ChiGoose

I’m trusting the guy who you allege has been wronged. He is saying you’re wrong. Don’t even need to bring the justice department into it. The guy who you say was wronged is saying that actually, you are wrong.

We didn’t have access to the tapes, that doesn’t necessarily mean that Chansley didn’t. And even if he didn’t, then if what you’re saying is true, his attorneys would immediately file for a new trial based on Brady violations. If what you’re alleging was true, not only would it be a slam dunk for him to file that, but it would call all J6 prosecutions into question. So what did he do? Released a statement that you’re wrong.

I’m all for criminal justice reform but a guy who is saying that you’re allegations are false might not be the best test case.

If what you’re implying was true, then he would file a motion to try to get out of jail because of Brady violations. Not only is he not doing that, he’s instead signing into a statement that what you’re alleging is false.

It’s honestly sad to see so many people fall prey to an avowed propagandist manipulating footage to feed a false narrative because he has nothing but contempt for his viewers. NOT REAL NEWS: A look at what didn’t happen this week “A statement prepared by the Department of Justice, which was signed by Chansley and his attorney, provides a timeline of the rioter’s movement in the Capitol. For example, the statement explains that Chansley entered the Capitol through a broken door as part of a crowd that “was not lawfully authorized to enter or remain in the building” and that he was one of the first 30 rioters inside. It goes on to note that although officers asked Chansley and others multiple times to leave the Capitol, he did not comply and actively riled up his fellow rioters. The statement describes Chansley’s interactions with officers, but also points out that he “entered the Gallery of the Senate alone.” Chansley pleaded guilty in September 2021 to a felony charge of obstructing an official proceeding.” So we have a guy who plead guilty and has signed onto a statement that the new narrative that he was aided by the police is false, but that doesn’t matter because a guy who admits he lies to his audience says something else…

There is absolutely a difference between being wrong and lying. Being wrong is fine. Everybody is wrong about something at some point. It’s an opportunity to learn something new. Lying is nefarious. Intentionally deceiving your audience is far worse than truly believing something that’s wrong.

As anyone who has been actually following the events instead of living in the fever swamps knows, there were instances in which the Capitol Police declined to use force because they were outnumbered and/or it would have made a bad situation worse. However, if officers were actively assisting the rioters, then yeah, they should be punished for that. There was at least one Capitol police officer charged due to their actions on that day. If you expect someone to respond to a post on a message board within one hour on a workday, I think that says more about you than it does about them. Maybe go touch some grass for a bit. Not all Trump supporters are bad, nor are they all complicit in what happened on Jan 6. Some of the Jan 6 people were just trespassing, some got caught up in the moment and acted destructively and violently, while a small minority went there with the intent to disrupt Congress violently if needed. That’s why you see various charges and sentences being handed out to them. It’s not a broad brush where everyone was in the same boat. .

So you think there’s no difference between someone believing something and being wrong versus someone knowing something is false and promoting it anyway? Because I think there’s a world of difference between the two.

I would argue that there is a difference between typical news hacks who get things wrong and someone intentionally deceiving their audience and treating them like dupes. But that’s just me.

CNN sucks and is one of the most destructive forces in this country. That has absolutely zero relevance to the fact that most of the people on this board seem to still love a guy who has told them he’s lying to them.

You do understand that this is a terrible and unconvincing argument, right? Just straight whatsboutism to deflect from the fact that Tucker has given sworn testimony that he regularly deceives his audience. Even if we had sworn testimony from people at other news orgs that they were knowingly lying, it still would be a dumb argument. ”I want to be lied to and that’s totally fine because other people are lied to” is just a really poor standard to set for oneself.

So people are still shilling for a guy who has given sworn testimony that he’s a lying liar who thinks the people who listen to him are gullible? Like, at what point do you get some self respect and stop listening to this guy?

The honest answer is that I actually have a life and I’ve been quite busy. I don’t have a ton of time to devote to an ignorant fool who believes an avowed liar and for some unknown reason, won’t stop tagging me in the most inane BS you can find on the internet. Not only that, but I never claimed the J6 committee was perfect and while I by and large agree with most of their work, I do actually disagree with the way they handled some things. But that fact, like all facts, don’t matter to you so long as your feelings are validated by taking heads and political leaders who think people like you who support them are idiots. But yeah, feel all superior or whatever makes you happy, dude.

