1) That’s… that’s not what haggling is. Haggling is a negotiation between a buyer and seller. There is no yelling or talking over in haggling. Maybe they and you are thinking of hawking, where sellers are calling out to try and attract the attention of potential buyers? In that case the sellers can try and yell over each other, but that also doesn’t make sense because that isn’t a one on one thing. So yeah, gonna go back to a couple dumb chucklefucks trying to shoehorn in a racial slight knowing their followers, like you, are too stupid to know the difference and will just eat it up because Brown Guy. 2) Follow-on, how many times have you heard a Bill O’Rielly or Hannity or Tucker or any other combative interviewer (with those not ideologically aligned with them) stated as sounding like ‘haggling in a middle eastern bazaar’? 3) Lastly the sound bite they commented was an edited clip! Your boy Dore fucking SAID his producer put it together. Talk about going to lengths to be both stupid and racist. Again, I see why you like him. So yeah, thanks for posting this. I posted the full uncut interview along with some uncut back and forths and you respond with two dumb racist chucklefucks who ADMIT to slicing up the audio to get the desired effect and then immediately demonstrate they understand the issue as little as you do. And now you’ll get pissy that I got treated differently by folks for posting unedited clips of the actual interview than you did for posting some bullshit and instead of reflecting on why you’ll just get all butthurt and claim it is all some liberal conspiracy. [PS] Don’t think we all don’t notice how you completely ignored the substance, that Matt was caught making up BS, intentionally misreading and misleading folks and you all just ate it up.
Let's focus on a joke made by Kurt Metzger and not the actual Twitter files. Anything to distract from substance, right? Let's just make pot shots at me because we all know that's the point of the whole thread. Hey look Federal Farmer's stupid because he believes the Twitter files are important, derp, derp, derp. Jimmy Dore edited the video, yes. So what? Did you think I didn't see that part when he said it was edited? Guess what, every fucking video is edited for various reasons. The point still remains that he was shouting over the guy he was supposed to be interviewing. That's what these jackasses over at MSNBC do. They did the same thing to Tulsi Gabbard when she ran for president because they don't like to hear the truth. DWS did the same thing when she interviewed Taibi last month. You're not upset about the censorship, you're upset that people are exposing it.
LOL! I didn’t ignore the meat, YOU DID! I typed it out for you. You just got triggered by my calling out you and your boy’s lazy racism so went off. Here, I’ll make it a ‘safe post’ for you: I made it 5 minutes into it and Jimmy is obviously as dumb as you are understands the issues as well as you do. These weren’t minor points but the basis of the entire ‘story’. Tiabbi got CISA and CIS confused (one is a government agency the other a non-profit) along with misreading the data. It was 22m million posts total that they monitored. Less than 3k were flagged to the Social Media companies as being possibly illegal or fraudulent and only 35% of those flagged were removed. So the story that the government told the SM to take down 22m posts and they did is complete and utter bullshit. It was a non-profit, they only reported potential illegal or fraudulent (for example a phishing page that purported to be Arizona elections registration page) and of those only ~1000 were taken down for having illegal or fraudulent content. Which you would know if you had the ability to read anything more complicated than the back of a box of Lucky Charms as it is laid out in read the link posted immediately above your Jimmy Dore video. Also, why am I not surprised you follow a guy who thinks a dude with a British accent (but of middle eastern descent) sounds like a ‘haggler in a bazaar’? Wonder what ever led them to making that connection? You really do love the lazy racists don’t you? You’re welcome.
Question number one: I grew up in SC. Question number two: the answer to question number one answers number two.
Yeah, the Southerners are lazy and stupid, but the Civil War fell on the stupid side. It might have fallen on both, but they were chewing tobacco at the time and can only focus on so many things.
FF, please give us your take on Taibbi either accidentally or deliberately getting the government agency and the nonprofit confused. Then give us your take on him apparently thinking that 22 million posts were taken down when that is in fact the number that was reviewed. These seem fundamental errors that should call into question either Taibbi's competence or independence or both. Try to take out the ad hominem attacks against the guy who originally pointed to these apparent errors.
You know he isn't. He just puts up stuff then gets mad because we make assumptions based on his posts - because we have no idea what his ideas are, he doesn't tell us.
I believe that Matt Taibi is a credible and competent journalist who far exceeds this joker from MSNBC. They get more things wrong in one broadcast than Taibi has gotten wrong in his whole career. This is a smear campaign because they're running cover for the Biden administration. Like I said, they're not upset about the censorship, they're upset that they are being exposed. If it were Trump, they'd be flipping the fuck out and you know it. As for your questions: 1. I think Taibi got the acronyms wrong, it was an honest mistake. I believe he even said as much in that interview. 2. I think he misspoke. He's apparently standing by his statement. I don't know why, hopefully there's more to it than just refusing to admit he was wrong. The three thousand posts that were taken down should still be looked at and you'd think people like the person who created this thread would be concerned about this, but he's more interested in calling me stupid and pointing and laughing at me. 3. I don't think getting one thing wrong, i.e. the 22 million number, is enough to place his whole entire reporting into question. Did you notice the media was mostly ignoring the Twitter files story for months until they found one little thing that they could dig their heels into? This is just one error in what has been an ongoing story that's been going on for several months. They can't question the rest of his reporting so they find one little thing and blow it up. It's a distraction, don't fall for it.
Let's put aside MSNBC or this guy. Whether they are better or worse journalists than Taibbi in general or smearing him is largely irrelevant. What is relevant is whether Taibbi did a good job with the Twitter Files. You seem to acknowledge that he made at least two mistakes: confusing the non-government agency for a government agency and vastly overstating the number of files that were flagged as problematic. You also seem to acknowledge that he is standing by one of his mistakes and you don't know why. Isn't that enough to get you to question whether a) he has made more mistakes or b) whether he can be trusted when he has made such a fundamentally obvious one as confusing the 22 million that were scrutinized for the 3,000 that were actually removed? Is there any reason to suspect that the 3,000 posts that were actually removed constituted "censorship"? Why don't you think that confusing 22 million with 3,000 is not enough to call into question the validity of the entire report? Even accepting for argument's sake that all 3,000 posts that were removed should not have been removed, it calls into question the theory that there was any widespread censorship of views on Twitter if only 3,000 of 22 million posts on the supposedly touchy subject were removed, does it not? And of course, there's at least some possibility that all 3,000 posts should have been removed under any sort of responsible moderation standard.
No dipshit, because he has a record of being credible. It's not a conspiracy theory that Twitter was working with the DOJ, it's a fact. No matter how much you don't want to believe it.
Can you point to any facts that in either Taibbi's reporting or elsewhere that supports the notion that Twitter did anything inappropriate or against conservatives, in favor of either Joe Biden or Hunter Biden, specifically at the urging of the DOJ or any other governmental agency?
Please; Rachel Maddow would have her history rewritten in your head if she started spouting right-wing crap.
I don't think I said anything specific about conservatives, but the one hearing was about RFK Jr's Tweets being censored.
