Mccarthy did nothing wrong. The media and Hollywood are the ones who went wild with accusations, not surprisingly as we later discover because they are filled with sensationalists and Marxists themselves. Of the people Mccarthy had accused, over 90% were found guilty and were fired or "resigned". They were only accusing people within the government, not private citizens. And with evidence, as it was bore out. *Patton* though, should have finished the job against the commies.

> I get what your saying but its politics not r/democrats or r/The_Donald They very intentionally take over or create seemingly neuteral sounding subs and then control the narrative to make it appear as though that is the popular opinion. It's just marketing.

That's the idea, like /r politics. Advertise yourself as the authority or unbiased opinion and push propaganda.

Yep, looks that way. Thanks for helping me to confirm!

On old reddit, but trying on new it was just prompting "We had a problem, don't freak out!" Same issue on relog, alt browser. Ran IP Release/renew aaanddd.. Seems to be working now, given that I was able to reply. Very strange timing.

On old reddit, but trying on new it was just prompting "We had a problem, don't freak out!" Same issue on relog, alt browser. Ran IP Release/renew aaanddd

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if journos not only participate but mod a number of these subs. They tend to have very vitriolic reactions to any questioning of journalists.

ITT: Damage control.

At least some worldnews mods are confirmed to be Muslims if I recall. And with ISIS having nothing to do with Islam, you think they'd have no problem at all with criticizing it?

Hm...leaving it open to whitelisting in the future. Aka "Give us more money and we'll unban it?"

It makes good sense in the right context. A person who's never even held a gun shouldn't be trying to lecture others on firearm safety. A man shouldn't be lecturing a woman on how to properly apply feminine products or to get over the cramping and discomfort of her period. A woman shouldn't be telling a man that getting hit in the balls isn't *that* bad. And a foreigner shouldn't be telling someone else how to conduct the affairs in which they are largely ignorant aside from skimming headlines in the context of something that was only pushed into law *two years ago* and is now being revoked. Funny how that works eh? It's almost like said people saying you don't have a place to comment might actually *know more about it*.

Actually it was made legal and funds provided for transitioning something like 2 years ago under obama's Tenure. Trump and Mattis simply removed it.

> "you don't have the same rights as 'normal' people" Access to the US military is not a right. The US military does discriminate based on age, weight, height, muscle density, physical capability and considerations along with mental ones. if you have a record of mental issues, you can be rejected outright. Women are often not allowed on the front lines because a slew of psychological and physical considerations aside now you have to run more supplies through dangerous territories for femnine hygiene products. Furthermore when you join the military you *are* discriminated against fully and entirely. If you are stocky and short you will likely end up carrying heavier gear for your squad. If you are too tall you cannot become a pilot, they make the pilots to fit the aircraft not the aircraft to fit the pilot. So on and so forth. People who are purposely seeking to cement their *identity* are not going to be helpful in a place where identity is sacrificed for the sake of unity. You are not a man, you are not a woman, you are not black, white, latino, you are not southern, you are not northern, you are not west coast or east coast. You are an Airman. A marine. A Solider. A sailor. Of the Us military. Full stop, nothing else matters, certainly not your gender pronouns.

> Are you transgender? If you're not, you have no right to have an opinion on transgender people. Well given the president isn't Trans, Mattis isn't trans, i guess you have no place to disagree with them on the subject. See how it still works against you? In fact if you're trans your maybe .6% of the population so you probably shouldn't remark on well...much of anything then by that logic.

Not surprising, I was banned a while back for criticizing Islam with even the most mild wording possible in the context of a terror attack. It's just another place used to push rhetoric where wrongthink is deleted or banned.

