314
Donald Trump lays blame for assassination attempt on Biden and Harris
(www.theguardian.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2024
314 points (91.8% liked)
News
23267 readers
3000 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This is debated
Not in good faith.
oh it absolutely is debated in good faith, unless you have pretty stout evidence that this guy was a neo nazi or something i'm content with him just being an "extremist" instead of a "right wing extremist" you might argue it's "right wing, extremist" but no
He was clearly right wing. And clearly an extremist. Are you an idiot?
yeah but that doesn't make him a right wing extremist. That makes him a right winger, and an extremist.
You can be political extreme, and politically moderate, you can politically extreme, and socially moderate. He was politically moderate, and socially extreme.
Are you really being so fucking pedantic that you distinguish between right wing;extremist and ring wing,extremist? If so, look in the mirror and reevaluate your blind biases.
it's not pedantic? This is like complaining about me mentioning that authoritarianism isn't actually explicitly for right wing ideologies, left wing ideologies can exhibit authoritarianism, and actually authoritarianism itself is entirely agnostic to the concept of "political alignment" it's just a style of governance.
Being a political extremist implies that you are either right wing extreme, left wing extreme, (or i guess an extremist centrist?) The purposes of your extremism are to further your political ambitions.
Being a social extremist just means you do things that extreme because you personally believe they will have some effect of impact, and of which, you don't really care.
if crookes were a political extremist, he would've had an online presence, he would've had some sort of manifesto, he would've said something and actually planned this out properly. He did none of these things, happened to get lucky, and then get unlucky. He literally didn't care who he killed, or what for, or probably even if he killed them at all.
like don't get me mistaken, if this kid was a groyper or some shit, i would be inclined to agree with you, but as far as i know, he isn't and wasn't.
What’s not in good faith? Did any reputable news source call him an outright ring wing extremist?
He was a confirmed conservative Republican voter,, so right-wibg on any account. And him trying to assassinate the president makes him extreme.
So he is a right wing extremist. Doesn't matter what the media calls him. Fox News calls Trump Mr President when he clearly lost.
this is not how political extremism works?
Who let the hexbear alt on this thread?
Confirmed by whom? Multiple independent and unbiased parties?
This is what arguing in bad faith looks like. If someone replies with sources, you will claim bias. Name a news source you consider to be unbiased.
Every news organization is biased. Unless you hear it from the horse’s mouth, it’s probably speculation. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask a person if they have any proof of this. Most people have no actual way to defend their opinions besides linking to another opinion—this includes me and you.
It’s also pretty unlikely that any real information would be released because of “national security.” Neither party wants people to side with him, because that might encourage copycats.
My guess is that he has no firm political party preference. I’m a registered democrat, but I’m hardly a fan of them. He was wearing a D/R shirt when he got shot. And as I’m sure you know, they are focused on giving power to the people, as opposed to a central government. Assassinating the leader of the central government is pretty on-brand. However, I’m sure the political ideologies of that group have probably shifted since 1820 😅
Do you have multiple independent and unbiased parties confirming the shirt he was wearing?
The logo was on the shirt 🤷♂️
Were you there to see it? I wasn't. We need to make sure we're evaluating information using multiple sources of independent and unbiased information. The image could have been photoshopped.
Do you really think what you’re doing right now is “good faith”?
Absolutely. And that’s why it’s important to view that shirt taken from multiple photographers. Ideally, ones that aren’t associated with a news organization. Additionally, wearing a shirt definitely doesn’t symbolize an association. If I were going to shoot up a Trump rally (I’m not going to) I would definitely be wearing a MAGA shirt—to fit in.
Thank you for agreeing with me.
I don't know, I have yet to see one of these unbiased sources from you.
I think it’s still too soon for trustworthy information on this topic. Hell, people still speculate about the “grassy knoll.”
You've made a lot of guesses about someone we have no trustworthy information about.
I didn’t write an article about it 🤷♂️ my comments are opinions and observations. I suggest we keep an open mind about a hot topic.
Neither did the guy you're replying to. But their opinions and observations are based on information they've received from news sources, whereas yours are apparently made up out of thin air based on nothing seeing as you don't trust any news source.
How do you even know an assassination attempt even happened? Unless you were there you are only hearing about it from biased news sources.
I guess you’re right. It never happened. Not sure I believe that, but you do you.
Well the news is all biased, so I haven't seen a credible, unbiased source reporting on it.
We probably won’t ever. The government is going to shush this thing like Tiananmen Square.
How can they shush a thing that didn't happen?
Exactly. Shhh. It neeeeevvver happened wink wink.
Okay, so go do some research on your own and get back to us.
Why? I don’t care what you think.
So you won't accept the research done by others and won't do it on your own.
I don’t really think it would be appropriate to find out who his friends were and call them up asking for an interview. I really don’t care that much, and that would be kinda creepy.
You don't care that much. Yet you'll spend excess time and effort arguing about your perception of bad journalism. Let's sum this up:
Right then.
I’m not pulling anyone into anything. You control you.