Democrats, Republicans and the "n-word"

[Sparko]

Did he? Or didn't he?

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/hunter-biden-texts/

Or should we all just sing Cole Porter's Let's Call the Whole Thing Off?

rofl - they claim unproven because "only one side is circulating it" -

Exactly what rogue06 said, the left is ignoring this because it's one of their own.

Here is the original story by the way:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ages-show.html

[rogue06]

rofl - they claim unproven because "only one side is circulating it" -

Exactly what rogue06 said, the left is ignoring this because it's one of their own.

Here is the original story by the way:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ages-show.html

Yup. If the MSM spikes the story then obviously it must be false.

The MSM spiked the story about old Joe getting confused while signing EOs and bewilderingly muttering that he had no idea what he was signing -- we have that on video -- but according to the criteria established by Snopes, it must be false because "only one side is circulating it"

And folks like Hypocrite_Alexandria wonder why we should take their statements about politics with a grain of salt

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

rofl - they claim unproven because "only one side is circulating it" -

Exactly what rogue06 said, the left is ignoring this because it's one of their own.

I have no idea if this actually took place precisely as rogue06 presented it. If Biden did indeed use the language it was inappropriate and potentially offensive.

Here is the original story by the way:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ages-show.html

The Daily Heil? Really?

[Sparko]

I have no idea if this actually took place precisely as rogue06 presented it. If Biden did indeed use the language it was inappropriate and potentially offensive.

The Daily Heil? Really?

Ah! If all else fails, use the credentials/ad hominem fallacy to dismiss the source. You never fail to perform as expected, H_A.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Ah! If all else fails, use the credentials/ad hominem fallacy to dismiss the source. You never fail to perform as expected, H_A.

Your source is not overly reliable you know. And my scepticism concerning the Daily Mail as a reliable source is no different from that of mossrose towards Snopes. I note you did not pick her up for her ad hominem fallacy?

[Sparko]

Your source is not overly reliable you know. And my scepticism concerning the Daily Mail as a reliable source is no different from that of mossrose towards Snopes. I note you did not pick her up for her ad hominem fallacy?

You are just deflecting and using "whataboutism" which is another logical fallacy. Someone else using a logical fallacy doesn't excuse yours.

Also Snopes didn't even claim it wasn't true. They just said "unproven" which is their way of saying "we have no idea but we want to spin it as if it isn't true but leave room in case we are wrong."

Has Hunter denied the texts?

[mossrose]

I have no idea if this actually took place precisely as rogue06 presented it. If Biden did indeed use the language it was inappropriate and potentially offensive.

The Daily Heil? Really?

Potentially offensive? Oh, please! If a conservative had uttered those words it would not have been considered "potentially offensive" fir 1 second! That person would have been hounded to death over it!

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Potentially offensive? Oh, please! If a conservative had uttered those words it would not have been considered "potentially offensive" fir 1 second! That person would have been hounded to death over it!

It depends on context. What people say in private is nobody else's business. If it is said where someone else can overhear and record it, it will be considered to be offensive.

And we do not know, as yet, if this alleged incident actually occurred.

[mossrose]

It depends on context. What people say in private is nobody else's business. If it is said where someone else can overhear and record it, it will be considered to be offensive.

And we do not know, as yet, if this alleged incident actually occurred.

Well, it wouldn't have been said in private if everybody knows about. And nobody would dare to make something like this up about somebody. Would they?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

You are just deflecting and using "whataboutism" which is another logical fallacy. Someone else using a logical fallacy doesn't excuse yours.

It is odd that that you choose to call my comments whataboutism but when those of your own persuasion write similarly you choose to ignore it.

Also Snopes didn't even claim it wasn't true. They just said "unproven"

Precisely. We don't know if it has been proven.

which is their way of saying "we have no idea but we want to spin it as if it isn't true but leave room in case we are wrong."

That is your prejudice petticoat showing.

Has Hunter denied the texts?

I have no idea.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

Well, it wouldn't have been said in private if everybody knows about.

If indeed it ever happened.

A standard tactic of the tabloid press is to allege that a comment is from someone close to the person. In other words the journalist just made it all up

[CivilDiscourse]

If indeed it ever happened.

A standard tactic of the tabloid press is to allege that a comment is from someone close to the person. In other words the journalist just made it all up

You mean like all the leaks from the Trump administration that were from "someone familiar with the situation" or some variation of?

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

You mean like all the leaks from the Trump administration that were from "someone familiar with the situation" or some variation of?

I have no idea. Do you?

[CivilDiscourse]

I have no idea. Do you?

I know you have no idea. You just said it's a standard tactic for the "journalist" to have simply made it up. You said Tabloid, but it wasn't limited to tabloids. Saying it came from an anonymous source was common during the trump admin.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

I know you have no idea. You just said it's a standard tactic for the "journalist" to have simply made it up. You said Tabloid

On occasion and usually with regard to people who are celebrities and of course royals. "Sources close the prince/princess remarked" or "A close friend of [insert famous name here] said".

That way the paper and journalist covers their respective proverbials.

However, the number of books that came out about the Trump administration does suggest that something was awry.