patrick.net

Well, yes, conspiracy theories do get a lot of mainstream media coverage when it suits the MSM ideology...

http://patrick.net/Trump+suggests+guns+could+settle+election

tatupu70 says

Conspiracy theories don't typically get a lot of mainstream media coverage because they are almost universally wrong and easily disproven.

Ranina ranina says

Well, yes, conspiracy theories do get a lot of mainstream media coverage when it suits the MSM ideology...

The fact that you would call this a "conspiracy theory" just shows how far down the wacko road you are:

"Hillary wants to abolish, essentially abolish the Second Amendment. By the way, and if she gets to pick her judges, nothing you can do, folks.

"But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

There is only one way to interpret that quote. I thought Trumpeteers were all about common sense. Well, use some of that common sense on that quote.

tatupu70 says

What are you talking about? A guy got murdered in Washington DC. It got the usual amount of attention.

Conspiracy theories don't typically get a lot of mainstream media coverage because they are almost universally wrong and easily disproven.

wikileaks is now offering a 20k reward for info leading to the arrest of the murderer of DNC staffer.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/was-murdered-dnc-staffer-behind-email-leak-wikileaks-offers-20k-reward-conspiracies-swirl-1575274?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=rss&utm_content=/rss/yahoous/news&yptr=yahoo

Oh and the extensive coverage on the nYT about Trump's treatment on women-where all the vicitms featured came out in support of Trump-I mean come on. Then the mass coverage of Trump posing his publicist or some such 20+ years ago. Meanwhile an iranian scientist gets executed, allegedly due to Hilalry's email and nobody cares.

I thought the joke was mildly funny. The reason it wasn't very funny is that it was kind of obvious. The outrage over this joke of all things on patnet is funnier than the original joke.
As far as the op is concerned, assange didn't say he was a whistle blower did he? He said a variety of sources are concerned when that kind of thing happens.

lostand confused says

Oh and the extensive coverage on the nYT about Trump's treatment on women-where all the vicitms featured came out in support of Trump-I mean come on. Then the mass coverage of Trump posing his publicist or some such 20+ years ago. Meanwhile an iranian scientist gets executed, allegedly due to Hilalry's email and nobody cares

Come on--Trump courts publicity. It cuts both ways---he gets lots of press and it helps his campaign, but bad press also comes with the territory. MSM is a business--they write what gets read. Iranian scientists aren't as interesting to most of the public as Trump's sexual harassment victims. Right or wrong-that's the way it is.

I liked the joke.

Stop being sniveling bitches.

I'd like to know more about the murder, rather than read over this weak thread-slap-fest. I remember more exciting fights in Hebrew school.

So far, we've had 2 attempts to kill trump, left activist murder of 10 cops, and now this poor hero of a kid is killed after he released DNC emails?

How can we look at our current political environment and suggest the left are the good guys?

I take it back Dan, some other people share your lame sense of humor

Joke was funny

EDIT:

I just watched the video... JA does not say SR was a source. reserve judgement

tatupu70 says

"But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

There is only one way to interpret that quote.

Bullshit! When I heard him say it, I didn't hear a joke, at all. I only thought he meant that, gun owners, as a large group of people, could provide a large voting block if they worked together. You are out of your mind and determined to see a predetermined meaning in everything Trump says. That's your problem, not his.

turtledove says

Bullshit! When I heard him say it, I didn't hear a joke, at all. I only thought he meant that, gun owners, as a large group of people, could provide a large voting block if they worked together. You are out of your mind and determined to see a predetermined meaning in everything Trump says. That's your problem, not his.

tatupu70 says

But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know

"Maybe there is? I don't know?" He's not sure if people can vote?

Ironman says

No, there's two. The ones with common sense and DON'T take statements out of context, and people like YOU and YESYNOT and the MSM who suffer from MAJOR Trump Derangement Syndrome

OK, please put it in context then for us. Let's see how the context changes the interpretation.

Here, I'll help you out CIC. This gives the context, right?

www.youtube.com/embed/EcxkkrNSv-4

turtledove says

tatupu70 says

"But the Second Amendment people, maybe there is, I don't know."

There is only one way to interpret that quote.

Bullshit! When I heard him say it, I didn't hear a joke, at all. I only thought he meant that, gun owners, as a large group of people, could provide a large voting block if they worked together. You are out of your mind and determined to see a predetermined meaning in everything Trump says. That's your problem, not his.

Completely agree.

Dan8267 says

At this point you are demonstrating the same kind of refusal to listen to reality that conservatives often display in their bubble.

Did you mean :....that conservatives display all the time? lol

Ironman says

Here's "context" for you Tatty. I'll post this here too. It's 31 seconds, TWICE as long as your "context".

Great--so which is it then? A casual joke or a call for gun owners to vote?

Sociopathic KILLARY is praised to the heavens by an adoring legion of MEDIAFUCKS while Trump's every utterance and fart is meticulously analyzed for a way to take it out of context. Just like a fucking woman to take everything you say in the worst sort of way possible!
MEDIAFUCKS!

Democrats are a party of entitled brats, gays, lesbians, sexually confused (whatever the term they use these days), feminists and communists like Dan.

errc says

Dan, this is a free speech forum.

That's a straw man. It is a sign of a weak position for you to imply that I am in any way opposing free speech on PatNet.

errc says

Say whatever you'd like, and try as hard as you may, i promise you won't offend me.

