4 minutes ago, tropo said:

Or stay with Twitter and have them discontinue adding politically biased fact-checks that are lies. That's the easiest way forward.

And now we are at the heart of it....Trump needs Twitter more than Twitter needs Donald Trump. As I said before, if the fact checks are lies, surely people can think for themselves and ferret out fake news where it lives and breathes...that must really sting...letting people think for themselves and not depend on Donald Trump to think for you. 

3 hours ago, DoctorG said:

and then you have the people on here who believe everything they see on CNN/MSNBC. Weird isn't it?

Nah, no weirder than all those who believe trumps constant lying 

16 minutes ago, Tie Dye Samurai said:

And now we are at the heart of it....Trump needs Twitter more than Twitter needs Donald Trump. As I said before, if the fact checks are lies, surely people can think for themselves and ferret out fake news where it lives and breathes...that must really sting...letting people think for themselves and not depend on Donald Trump to think for you. 

Irrespective of who needs who more, we're a long way from Trump needing to delete his account and start using another platform. Watch this space. I will make a prediction that Trump's Tweets will not be fact-checked going forward.

Edited May 28, 20206 yr by tropo

2 hours ago, n00dle said:

Perhaps the scariest thing about trump is that he may actually beleive his own narrative.

Not. He doesn't believe a word of it. Just mindless rhetoric to feed his base, who he personally despises.

24 minutes ago, tropo said:

Or stay with Twitter and have them discontinue adding politically biased fact-checks that are lies. That's the easiest way forward.

What are the 'lies' with Twitter's fact check content of the two trump posts?

31 minutes ago, tropo said:

Or stay with Twitter and have them discontinue adding politically biased fact-checks that are lies.

Which lies are you referring to?

2 hours ago, Walker88 said:

45 probably doesn't even know the internet is international in scope, and there is absolutely nothing he could do to block Twitter. If he somehow sicked his private lawyer on Twitter (the guy formerly known as the Attorney General), Twitter could move to Canada or another country where private enterprise is championed and where the leadership not only is above the age of consent, but also acts like an adult. If 45 still tried to block it, Americans could easily access it on TOR or another tunneling proxy.

 

Freedom wins, 45 loses. A taste of this November.

sure, he can try to shut them down or block them.  not possible.

 

tens of millions of chinese on twatter and farcebook prove otherwise.

29 minutes ago, tropo said:

Irrespective of who needs who more, we're a long way from Trump needing to delete his account and start using another platform. Watch this space. I will make a prediction that Trump's Tweets will not be fact-checked going forward.

Lets just examine that...why is fact checking so scary for the Trump supporters. If the fact checks are lies, they will be exposed...if the facts checks are true then Trump will be exposed...I mean we are just trying to shed light on the truth, right? At the end of the day the truth is what is important, correct? So what is wrong with fact checking...and if Trump does not like being fact checked, why shouldn't he delete his account and move on to more "accurate" platforms to distribute his message instead of trying to censor free speech? Freedom of speech surely allows for fact checking....right? 

Childish behaviour as we have all come to know and expect. 

Trump has been used to total control all his life and still doesn't expect anyone to confront him.

Carry on Twitter.

Why does "the goose"  not shut them all down. It would go down as one of the only good things he achieved. 

Make the world a better place

36 minutes ago, Phoenix Rising said:

Which lies are you referring to?

The fact that there isn't widespread and endemic voter fraud in the US. How else would Trump have got elected? I refuse to believe that 50% of the American voting public would be so incredibly stupid as to vote for a snake oil salesman.

18 minutes ago, Phil McCaverty said:

The fact that there isn't widespread and endemic voter fraud in the US. How else would Trump have got elected? I refuse to believe that 50% of the American voting public would be so incredibly stupid as to vote for a snake oil salesman.

As has been explained to people ad nauseum since trump was elected, he did not gain 50 percent of the vote, nor did he even acheive a majority because the us electoral college system is setup to make a majority common vote unnessescary.

 

Trump won with 304 of a possible 538 votes from the electorate.

 

Given the skew of votes per territory he won the electorate majority.

 

By actual numbers the story iwas somewhat different. Donald trump won less votes, but more of the right votes.

 

Hillary clinton won 65,853,625 votes (48.0%)

donald trump won 62,985,106 votes (45.9%).

 

 

Edited May 28, 20206 yr by n00dle

4 hours ago, TopDeadSenter said:

And here we go again. False smears without a scintilla of evidence presented as fact. Again and again and again. For the record Trump donates his salary to the US armed forces, he is a hero. There is no evidence of his having stolen anything. Kindly retract your false and insulting post which is in breech of forum rules. Thank you.

you have set a low bar for "heroism."

 

but good to know donating his salary makes up for dodging the draft and pardoning war criminals.

26 minutes ago, Tie Dye Samurai said:

Lets just examine that...why is fact checking so scary for the Trump supporters. If the fact checks are lies, they will be exposed...if the facts checks are true then Trump will be exposed...I mean we are just trying to shed light on the truth, right? At the end of the day the truth is what is important, correct? So what is wrong with fact checking...and if Trump does not like being fact checked, why shouldn't he delete his account and move on to more "accurate" platforms to distribute his message instead of trying to censor free speech? Freedom of speech surely allows for fact checking....right? 

No, wrong. The problem is that fact checking is not fact checking at all. It's a political activist with an agenda pretending to be a fact checker. I indicated who was responsible for the fact checking in a post above.

 

 

14 hours ago, riclag said:

Who are the factcheckers ,that twitter uses and what bias ,if any ,have they shown ,recently! Many reports in the past mention these tech giants in California's corporate locations have very liberal leanings.

 

Do they outsource their factchecking or is it in house

Why are you asking posters on TVF?