Inside the Panic at Fox News After the 2020 Election Just another reminder that: 1. The 2020 election wasn’t stolen and everybody (including most of the people saying it was) knows it 2. People who watch Fox News love being lied to because they value feelings over facts.

Malicious prosecution cases are next to impossible to win and the facts here are really tough for Flynn. Very little chance of a victory in the legal arena, but that’s clearly not the purpose of this filing.

This lawsuit likely will go nowhere but he should be able to grift a good amount of money off it it, which is likely the goal.

This should have a significant impact on the runoff: For those who aren’t familiar, White is the closest thing you can find to a consensus candidate in our polarized environment. In his last election (2018), he won 68% of the vote in an election where the Dem governor and AG candidates each won 55%. The next closest statewide candidate that election was the Comptroller who won with 60%. White carried a lot of downstate counties that are equivalent to the upstate and western counties of NY. He’s recently retired but this is a significant endorsement for Vallas. Here’s how the state voted for Governor in 2018: And here’s how it voted for Secretary of State (Jesse White’s race):

This cancel culture snowflakes are at it again. Trying to cancel an entire political party because of something from 150+ years ago. Florida Republican pitches bill to eliminate the Florida Democratic Party “A Republican in Florida's Legislature has filed a bill that, if enacted, would eliminate the Florida Democratic Party. “The Ultimate Cancel Act,” filed Tuesday by state Sen. Blaise Ingoglia, would require the state’s Division of Elections to “immediately cancel” the filings of any political party whose platform had “previously advocated for, or been in support of, slavery or involuntary servitude.”

I mean, yeah. That's why I didn't vote for her. And it seems most of Chicago agreed with me.

Hard to understand who is still supporting her. What are they saying? I don’t know anyone who voted for her this time around even though most people I know (including myself) voted for her in the runoff in 2019.

The true Chicago style pizza is tavern style and it has a cracker thin crust. It’s cut into squares. It has a cool history, but I’m not a fan.

Yup! I moved to Chicago a little over a decade ago. I think Johnson will be favored to win but Vallas will have a shot at the upset. Johnson's lead won't be prohibitive and turnout is going to be the major factor. Any change from Lori is a positive change. Beyond that, hard to say. Chicago's biggest problems (gun violence, lack of investment, housing, etc) can't be solved solely by the mayor but instead require help from Springfield as well as states like Wisconsin and Indiana. Personally, I voted for Kam Buckner because I liked his ideas around fostering entrepreneurship, trade and vocational schools, funding neighborhoods and a post-COVID downtown with mixed use and more public spaces. Crime is the top issue in Chicago, but it's not the only issue and it's not why Lori lost. She lost because she alienated everyone. She spent her entire term yelling at everyone and claiming she had the biggest dick in Chicago. Even people who work for her don't like her. If the theory that supporting the police / being tough on crime was the only issue in this race, Brandon Johnson wouldn't have made the runoff. Chuy ran a pathetic and lethargic campaign. Lori was hitting him in the local media and he wasn't responding. I'm not sure he even wanted to win, his campaign was so bad. It had nothing to do with Cori Bush. Don't form your opinions on a local race from the national media. That goes double for Chicago where most of the national coverage is junk.

Tell me you have no idea what’s going on with the Chicago mayoral election without saying you have no idea what’s going on with the Chicago mayoral election.

Given Vallas’s move to the right, I would think that Johnson has a stronger chance at picking up those votes even though they aren’t progressive areas. Lightfoot was somehow both arrogant and incompetent. Not a great combination. She didn’t play nice with anyone and just assumed everyone would do what she wanted while she yelled at them and berated them.

Vallas is a traditional establishment guy who has tacked to the right to carve his lane in the election. His endorsements largely come from those that endorse republicans (like the FOP) though Vallas has himself traditionally been a Dem. Vallas’s support has come from the southwest and northwest white conservative areas of the city. Johnson is a Cook County Commissioner, so he has experience with local government administration. His platform is fairly progressive and he’s big on fixing the homelessness problem. He actually was a big supporter of a local non-profit that worked to help the homeless whose associate board I used to sit on. However, he has some controversial proposals like a 3% tax on incomes over $100k and a business headcount tax for people who work in the city (and thus benefit from its infrastructure) but live in the suburbs. Johnson’s support has come from the white progressive / liberal areas in the north. The runoff will be decided by turnout and who can court the west and south side areas that supported Lightfoot, Chuy, and Willie Wilson: Here’s another breakdown of the vote: