpy?
[Reply]
Ninerfan11 02:13 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by Just Passin' By:
Serious question for you:


Of the leftists who regularly post in this forum, which of them do you honestly think would change their posting based upon their knowledge of it being false?
lmao. so true.
[Reply]
Ninerfan11 02:15 PM 04-06-2021
If I was ANY business anywhere, I'd probably be donating to Republican candidates right now. Choice is pretty obvious, unless you're part of the green/vegan/vaccine agenda.
[Reply]
ScareCrowe 03:40 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
It was a question, not a point, really. But, if there was no pay, there cannot be play.
So you're really trying to claim that wasn't a rhetorical question?
[Reply]
Donger 03:48 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by ScareCrowe:
So you're really trying to claim that wasn't a rhetorical question?
Not really. I figured that he didn't claim that the donation wasn't given right before the contract was awarded.
[Reply]
ScareCrowe 04:04 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
Not really. I figured that he didn't claim that the donation wasn't given right before the contract was awarded.
This is a pretty specific question for someone who claims they didn't know the answer to the question before he asked it:

Originally Posted by Donger:
So Publix didn't donate $100,000 to his campaign right before he awarded them a contract to administer the vaccines?
You knew the exact amount he got paid & that it was close to the time that he awarded the contract. I'm sorry that isn't a question someone would ask that really didn't know what was going on.

Furthermore what does any of this have to do with 60 minutes editing his answer? Whether he's guilty of what they're accusing him of is irrelevant.
[Reply]
Donger 04:08 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by ScareCrowe:
This is a pretty specific question for someone who claims they didn't know the answer to the question before he asked it:



You knew the exact amount he got paid & that it was close to the time that he awarded the contract. I'm sorry that isn't a question someone would ask that really didn't know what was going on.

Furthermore what does any of this have to do with 60 minutes editing his answer? Whether he's guilty of what they're accusing him of is irrelevant.
I asked that question before watching the video. You're making this more complicated than it is, which you have a penchant for doing.

It doesn't have anything to do with it. It's irrelevant if he played for pay?
[Reply]
ScareCrowe 04:16 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
I asked that question before watching the video. You're making this more complicated than it is, which you have a penchant for doing.

It doesn't have anything to do with it. It's irrelevant if he played for pay?
Yes it's irrelevant to the point of whether it's OK for a media outlet to edit his comments to make it appear he's saying something other than what he's saying.

As an example if I'm arrested for dealing drugs, but the DA doesn't have enough evidence to convict me so he manufactures evidence to make me look guilty. Is his behavior only OK if I was really selling drugs? Or is a DA fixing a case not OK regardless of whether the defendant is guilty?
[Reply]
Donger 04:20 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by ScareCrowe:
Yes it's irrelevant to the point of whether it's OK for a media outlet to edit his comments to make it appear he's saying something other than what he's saying.

As an example if I'm arrested for dealing drugs, but the DA doesn't have enough evidence to convict me so he manufactures evidence to make me look guilty. Is his behavior only OK if I was really selling drugs? Or is a DA fixing a case not OK regardless of whether the defendant is guilty?
Yes, I agree with that. But I'd hope that you wouldn't be fine with any politician practicing pay for play.
[Reply]
ScareCrowe 04:25 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by Donger:
Yes, I agree with that. But I'd hope that you wouldn't be fine with any politician practicing pay for play.
Of course I'm not but then it comes down to the question I posed above. If they're the best company to get the job done should we not give it to them simply to avoid it appearing to be "pay to play"? If you're going to allow companies to donate to politicians you're going to have these sorts of conflicts.

Which gets to the point he very candidly explained the process & why it wasn't pay to play, then they removed that from the video. If they had a real story they should be able to present it fairly & honestly. They obviously didn't feel they could make their point without underhanded tactics.
[Reply]
Donger 04:29 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by ScareCrowe:
Of course I'm not but then it comes down to the question I posed above. If they're the best company to get the job done should we not give it to them simply to avoid it appearing to be "pay to play"? If you're going to allow companies to donate to politicians you're going to have these sorts of conflicts.

Which gets to the point he very candidly explained the process & why it wasn't pay to play, then they removed that from the video. If they had a real story they should be able to present it fairly & honestly. They obviously didn't feel they could make their point without underhanded tactics.
I don't disagree.
[Reply]
vailpass 04:35 PM 04-06-2021
60 Minutes severely damaged their credibility with this one. It's a shame.
[Reply]
Donger 04:37 PM 04-06-2021
Originally Posted by vailpass:
60 Minutes severely damaged their credibility with this one. It's a shame.
Rather did that a long time ago with Bush.
[Reply]
Page 8 of 11
« First < 45678 91011 >
Up