Media Bias
- Thread starter Archy1221
- Start date
JJ Husker
Donor
I’m searching for the relevance here. Is it not already widely accepted fact that many dems close to Biden did in fact coverup his mental decline? Is it also not understood how/why the dems likely felt safer running a mentally declining incumbent rather than forcing him out sooner?
So, what does this have to do with the price of tea in China now?
So, what does this have to do with the price of tea in China now?
Last edited by a moderator:
Im not sure why Chinese tea prices are relevant to this but the relevance for the story is of a media system actively playing along with the Democrat and WH scheme to hide Joe’s mental decline for years.
Why would they play along until AFTER the election?? Well that’s for you to decide I guess. It’s also for you to decide how much scrutiny their “reporting” should get moving forward especially when the reporting relies on unnamed sources.
My Big Dic& Syndrome? Sorry, I forgot to zip my zipper. Ziiiiiiiiiiiip. Geesh that was embarrassing.
JJ Husker
Donor
Jeez, you didn’t have to waste two paragraphs when you could’ve simply said this is just BS fodder to deflect from things the current WH occupant is actively engaged in. Everytime (at least 4x daily) Trump steps on his d!(k, ignores the Constitution or otherwise behaves criminally, I guess we can count on you providing the “But Biden, but Hunter, but dems” take to draw attention away from things that could actually be rectified as they are happening.
Maybe you didn’t realize that this has now been a story for a few days lately (not one I just made up out of thin air because Trump did something boneheaded) because a major media member who at one point was a Democrat Staffer wrote a book about Biden’s mental decline. It’s on the news because the members of the news are now revisiting it.
Hope that clears things up for you as the media cycle is the one “looking backward”
I’m just sharing it, to your apparent disgust.
JJ Husker
Donor
Fair enough. Maybe it’s just coincidence that it always seems to occur when Trump is doing something boneheaded, illegal or outrageous. And I suppose that’s not fair since that has been the daily situation since January 20th.Maybe you didn’t realize that this has now been a story for a few days lately (not one I just made up out of thin air because Trump did something boneheaded) because a major media member who at one point was a Democrat Staffer wrote a book about Biden’s mental decline. It’s on the news because the members of the news are now revisiting it.
Hope that clears things up for you as the media cycle is the one “looking backward”
BigRedBuster
Active member
Guy Chamberlin
Active member
Biden's decline and the coverup is a story. And yes, it's getting told in more detail now from the safety of a lost election. There are a lot of lessons and blame in that loss, but Democrats are rallying around the theory that Biden's refusal to step aside much, much earlier was the culprit, although I don't see that letting everyone else off the hook.
As mentioned in previous posts, ditching the incumbent anytime in 2023 would have seemed crazy at the time, and even March 2024 Joe who gave the State of the Union speech still seemed viable. Apparently the decline from March to June was quick and often catastrophic. The White House team not only lied to the press, fellow Democrats, and prominent fundraisers, they lied to Biden himself. I don't know how you would have unseated Joe for a traditional primary, but there was plenty of evidence that he never should have been allowed to take that debate stage. Some of those donors were stunned by Joe's feebleness even in managed settings. Rumors spread, but the people spreading them were often doxed by White House and Party operatives.
Everyone was paralyzed because any Plan B was contingent on Biden stepping down willingly. He never went willingly. They were kinda f#&%ed.
Political allies and media spokespeople covered for Biden out of raw partisan instinct. And no, that's not the media's job. They were blinded by the likelihood Trump would be reelected and the already vengeful and childish President would be a profound danger to America.
And they were right.
So yes, liberal cover-up of Biden's decline is a story worth considering. What slice of the larger American conversation should it take? Hard to say. Are the people concerned about this level of media bias equally concerned about the misleading coverage and non-reporting on Trump by, let's say America's most popular news channel? Happening as we speak? With massive consequences still in play?
I think we can have both conversations at the same time. But who wants to do that?
As mentioned in previous posts, ditching the incumbent anytime in 2023 would have seemed crazy at the time, and even March 2024 Joe who gave the State of the Union speech still seemed viable. Apparently the decline from March to June was quick and often catastrophic. The White House team not only lied to the press, fellow Democrats, and prominent fundraisers, they lied to Biden himself. I don't know how you would have unseated Joe for a traditional primary, but there was plenty of evidence that he never should have been allowed to take that debate stage. Some of those donors were stunned by Joe's feebleness even in managed settings. Rumors spread, but the people spreading them were often doxed by White House and Party operatives.
Everyone was paralyzed because any Plan B was contingent on Biden stepping down willingly. He never went willingly. They were kinda f#&%ed.
Political allies and media spokespeople covered for Biden out of raw partisan instinct. And no, that's not the media's job. They were blinded by the likelihood Trump would be reelected and the already vengeful and childish President would be a profound danger to America.
And they were right.
So yes, liberal cover-up of Biden's decline is a story worth considering. What slice of the larger American conversation should it take? Hard to say. Are the people concerned about this level of media bias equally concerned about the misleading coverage and non-reporting on Trump by, let's say America's most popular news channel? Happening as we speak? With massive consequences still in play?
I think we can have both conversations at the same time. But who wants to do that?
BigRedBuster
Active member
Obviously Mr. Miller hasn't paid attention to other "dishonest media campaigns in his life time".
Good point. He probably forgot we did have Dan Rather report a known false story about Bush that got him fired. And then we had all the “if true” “ walls are closing if reports are true” (though they didn’t turn out true) of the Russia/Trump campaign collusion nonsense that was all the rage.