Mike Pence states the obvious, Trump is wrong

Interesting. So you don't believe that the guy who dolls out money shouldn't be held responsible for where the money went? Originally Posted by HedonistForever

Exactly. According to the New York Post, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases allocated money to a New York non profit, EcoHealth Alliance. EcoHealth in turn passed $826,277 to the Wuhan lab over a six year period. The budget of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases is currently around $6 billion a year. Assuming $5 billion per year over 6 years, that means .0028% of the Institute's budget went indirectly to Wuhan. And Fauci's supposed to keep track of that?

This sounds like a witch hunt, like the Democrats going after the Trump campaign for its alleged (actually nonexistent) collusion with Russia.

Exactly. According to the New York Post, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases allocated money to a New York non profit, EcoHealth Alliance. EcoHealth in turn passed $826,277 to the Wuhan lab over a six year period. The budget of the National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases is currently around $6 billion a year. Assuming $5 billion per year over 6 years, that means .0028% of the Institute's budget went indirectly to Wuhan. And Fauci's supposed to keep track of that?

This sounds like a witch hunt, like the Democrats going after the Trump campaign for its alleged (actually nonexistent) collusion with Russia. Originally Posted by Tiny

Not what I said or at least meant. When he was confronted with the fact that this money did go to the Wuhan lab and the Wuhan lab was doing gain of function ( I believe has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt ) he denied, denied, denied! Tiny, are you aware of the now many e-mails between Fauci and between various scientist involved in this proving that people have been lying about what has been said and done? Maybe not if you don't watch Fox news.


Should SOMEBODY be held accountable because nobody has to my knowledge.




How about those scientist that reversed their initial opinions ( proven ) and then received tens of millions in grant money? Nothing to see here, move along?


I believe there is much to be investigated here. The general consensus between Fauci and others was "let's keep a wrap on this because if it gets out what was done, it will hurt science going forward". Do you believe that is the way science should be approached?


And do you believe he consciously sided with China to denounce anybody suggesting an alternate theory of how all this came to be because that to would hurt science and Fauci because after all, as Fauci said "I am science".



And yeah, I agree, the whole Trump Russia hoax was started by Democrats and maintained by the Democrats and media.


I think this virus was made in China and it either escaped or was released and anybody that voiced this opinion has been silenced or at least they tried to silence what is most likely the truth. There was never any truth to the Trump Russia conspiracy.


And don't even get me started on Joe and Hunter Biden corruption being covered up by Democrats and media.


But that will be a full blown investigation when the Republicans take the House in less than a year.

Drifting well off topic now, but that is normal for a 6 pager.


Trump did a good thing in asking our NATO allies to step up and start paying more of their share of the NATO defense budget. If the Ukraine heats up, money will be consumed that will make the above discussions sound like peanuts.

Drifting well off topic now, but that is normal for a 6 pager.


Trump did a good thing in asking our NATO allies to step up and start paying more of their share of the NATO defense budget. If the Ukraine heats up, money will be consumed that will make the above discussions sound like peanuts. Originally Posted by VitaMan

Sometimes a topic is only worth a few posts, this was one. Talking about what news you believe depending on what media you consume could go on forever. It applies to literally every topic we discuss here and can be added, thoughtfully to any of these topics, but I'll play ball, Trump was wrong and Pence was right IMHO.

Why did it take Fox nearly 3 days to show Pence’s statements? Why did Fox take 2 days to report what Pence said? Seems newsworthy from the moment he said it. Surely Fox was aware of his statement, so why take so long to make their viewers aware.

Why did it take Fox nearly 3 days to show Pence’s statements? Why did Fox take 2 days to report what Pence said? Seems newsworthy from the moment he said it. Surely Fox was aware of his statement, so why take so long to make their viewers aware. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

So, you want to debate which is worse, waiting 2 or 3 days, which I only have your word on,( I thought you had once told me that you were going to start backing up the things you say, guess not ) no proof provided or not reporting a story at all like the John Hopkins report which the Times, the Post, CNN, MSDNC, ABC, NBC, CBS never reported on at all?


