Imgur sucks so much balls.
Your image is gone.
Whoever chose this facial expression of trump in combi with the meme did an awesome job, lmao.
It’s not a fake news network. It’s right wing entertainment network. Some people are entertained from watching horror movies. Some are entertained by being told their anger and hatred is justified.
You mean the lawsuit from fake judges?
Edit : thank you for the downvotes for not adding /s.
Proves the plausibility of such comment in this day and age
Kamala wants to change the rules of the one debate she said she’d do. She even wants to have notes during the debate. If I were Trump, I wouldn’t do the ABC debate either. They’re also the network that gave a candidate the questions ahead of time before. Donna Brazille admitted to it. Just a few days ago, a reporter on ABC tried lying for Kamala to when he was interviewing Tom Cotton. I don’t think Trump is backing out of anything but I do think he should unless she agrees to do a debate on a Conservative network.
Kamala wants to change the rules of the one debate she said she’d do.
Kamala wants to change the rules to what Trump has demanded previously.
She even wants to have notes during the debate.
Trump would have the same option of notes, only he’s afraid that someone organised would more readily call out his bullshit.
They’re also the network that gave a candidate the questions ahead of time before. Donna Brazille admitted to it.
Source.
Just a few days ago, a reporter on ABC tried lying for Kamala to when he was interviewing Tom Cotton.
Again, source. Also there’s a difference between a reporter lying in an interview, perhaps to elicit a reaction from the interviewee, and a reporter lying on behalf of Kamala (which you’re implying), let alone at her request.
but I do think he should unless she agrees to do a debate on a Conservative network.
“Anything not on my side is biased” - you do not understand reality. Stop watching Fox News, that’s not a news channel, it’s fake entertainment, by their own admission under oath.
Here’s you a couple of sources and you won’t convince me the reporter lied to “elicit a reaction” If that were the case, they wouldn’t only do it to a certain party. They’d do it to the other party as well. These MSM networks scream bias, especially when they’re giving one party the questions ahead of time for a debate. I understand reality just fine.
Apologies for the delay in my reply here, I’ve only just got around to checking your links.
Both of these sources are primarily centred around Trump’s tweet, repeating and amplifying it as if what he says is true.
The first one has a video clip where the reporter clearly slipped up and didn’t have his facts straight. However, Cotton was also lying - he misrepresented Kamala’s position, as if to say she would take things away from people. The private health industry in the US is diabolical and needs sorting out, such that it isn’t tied to your employment. No one should be left in a situation where losing their job means they lose their healthcare. This is what Kamala was referring to by “abolish private health insurance on the job”. This would eliminate private health insurance as we know it, but it wouldn’t entirely eliminate private health insurance as you’d still be able to take out your own policy, separate from work. What she’s talking about is healthcare that’s free at the point of service, much like in Canada and the UK. Those systems aren’t free for everyone, but you don’t have the bullshit hoops with doctors being out of plan that insurance and the healthcare industry fleeces everyone with.
The first link also had a comment about veterans:
In the heated interview, Karl pressed Cotton on Trump’s recent remarks referring to the Medal of Freedom as “equivalent” to or “much better” than the Medal of Honor, which is the nation’s highest military award for bravery in combat.
“Jon, you’re totally taking that out of context. Donald Trump was great for our military. He is great for our veterans,” Cotton retorted.
This is completely false. Trump has not been good for the military, and he’s certainly not been good to veterans. He doesn’t even pretend to be good to veterans.
The second article, hosted on MSN but originally written by “Hindustan Times”, also goes into the healthcare thing, so I won’t repeat that part. However it does elaborate more on the "How do you know that is not her position now?” and accuses her of hiding her position. This is simply bullshit: when a person campaigns on something, that becomes their mandate. A politician can’t win an election and then use that as a mandate to do something else - which is exactly what the Republicans have done eg with repealing Roe vs Wade. There is no evidence that the Democrats are doing this, just a blind accusation from a party that already engages in this practice.
The reporter and Cotton then bickered about whether or not she had changed. Frankly, it’s all a very shit interview, and the reporter doesn’t come across as a very good journalist. However, to say that this proves the network is biased is a very weak argument. A reporter is supposed to be opposed to the person they’re interviewing, particularly with politicians, in order to challenge them. A good reporter would challenge guests regardless of which way the guest leans, in such a way that they ask difficult questions. It can easily seem that they’re biased if you only look at one interview, because they’re not on side with that guest, but you need to see interviews of both side to determine this. Without an interview of a Democrat where the reporter/network is clearly on side with them and does not ask difficult questions, this is nothing but an excuse for Trump to try and weasel out of a debate he agreed to but is now afraid of.
And if you look back to the interview with Harris in 2019, the reporter then did ask difficult questions when she talked about changing the healthcare industry.
You seem to be taking the words of Trump, a serial liar, as gospel. That is a mistake and not something that you can rationally justify.
Brazille was working for CNN at the time of Clinton, not ABC.
Harris is negotiating the rules of a debate she hadn’t agreed to yet since she wasn’t running for president at the time the debate was agreed to by BIDEN. Trump is also negotiating terms. Seems fair to me that they both get to negotiate for whatever they want before agreeing to final terms.
do a debate on a Conservative network
Conservative news network? WHERE? All I see on the right-wing are garbage propaganda outlets. Why would anyone serious agree to a debate at a propaganda outlet?
A debate has to happen on a real news network like ABC, CBS, PBS, NPR, AP, Reuters, CNBC or something of the like, or hosted by a neutral university or some other serious institution. The point is to try to have less BS, not more.
And I agree, if the DNC operative Brazille gave one candidate the questions ahead and not the other, that’s a major issue and she is right to be shamed for it and have been removed by CNN. Nobody wants to see that favoritism crap, which is also the reason we can’t have the debate at Fox or any other trash-tier outlet either.
There’s also politicking involved. Trump is currently losing this election, so he should be more desperate to get a debate going even if he is most likely to do poorly. From a politics perspective, the Harris campaign is right to press Trump and push the rules to make him as uncomfortable as possible. Trump can back out if he wants, but he is the one that needs the debate the most. That’s just how politics works. If Trump was ahead he could simply avoid the debate and run a telethon by himself like he’s done in the past when he refused to participate, in the same vein of political gamesmanship. It’s only fair that when Harris is on top she gets to be the gamester. That’s Trump’s lack of decorum coming back to roost. Those that lead with being dicks get mirrored treatment when the tables turn.