Your an anon. You have no credibility. Ergo I have absolutely no reason to listen to anything you have to say let alone read it because you have no credibility. Btw I heard CNN just got another hot leak from an anonymous unverified source. You may want to go check out the new narrative of the week from their super credible anonymous source familiar with someone's thinking. It's totes legit. Meanwhile, the rest of us won't be acting like audio/video evidence of a producer on CNN straight up admitting they were pushing for WW3 with the worlds second largest nuclear superpower for ratings, doesn't exist.

You shouldn't have to belive or trust someone to objectively view their point and consider it. If PV said "The world is a roughly round shape" would you proclaim "Ha! What a Liar, like we can trust anything he says!" ? Thing is, if this came from literally any other source likely to report it, you would attacking the source. You can't change what was said on video, and who said it.

Opinions should be taken seriously when you consider the rationality and/or logic used in said opinion rather than whoever said it. Otherwise why should anyone listen to CNN, NYT, other fake news? This is how "muh russia" conspiracy theorists are allowed to waste our time.

Ad-Hominem

[Confessions of a post modernist](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xgu1jjZlV_0) is something I found enlightening. They reject western principles, values and morals. Embracing Cynicism and Criticism in hopes of finding something better but they never did. They searched for years, they built their identity around that idea there's something better, but they never found it so now they are stuck defending that identity their lives revolve around. When they discovered they could find nothing that mattered to them, they decided nothing matters at all, and embraced nihilism. Even if they can't build a better society, they still want to reduce this one to ash in hopes that something better grows. --------- TL: DR You know those people who reject capitalism, a system that is flawed but works, and always push for communism, a system that is *theoretically* flawless and so *never works*? No matter how many times communism fails? Yeah, they're those kinds of people.

Ah you see it's just a translation error. It's the religion of "piece" as in, a piece of you there, one over there, a few over there..

I never said I trust them. I evaluate the evidence they provide and points they make with critical thinking. If possible I attempt to find conflicting reports on a subject and evaluate what either side emphasizes, omits, includes or precludes. That's the only way to find something close to the truth of things. If you rely entirely on the "reputation" of a news outlet and uncritically accept anything they say as fact, you're only doing yourself a disservice. Have a good one.

Wikipedia isn't a reputable source because anyone can modify pages and it has a clear bias. See how that works? >It is important whether Obama ordered a wire tap on Trump's campaign, that's what Trump claimed. I think we can both agree that the truth matters. The Tap occured, people were unmasked potentially illegally, and information was leaked to the press all under Obama's administration. These are undeniable facts. > I just hope to open your eyes...places like Fox News You'll note I didn't link fox news once. Your prejudice is showing, in fact if you looked at the article I posted regarding media bias you would see Fox news was perhaps the least biased against Trump but *still* up to 50% or higher unfavorable and biased reporting *against* him. The majority of MSM is owned by the same 6 or so corporations, they are products and producers, advertisements. The only place you can get relatively honest reporting is from "fringe" publications because they have no investors pulling their strings. Whether or not you can believe *everything* they say is a matter of critical thinking rather than dismissing them offhand based on "What is reputable and what is not" given that naturally corporate sponsored products such as most MSM have better advertisement to make them appear more "reputable". It's like comparing Mcdonalds to a local bar and grill. Mcdonalds appears reputable because it has advertisement. The bar and grill you would actually have to investigate and given that it has no reputation because it has no advertisement you would likely consider it disreputable offhand, but that's not strictly the case. Fox news is no different. They often sell controversy as their primary product which tends to be contrary to most outlets but they are effectively controlled opposition. Another brand of product from the same company claiming it competes with a different brand. ---------- At any rate, we can agree on "It is important whether Obama ordered a wire tap on Trump's campaign". And you have never disputed the facts that: * Under Obama's administration two FISA warrants were submitted, one was rejected for being too broad in scope. His appointed FBI director accepted the second FISA warrant based on a document that was demonstrably unable to prove its claims. * Susan Rice who is under the direct order and chain of command of Obama requested the unmasking of individuals and information recorded during the investigation. This is not the job of the executive branch, but the judicial branch. The judicial branch (FBI, CIA) did not determine it was necessary to unmask individuals that were part of the investigation. * Unmasked indaviduals and data from the investigation was leaked to the press in attempts to damage Trump, his campaign and his administration. These are facts. The only debate currently is whether Susan Rice was within the law to unmask indaviduals who were part of the investigation, who leaked that unmasked information to the press (Illegal) and why the investigation was created and greenlit in the first place.