The John Hopkins report seems "news worthy" does it not? You can report the findings and disagree with them and have a debate. But what all those other media outlets didn't do that Fox did, was acknowledge the report not try to cover it up.


This is the problem. Not how long it takes to report on a story but not reporting on a story at all like the Hunter Biden story before the election. Hell, that was a conspiracy of the left leaning media to help Biden.


Now if you have a significant story that all the left leaning media reported on that Fox never mentioned, I'd like to hear it and I'd like proof of what you say.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10474269/Mainstream-news-outlets-IGNORE-Johns-Hopkins-study-COVID-lockdowns-reduced-deaths-0-2.html


Here is an interesting report criticizing the study which in my opinion has some validity to it but that is the point. Why try to hide the fact that a study was conducted whether it was approved by John Hopkins or not and was totally accurate or not. This is the least the LSM could do, acknowledge the report and criticize it but the LSM didn't want to acknowledge any other reporting that didn't tow the line on their narrative.


https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2022/02/06/did-so-called-johns-hopkins-study-really-show-lockdowns-were-ineffective-against-covid-19/?sh=556fa1971225


See how backing up what you say works or at least gives readers something other than a posters word.


The unwillingness to debate anything other than the "accepted narrative" of the left is the problem here IMHO.

https://www.foxnews.com/

I’m sure they did an article somewhere but it’s nowhere to be seen. Maybe there’s a search function that’ll locate it. I also a clips look and didn’t see any fox host discuss it Friday or Saturday. I’m sure it’s there and I missed it. Or maybe it’s hidden so that Fox viewers won’t get that news.

I guess I’m lost as your complaint. Because some like me have doubt as to the factual basis for articles from the likes of Breitbart, the Washington Examiner, Tucker Carlson, rightwing. Com, red state.co, Telegraph and whatever the fake news site Tucker is always quoting, etc we are somehow avoiding valid discourse. Hmmm. So if I understand you correctly, we should accept what the likes of Trump Tucker etc say as true, Eve no when the majority of the time the factual basis is obviously lacking, for the purpose having an unbiased discussion.

Why don’t we just stick to debating provable facts instead of opinions. Oh that’s right, alternative facts are just as valid unless they can be disproved. I forgot about that. I think someone once wrote they are entitled to believe whatever facts they want.

JUST IN - Billionaire Peter Thiel to step down as board member of Meta, Facebook's parent company, to support Trump-aligned candidates, the WSJ reports.

Zuckerberg's Meta stock fell 5.1% today, adding to losses after its bleak forecast last week.

@disclosetv

Pence isn’t on the list of candidates Trump will support.

No one cares about Peter Thiel. He was already a trump supporter and heavy contributor to Trump and republicans. He’s a lifetime Republican. No one votes for someone because Peter Thiel does.

https://www.foxnews.com/

I’m sure they did an article somewhere but it’s nowhere to be seen. Maybe there’s a search function that’ll locate it. I also a clips look and didn’t see any fox host discuss it Friday or Saturday. I’m sure it’s there and I missed it. Or maybe it’s hidden so that Fox viewers won’t get that news.

I guess I’m lost as your complaint. Because some like me have doubt as to the factual basis for articles from the likes of Breitbart, the Washington Examiner, Tucker Carlson, rightwing. Com, red state.co, Telegraph and whatever the fake news site Tucker is always quoting, etc we are somehow avoiding valid discourse. Hmmm. So if I understand you correctly, we should accept what the likes of Trump Tucker etc say as true, Eve no when the majority of the time the factual basis is obviously lacking, for the purpose having an unbiased discussion.