And I promise to not give a rat's ass if I do offend you.

HEY YOU says

Dan8267 says

At this point you are demonstrating the same kind of refusal to listen to reality that conservatives often display in their bubble.

Did you mean :....that conservatives display all the time? lol

Bill Maher said it best. It happens mostly on the right because they have a much larger batshit crazy base, but the left is also guilty of it.

www.youtube.com/embed/aA4s4KsLndI

An important topic, with 80 comments, of which maybe more than half were off-topic. Good call to end that spergy discussion.

Ow, jazz. You really misunderstood VERY badly what I was saying. Hint: IT WAS NOT ABOUT YOU.

tatupu70 says

ranian scientists aren't as interesting to most of the public as Trump's sexual harassment victims.

Except all his victims came out in defense of him . Hilalry's victim has been executed.

lostand confused says

Except all his victims came out in defense of him . Hilalry's victim has been executed.

I'm not saying he's guilty, just that the sexual harassment scandal is much more interesting to the general public.

But, the Iranian scientist thing has been thoroughly debunked.

tatupu70 says

Iranian scientist thing has been thoroughly debunked

Only by the LameStreamMedia and their propaganda machine. Those with tin foil hats on know the truth. Add one to the HRC body count.

Sure, gunned down from behind in broad daylight with his wallet, phone, and watch on his body. Sounds like a typical robbery.

How many people listen to right wing AM talk radio?

My Sirius politics channel are often hard to stomach, but most of them are lefty shops. Its pretty much nonstop "trump is so bad. Hahaha, we are so smart to know this! Vote against Trump in '16"

thunderlips11 says

Sure, gunned down from behind in broad daylight with his wallet, phone, and watch on his body. Sounds like a typical robbery.

I know it's hard to keep the conspiracy theories straight, but I'm pretty sure the Iranian scientist wasn't shot in DC.

So many possibilities:

1. Hillary had Rich killed to prevent him from leaking even worse things. Rich was not smart enough to create and let them know he had created a "dead man's letter".
2. Gang initiation. They have to just kill someone at random to get into the gang so that the gang has something on them.
3. Actual robbery gone bad. Robber noticed someone and fled before taking wallet.
4. Trump killed Rich to make the DNC look bad.
5. Putin had Rich killed to make the DNC look bad as an unasked favor to Trump.
6. Assange is just making up random shit because he doesn't like Hillary.

I think #1 is the most likely. The Vince Foster "suicide" never sounded quite believable to me.

So, the theory is that Rich had incriminating material that he was going to take to the FBI? And that he was the DNC leak?

Why didn't he leak the incriminating material then? Especially since the FBI has already shown that they will quash any charges against HRC (at least, according to you guys). That doesn't make sense.

Maybe he did try to leak it, but didn't quite get the chance.

It's also very troubling that there is absolutely zero about the possibility of his being the DNC leaker in the mainstream press. Why isn't it even mentioned? Do you think Trump would get he same useful silence?

But I do want to point out the general level of media silence. Take these facts and change the names – imagine Trump’s email had been hacked, and then a staffer with possible ties to wikileaks was inexplicably shot dead. Imagine this poor young man had been a Kremlin whistleblower, or a Chinese hacker, or an Iranian blogger.

If this, as yet unsolved, murder had ties to anyone other than Hillary Clinton, would it be being so ritually and rigourously ignored by the MSM?

https://off-guardian.org/2016/08/10/seth-rich-murder-the-facts-so-far/

rando says

t's also very troubling that there is absolutely zero about the possibility of his being the DNC leaker in the mainstream press.

Well, MSM requires things like sources, and does things like checking facts. Both of those tend to reduce the number of crackpot conspiracy theories that they can print.

Just wait for it, Twitter to ban #sethrich any minute now.

Interestingly, the WaPo has lots of articles on Seth Rich:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/newssearch/?query=seth%20rich

I finally found one fleeting mention of Seth Rich in the NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/11/us/politics/democratic-party-russia-hack-cyberattack.html

It's really crazy. Seth Rich not only was the informant on the DNC, but also hacked the democratic congressional campaign committee and the private emails of 100 people in the Democratic party. That was one bad ass hacker. He must have been great at chit chat at the water cooler. Maybe he was a hypnotists.

assange, grasping at internet conspiracy straws in a last ditch attempt to remain relevant...

It was extremely suspicious considering the circumstances. Wikileaks also never discloses the source of the leak as a matter of policy. Is Assange trying to convey something between the lines? I have no idea, but it's possible, and it wouldn't surprise me if it were true, or partially true.

jazz music says

Imagine how easy it is to divide and conquer people who listen to talk radio a lot during the work day

You do realize that no one is forced to listen, but people choose to listen to that stuff because they agree with it. Just like you left wingers, commies, who are hell bent on total government control over everything choose to listen to your left wing kumbaya PC crap while you lose all your rights and your economy to offshore labor. Good job kid, should have spent more time working instead of watching pink panther.

says

It's really crazy. Seth Rich not only was the informant on the DNC, but also hacked the democratic congressional campaign committee and the private emails of 100 people in the Democratic party. That was one bad ass hacker. He must have been great at chit chat at the water cooler. Maybe he was a hypnotists.

He worked for the DNC. Not that hard. Given the level of passwords used by the employees, they probably told coworkers what it was, maybe to check it for them in an absence or somesuch.

Yea were talking democrat pols and their workees. No diving in that end of the gene pool

BUMP.