>Not all sources are reputable. In which case you would have to provide evidence they are disreputable and their evidence is false. And you're still deflecting from the main argument. > Pretty much everything else Splitting hairs and once again, deflecting. You're focusing on a single very specific instance to try and disprove of all the other instances. You're not in the least bit trying to argue a point with intellectual honesty, you're just trying to be "right" rather than admit again, the obvious truths. * Two Fisa warrants were submitted. The first was too broad in scope and was rejected. The second was more narrow in scope and used the report that the FBI wouldn't even pay for (They offered to pay if the claims could be proven, they couldn't so they didn't pay) as evidence to allow the warrant. * Susan Rice who acts under direct authority of Obama requested and received unmasking of individuals recorded. Not only did the FBI and CIA deign it was not necessary to unmask the individuals in the investigation, but it's practically unprecedented for someone in the executive branch to do so rather than the judicial. * Unmasked data of Trump and his admin was then leaked to the press. It's funny how you keep referring to things that have factual basis and evidence as "conspiracy theories" while likely proclaiming things like "Russian collusion!" that have no evidence of [and even your own side admits this](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bqzEpRR4n8), as "fact". [Study demonstrates that news media of Trump was invariably biased negatively](https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-donald-trumps-first-100-days/?utm_source=POLITICO.EU&utm_campaign=ab6d830a9d-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_05_19&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_10959edeb5-ab6d830a9d-189799085). [Wikileaks demonstrated media DNC collusion](http://archive.is/WGYPA) [Which is no surprise given that only 7% of Journalists identify as republican](http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-20/reminder-just-7-journalists-call-themselves-republican) -------- There's no point in arguing with you any further, again you have no intention of being honest or learning anything. You'll cling to your willful ignorance and it's terribly obvious as you: * Deflect the points of discussion * Dismiss evidence without even reviewing it * Split hairs on points to try and find a way to be "right" on something that is irrelevant to the overall argument. You don't want to be right, you just want to "win".

No, it's not an argument. It's [Ad-hominem](http://jimbuie.blogs.com/.a/6a00d8341c5a0553ef015390755e91970b-800wi) which is a [fallacy](https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem) attacking the person giving the argument or sources of evidence rather than the argument itself, only slightly better than "Yeah well, you're stupid!'. Also **deflecting** the topic to Trump has no relevance to the evidence or points presented. Again: There is no question Trump, his admin, and others were under surveillance at this point. Go educate yourself on the Susan Rice scandal, everyone admits it exists but argues whether or not it was legal or justified to do. P.S. What's especially Ironic is that the last source I used was NYT themselves proclaiming "Wiretap data used in inquiry of Trump aids" a publication you just simutaniously said isn't credible (because I used it), and at the same time is a "respected publication" (because Trump attacks it all the time). ------- That feeling you're getting when your desperately ignoring looking up Susan rice or actually looking at what my sources present? That's called cognitive dissonance, it's a form of willful ignorance where you ignore the obvious evidence presented to you and fabricate your own reality to protect your world view because it's too painful to do otherwise.

Not an argument. I'll leave you to your cognitive dissonance.