Why don’t we just stick to debating provable facts instead of opinions. Because politics is not always about "provable facts", politics can more often than not be about opinions and how many so called provable facts about Covid have been proven to be wrong? Could we even discuss the "lab leak theory" VS the "wet market theory" because we didn't know what was a fact or wasn't? Wasn't wearing a cloth mask in the beginning, according to God Fauci, stated as a fact, said to be better than no mask at all? And is that a fact today? Oh that’s right, alternative facts are just as valid unless they can be disproved. I forgot about that. You're quoting one single person's opinion and attributing it to every member of a party. Think that's an intelligent way to debate? Shall I assume that everything AOC or Cory Bush says is what every Democrat believes? I think someone once wrote they are entitled to believe whatever facts they want. What I heard was "you are entitled to your own opinion but you are not entitled to your own facts". A true statement Originally Posted by NoirMan

And as we see here every single day, posters have doubts about anything they see in the New York Times, Washington Post and CNN, MSDNC. I have never said and never will say, "you must believe everything said by the media I sighted" including Tucker. You post your sources, I post my sources and from there we debate. That's all I have ever suggested. Let me put it this way, you can't intelligently debate a story/ topic, you haven't heard about. Fox did a "man on the street" interview after the election asking people if they were aware of the Hunter Biden laptop story and many said no, they had no idea because the story wasn't covered by the LSM. They asked "have you heard the name Tony Bobulinski", a man charging the President of the United States and his son with corruption? A well respected man with documents to back up what he was saying but the LSM completely ignored the story. Again, how can we have a honest debate about a story if you have never heard the story because it was consciously kept from you to protect "their guy"?



I have mentioned before that some of you don't know a story, let's use Hunter Biden as an example. If you only look at "your" sources, you would never have heard a word about this story because there was a LSM conspiracy to not cover the story. So if you didn't watch Fox News you never heard the story. That doesn't mean you have to believe it but you have to "hear it" in order to peak your interest to find out if there is anything to the story and low and behold AFTER the election, many of those LSM outlets did give a mention to the story calling it "Russian disinformation". It was not and anybody with half a brain now knows it.


And how would you know a story from Tucker was as you say "the majority of the time the factual basis is obviously lacking", if you didn't hear the story with your own hears but had it related to you by a person paid to discredit anything Tucker says?? Oh, you heard somebody on CNN relate what "they heard" and since they are your source without any independent confirmation, you believe it. That is why I post sources, not to suggest that you must believe this to be true but to start a debate and hopefully find someone intelligent enough to offer a counter source and then we can have a civil debate but if you don't have first hand knowledge of what was said and only take the word of people paid to discredit what Tucker says, you can't possibly have an intelligent debate.


So, how do you know a story is lacking a factual basis? Do you research it and get other opinions from both sides like I do? I have posted articles from the Times and Post many times on this sight when I think they get a story right but I don't see people on the left doing the same.


"You can't know what you don't hear"

No one cares about Peter Thiel. He was already a trump supporter and heavy contributor to Trump and republicans. He’s a lifetime Republican. No one votes for someone because Peter Thiel does. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

I call for some receipts for that statement!

I know the actual saying “own opinions but not own facts” however, that’s absolutely not what happens on this site. People on here, myself and you included Quoting opinion as fact or worse quoting the likes of Tucker and other “opinion hosts” whether on the right or left will rarely pique my interest about a story. We debated at nauseum Hunter Biden. I said then and repeat now - so what. Hunter was a scum. Had nothing to do with Joe. In fact, Bubbles or whatever his name is, did not have any “proof” linking Joe to anything in Ukraine. He did have his own assumption as to who people in emails were but he didn’t have any substantiation that I recall. No one except Fox and Trumpys cared about Hunter and that remains to today.

I call for some receipts for that statement! Originally Posted by winn dixie

Which part. That he’s a life long Republican or that people don’t vote a certain way because Peter Thiel does.

I know the actual saying “own opinions but not own facts” however, that’s absolutely not what happens on this site. People on here, myself and you included Quoting opinion as fact or worse quoting the likes of Tucker and other “opinion hosts” whether on the right or left will rarely pique my interest about a story. We debated at nauseum Hunter Biden. I said then and repeat now - so what. Hunter was a scum. Had nothing to do with Joe. In fact, Bubbles or whatever his name is, did not have any “proof” linking Joe to anything in Ukraine. He did have his own assumption as to who people in emails were but he didn’t have any substantiation that I recall. No one except Fox and Trumpys cared about Hunter and that remains to today. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Really? Why biden be so worried ukraines? hunter knows! lolling bahahahahhahahahhaha snick

Which part. That he’s a life long Republican or that people don’t vote a certain way because Peter Thiel does. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

red light and cat. snick