JFKjr Posted September 2 Posted September 2 1 hour ago, JDHillFan said: People who menstruate… Pardon my language but it makes as much sense as "Washington Post writers who *****."
Trump_is_Mentally_fit Posted September 2 Posted September 2 Is the media even reporting on Trump's health problems? Nope
JFKjr Posted September 2 Posted September 2 3 minutes ago, Trump_is_Mentally_fit said: Is the media even reporting on Trump's health problems? Nope It is well known online that the walls are closing in and Trump is dying. Fits in with the "Taco" meme as well -- we haven't seen enough of that one!
Trump_is_Mentally_fit Posted September 2 Posted September 2 2 minutes ago, JFKjr said: It is well known online that the walls are closing in and Trump is dying. Fits in with the "Taco" meme as well -- we haven't seen enough of that one! Will you cry if he dies?
JFKjr Posted September 3 Posted September 3 Trump must still be alive because Libnuts are still butthurt.
The Frankish Reich Posted September 3 Author Posted September 3 3 minutes ago, JFKjr said: Trump must still be alive because Libnuts are still butthurt. Trump is alive and he is suffering the biggest butthurt of all as his buddy Vlad dumps him for Xi and Little Rocket Man.
JDHillFan Posted September 3 Posted September 3 But did you see the article they put together about the Minnesota assassin? I’m not talking about the trans kid. They’ve already determined there’s no way to divine a motive on that one. 1
The Frankish Reich Posted September 3 Author Posted September 3 3 hours ago, JDHillFan said: But did you see the article they put together about the Minnesota assassin? I’m not talking about the trans kid. They’ve already determined there’s no way to divine a motive on that one. Did you see the alt media insight shared by some of our friends here about the Minnesota assassin? The one hired by Tim Walz to take out Amy Klobuchar? Now that's the kind of reporting that ought to win Pulitzers.
JDHillFan Posted September 3 Posted September 3 4 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: Did you see the alt media insight shared by some of our friends here about the Minnesota assassin? The one hired by Tim Walz to take out Amy Klobuchar? Now that's the kind of reporting that ought to win Pulitzers. Those alt media people are unreliable. No better, and sadly, no worse than the NYT. I like that you believe the NYT is reliable. Just look at their “reporting” on the Trump is dead business highlighted above. I guess nobody should be surprised that you went with “mentally fit” for so long. As a devotee of the NYT, how would you have known any better?
The Frankish Reich Posted September 3 Author Posted September 3 2 hours ago, JDHillFan said: Those alt media people are unreliable. No better, and sadly, no worse than the NYT. I like that you believe the NYT is reliable. Just look at their “reporting” on the Trump is dead business highlighted above. I guess nobody should be surprised that you went with “mentally fit” for so long. As a devotee of the NYT, how would you have known any better? See, here's the problem. Some Trumpy Tweeter posts a clip of a NYT story and mischaracterizes the whole thing. You people are not NYT readers, and it's paywalled and you're cheap (not that you'd read it if it were free). So you believe the bs characterization. The real thing: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/02/us/politics/trump-health-bruise-conspiracies.html And here's how it starts, long before it goes into the "why are people prone to hoaxes like this" explanation: For a swath of hyper-online Americans over the long Labor Day weekend, all of this was explanation enough: The president was either dead or about to be. Mr. Trump’s critics have speculated about his health for as long as he has been in national politics. And for his part, he has long declined to explain when and why he has sought out medical care, whether he was suffering from Covid or undergoing routine procedures. But there had never been a conspiracy wave as feverish as this one. On TikTok, influencers with legions of followers surmised that the White House was publishing old photos, suggesting that the president was being hidden from view. Reddit threads, one after another, were ablaze with commentary. On X, posts shared by anonymous critics disseminating dubious reports picked up thousands of interactions and shares. See the digs at the alt media conspiracists? "Hyper-online." "conspiracy wave" "dubious reports"
JDHillFan Posted September 3 Posted September 3 13 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: See, here's the problem. Some Trumpy Tweeter posts a clip of a NYT story and mischaracterizes the whole thing. You people are not NYT readers, and it's paywalled and you're cheap (not that you'd read it if it were free). So you believe the bs characterization. The real thing: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/02/us/politics/trump-health-bruise-conspiracies.html And here's how it starts, long before it goes into the "why are people prone to hoaxes like this" explanation: For a swath of hyper-online Americans over the long Labor Day weekend, all of this was explanation enough: The president was either dead or about to be. Mr. Trump’s critics have speculated about his health for as long as he has been in national politics. And for his part, he has long declined to explain when and why he has sought out medical care, whether he was suffering from Covid or undergoing routine procedures. But there had never been a conspiracy wave as feverish as this one. On TikTok, influencers with legions of followers surmised that the White House was publishing old photos, suggesting that the president was being hidden from view. Reddit threads, one after another, were ablaze with commentary. On X, posts shared by anonymous critics disseminating dubious reports picked up thousands of interactions and shares. See the digs at the alt media conspiracists? "Hyper-online." "conspiracy wave" "dubious reports" In your zeal to defend the reliability of the NYT, you posted in large part what was in the tweet. Not sure why you felt the need. Your claim of mischaracterization amounts to bullsh*t. Are you able to detect the difference in tone of the headlines shown in the tweet? You didn’t address that so I am left wondering. Did you call someone else cheap? 1 1
The Frankish Reich Posted September 4 Author Posted September 4 17 hours ago, JDHillFan said: In your zeal to defend the reliability of the NYT, you posted in large part what was in the tweet. Not sure why you felt the need. Your claim of mischaracterization amounts to bullsh*t. Are you able to detect the difference in tone of the headlines shown in the tweet? You didn’t address that so I am left wondering. Did you call someone else cheap? Yes, because you insist on reading only the free media. You get what you pay for. Again, I would challenge anyone to read the entire NYT article and come away with anything other than "they're covering this like the ridiculous conspiracy theory that it is."
JDHillFan Posted September 4 Posted September 4 1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said: Yes, because you insist on reading only the free media. You get what you pay for. Again, I would challenge anyone to read the entire NYT article and come away with anything other than "they're covering this like the ridiculous conspiracy theory that it is." Let’s keep in mind that as a media analyst, you are truly horrible. Look no further than your assessment of the Kamala/CBS interview and edit thereof. You declared it a nothing burger. A 15M nothing burger as it turns out. Good work. Any thoughts on the headlines of the two items?
The Frankish Reich Posted September 4 Author Posted September 4 34 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: Let’s keep in mind that as a media analyst, you are truly horrible. Look no further than your assessment of the Kamala/CBS interview and edit thereof. You declared it a nothing burger. A 15M nothing burger as it turns out. Good work. Any thoughts on the headlines of the two items? I don't know what to make of headlines because they are not written by the article writers. They sometimes change between print and e versions. I assume they are aimed at getting clicks. Solution? Start thinking beyond the old 140 characters of a tweet or the 10 words of a headline. In other words: read. Don't passively consume.
JDHillFan Posted September 4 Posted September 4 9 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: I don't know what to make of headlines because they are not written by the article writers. They sometimes change between print and e versions. I assume they are aimed at getting clicks. Solution? Start thinking beyond the old 140 characters of a tweet or the 10 words of a headline. In other words: read. Don't passively consume. So, as a savvy media consumer (excluding your 15M nothingburger failure), you feel that headlines do not matter as it relates to the reliability of a media source? That seems to be what you are saying, hard as that is to believe. Yikes.
Recommended Posts