Guess you haven't heard of Susan Rice Unmasking? Try to keep up. The wiretaps have been a known element for at least a month now, the question is why Susan Rice unmasked people who had been tapped and then leaked that data. The FISA warrants exist, yes that is plural. The first was rejected, the second was accepted but on the grounds of a shitty supposed intelligence article that the [FBI wouldn't even pay for](http://archive.is/vAtoX) at the time as their justification of "muh russia". [Democrats have already turned to trying to defend the taps because evidently the year is 1980 and the red scare is all the rage again.](http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/03/hillary-clintons-campaign-manager-robby-mook-confirms-knew-wiretaps-video/) It's pretty funny you guys deny this considering [you were gloating about it](http://mobile.wnd.com/files/2017/03/NYT-wiretap-screenshot.jpg) earlier.

Trump's personal conspiracy theories? Weird that the director of the CIA, Comey, Lynch and others also share "Trump's personal conspiracy theories". On video, on record. Keep projecting that [delusion](https://i.redd.it/9542880vyowy.jpg) though, it's going so well for you.

"You people are delusional" said the person who reads only headlines and selectively ignores officials stating there is no evidence and that Trump isn't under investigation. Said the person who probably simultaneously claims Trump wasn't surveilled by obama admin but he is under investigation.

Nothing, because [Trump isn't being investigated](http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/may/11/trump-not-personally-under-investigation/). It was Flynn they were investigating. Now they wanted and got a "consul" for investigating Russian "collusion" regarding the previous election.

Yep, they can enjoy their hugbox. T_D was a means to an end and it accomplished that when President Trump got elected.

This is a pretty hilarious turn that I saw. First you guys started off with "Stage a coup! Resist!" then you suddenly realized as people were getting hit by the secret service that *Sedition is Illegal*. So now the narrative is "Uh...Trump is the real traitor, not us!".

> THE ENTIRE REDDIT HATES YOU. Except for the what was it, 400K people that were subscribed? More if subs were being choked? You do realize those people are subbed to other places too, IE other places on reddit. "Entire reddit hates you!" pretty sure the subs disagree.

>Haha you trumper's don't deserve a space on reddit ---------- > FUCKING CHRISTIAN BAKERS MAKE MY CAKE YOU FUCKING HOMOPHOBES REEEEEEEEEEE Pick one.

Sure, like pretty much every other political sub, you're going to have *some* people in that sub with propaganda and theories. Thing is that politics and every anti-trump sub is pushing the insane theory of "muh russia collusion" with 0 evidence. Tapper said 0 evidence. Comey agreed. Crowdstrike retracted. Various dems agree, no evidence, yet they push "Muh impeachment, muh russia" with 0 evidence.

No, you are (or were) welcome to disagree as long as you're a Trump supporter and not disagreeing for the sake of stirring up shit and trolling, obviously that's a fine line sometimes. But that said there was a lot of disagreement over several issues, people didn't get banned for it. We had good conversations too.

Yep. Just pointing out the hypocrisy.

Nope, you can't partake if comments are downvoted into obscurity simply for your opinion so you can't actually discuss anything or when people will check your post history or RES for your jewden star and immediately attack your character because of a place you visit rather than any idea you presented.

You do realize that people who sub to T_D are also subbed to other places, right?

Reddit is supposed to be for free speech, politics sub is supposed to be unbaised. T_D is a President Trump fansub for President Trump fans. One of these is not like the other.

More like: T_D: "Hey look at these guys breaking the rules by linking to our sub, and calling for brigades against us, here's a link." leddit: "Banned for linking to another sub, obviously a call for brigade."

How is it censorship to only allow people who support President Trump is a sub designed specifically to cater to people who support President Trump? You want to bitch about President Trump, you have 90% of reddit to do that in. You want to harass supporters of President Trump, there's really no reason to entertain you. Pretty much all subs have rules against harassment or civility.

Yeah, that's not doxxing. Doxxing is revealing a hidden person's ID. They're simply tagging people in a clumsy amateur "investigation" but no more doxxing or harassing than anything the commie or antifa subs do to arrange physical attacks on Trump supporters.

Rules they selectively enforced only on T_D. Basically T_D links to posts that are linking to T_D. T_D mods get banned, the other posts stay up.