 

If you really want to know, then talk to the people who run Twitter, ask all your questions to them and the report back on this thread.

Just now, tropo said:

No, wrong. The problem is that fact checking is not fact checking at all. It's a political activist with an agenda pretending to be a fact checker. I indicated who was responsible for the fact checking in a post above.

 

 

The crux of the matter is for you or others who object to Twitter fact check of trump to demonstrate it's incorrect, not that the fact checker has a prior history of criticising trump which in essence is 'so what'.

Just now, ChouDoufu said:

you have set a low bar for "heroism."

 

but good to know donating his salary makes up for dodging the draft and pardoning war criminals.

its a tax dodge.

1 hour ago, simple1 said:

What are the 'lies' with Twitter's fact check content of the two trump posts?

You can do some work too... state his facts and I'll counter them for you.

1 minute ago, Phil McCaverty said:

its a tax dodge.

 

not likely.  it's a public relations stunt that i believe most presidents do.  it looks good, but compared to their total assets, utterly meaningless.

 

he doesn't need ANOTHER tax write off.  i'd have to google the exact figgers, but isn't he still writing off about a $billion in losses from one of his bankruptcies, that can be carried forward for about a decade to offset income?

11 minutes ago, tropo said:

No, wrong. The problem is that fact checking is not fact checking at all. It's a political activist with an agenda pretending to be a fact checker. I indicated who was responsible for the fact checking in a post above.

 

 

Then tell us what the fact checkers got wrong. Its only a couple of the twits tweets.

8 minutes ago, tropo said:

No, wrong. The problem is that fact checking is not fact checking at all. It's a political activist with an agenda pretending to be a fact checker. I indicated who was responsible for the fact checking in a post above.

 

why a problem?  a private (non-government) company hires/tasks an employee to do research.  better to have someone who would take the job seriously, than one more interested in covering for the buffoon.  otherwise it would be like appointing big-pharma executives to run the national virus/vaccine effort.  ooh, whoopsie!

 

anyhoo, if the fact-checkers prove to be consistently pushing an agenda, this will become a public relations gold mine for trump.

4 minutes ago, simple1 said:

The crux of the matter is for you or others who object to Twitter fact check of trump to demonstrate it's incorrect, not that the fact checker has a prior history of criticising trump which in essence is 'so what'.

No, the crux is that his "fact checking" is not fact checking at all AND he's a Trump hater with a political agenda.

 

 

2 minutes ago, tropo said:

No, the crux is that his "fact checking" is not fact checking at all AND he's a Trump hater with a political agenda.

 

 

How do you know its a "he"?

 

Admit it, you have no idea who the fact checker is or their political leanings.

10 minutes ago, tropo said:

You can do some work too... state his facts and I'll counter them for you.

You're making the allegations, the onus is on you to back up your accusation with factual info from credible sources. if you decline to do so one can only come to one conclusion; you've got nothing.

10 minutes ago, Phil McCaverty said:

How do you know its a "he"?

 

Admit it, you have no idea who the fact checker is or their political leanings.

The guy's name is in the public domain, Yoel Roth, but the reality is the CEO of Twitter 'owns' the content.

 

https://nypost.com/2020/05/27/twitter-fact-checker-has-history-of-politically-charged-posts/

2 minutes ago, simple1 said:

The guy's name is in the public domain, Yoel Roth, but the reality is the CEO of Twitter 'owns' the content.

 

https://nypost.com/2020/05/27/twitter-fact-checker-has-history-of-politically-charged-posts/

NY Post is about as credible as Fox News.

 

From your link: "Commenting on the criticism of Roth, the spokesperson said, “No one person at Twitter is responsible for our policies or enforcement actions, and it’s unfortunate to see individual employees targeted for company decisions.”

 

I would imagine that before Trumps tweet was flagged, it would have received clearance at the highest level and checked and rechecked by a number of people.

2 minutes ago, Phil McCaverty said:

NY Post is about as credible as Fox News.

 

From your link: "Commenting on the criticism of Roth, the spokesperson said, “No one person at Twitter is responsible for our policies or enforcement actions, and it’s unfortunate to see individual employees targeted for company decisions.”

 

I would imagine that before Trumps tweet was flagged, it would have received clearance at the highest level and checked and rechecked by a number of people.

You wanted the name of the guy,, NY Post is just one source of the info. last paragraph, agree, as I posted the CEO will be the executive owner of any content published by twitter

Astounding lack of knowledge of constitutional limits on the power of the presidency. Media outlets can't be closed by a President. Trump saw what they do in North Korea and got excited. This is just one reason why a failed casino operator is unqualified for the office of Chief Executive.

34 minutes ago, tropo said:

No, wrong. The problem is that fact checking is not fact checking at all. It's a political activist with an agenda pretending to be a fact checker. I indicated who was responsible for the fact checking in a post above.

 

 

As I said before, if the fact checking is wrong, it will be exposed....you should be welcoming the opportunity to debunk "fake news" on the biggest loudest most visible platform there is...The Big Orange Twitter account....you should be gloriously happy that you can now compare and contrast the difference between the golden pure 100% HONEST MAGA message of Donald Trump and expose the liberal deranged political activist fact checking and eradicate fake news in our time. Have courage....have strength and with the purpose of right, decency and the focus for a better tomorrow...dare to be great...don't run, cry and cower from the fight...have the purpose of your convictions and defeat the fact checking head on. Expose the liberal horde for what they are...and all of that stuff...

1 minute ago, KhunFred said:

Astounding lack of knowledge of constitutional limits on the power of the presidency. Media outlets can't be closed by a President. Trump saw what they do in North Korea and got excited. This is just one reason why a failed casino operator is unqualified for the office of Chief Executive.

Yep, "1st Amendment" which so many of his supporters scream about.