5 ms·

I don't claim that it's 100% guaranteed legit just because they didn't deny it, but it certainly puts the burden of proof on the people who would claim that it

I don't claim that it's 100% guaranteed legit just because they didn't deny it, but it certainly puts the burden of proof on the people who would claim that it is fake. As for evidence that it was a coverup, Mark Zuckerberg stated publicly that FB algorithmically suppressed the story because the FBI came to them warning that it was Russian disinformation (of course they used the phrase "has all the hallmarks of" so they can deny that they lied about it later). Of course he could be lying, but I don't think he is, and you just asked for evidence, not outright proof.

wpietri 4y ago
That's not proof of a coverup. People can be legitimately wrong. And you claiming that they phrased it carefully as part of a coverup is another thing that requires evidence. Given that you and the other poster seem to be indulging in low-fact speculation, I think I'm done here.
- Cupertino95014 4y ago
  > another thing that requires evidence. Now how, exactly, would someone provide "evidence" that there was a coverup? In Watergate, Leon Jaworski went to elaborate lengths to prove it with conversations, statements by collaborators, written documents, etc. Do you expect ordinary people to have that? So we're left with extremely strict standards from "fact checkers" when Trump says anything, and "hey, what the hell, he meant well" when Biden says something blatantly wrong. For example: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-ar-15-bullet-gun/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-ar-15-bullet-gun/ So they rate this a "correct attribution" even though they say "the President's claim is false." I'm glad you're done here. Otherwise, you'd have to go to even more insane contortions now.
  - wpietri 4y ago
    > Do you expect ordinary people to have that? I expect people not to make factual claims when they have no facts. If you want to say, "I have no proof but I believe in my heart it was a coverup", that's fine. If you want, feel free to build your worldview around vibes or whatever. Just don't pretend otherwise.
    - Cupertino95014 4y ago
      You are the one who has no facts, I'm afraid. If someone says "all sheep are white" disproof comes from just one black sheep. So if we say "the establishment media covered up this story" you can disprove it with one, or preferably several references where it was covered fairly and prominently. But you can't, can you?

wpietri 4y ago

That's not proof of a coverup. People can be legitimately wrong. And you claiming that they phrased it carefully as part of a coverup is another thing that requires evidence. Given that you and the other poster seem to be indulging in low-fact speculation, I think I'm done here.

Cupertino95014 4y ago
> another thing that requires evidence. Now how, exactly, would someone provide "evidence" that there was a coverup? In Watergate, Leon Jaworski went to elaborate lengths to prove it with conversations, statements by collaborators, written documents, etc. Do you expect ordinary people to have that? So we're left with extremely strict standards from "fact checkers" when Trump says anything, and "hey, what the hell, he meant well" when Biden says something blatantly wrong. For example: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-ar-15-bullet-gun/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-ar-15-bullet-gun/ So they rate this a "correct attribution" even though they say "the President's claim is false." I'm glad you're done here. Otherwise, you'd have to go to even more insane contortions now.
- wpietri 4y ago
  > Do you expect ordinary people to have that? I expect people not to make factual claims when they have no facts. If you want to say, "I have no proof but I believe in my heart it was a coverup", that's fine. If you want, feel free to build your worldview around vibes or whatever. Just don't pretend otherwise.
  - Cupertino95014 4y ago
    You are the one who has no facts, I'm afraid. If someone says "all sheep are white" disproof comes from just one black sheep. So if we say "the establishment media covered up this story" you can disprove it with one, or preferably several references where it was covered fairly and prominently. But you can't, can you?