Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Tucker Carlson now says QAnon doesn't exist


Recommended Posts

Just now, WestCanMan said:

LOL, you watch John Oliver.

He's got an accent, so no doubt he sounds smart to some, but he's a lying dolt.

He's the one who went on and on trying to call Trump a liar for saying that it didn't rain during his speech: https://time.com/4668566/john-oliver-trump-president-lies/ He even found a picture of Melania holding an umbrella to try to provee his point.

Turns out Trump was right as usual, and Oliver was just editorializing and lying his face off.

Here's a hi def video of Trump's inauguration speech from ABC news: 

 

 

Watch for yourself and you'll soon see for yourself that John Oliver is nothing but a worthless liar. 

Oliver attacking Carlson for lying is like Hitler calling Ghandi a warmonger.

So that's the biggest lie told about the Inauguration? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 261
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

whew! i was getting scared there... Tucker Carlson Suggests QAnon Doesn't Exist Because He Can't Find Its Website i guess all of those Q shirts, signs and flags are just associated with the

It don’t see anyone defending Epstein or Prince Andrew, or saying they don’t exist. Trump was also a good buddy of Epstein’s.

Complete and utter nonsense.

Posted Images

52 minutes ago, Boges said:

So that's the biggest lie told about the Inauguration? :lol:

It was tied for first, actually.

The other biggest lie was that "Trump lied about having the bigger inauguration crowd".

FYI, Trump said his inauguration crowd was bigger, but that was an estimate which they based on transit ridership that day. So Trump was wrong. Do you know the difference between being wrong and lying, Boges? An example of actual lying about this topic was when MSM members showed a picture of Trump's crowd several hours before his speech and said it was a comparison it to Obama's crowd photo, which was taken during Obama's inauguration speech. 

If Trump was dropping a nuke there'd be no room for being wrong, but being wrong about something as inconsequential as inauguration size wasn't that big of a deal.

So the three biggest lies about inauguration day were: 1) "Trump lied about his inauguration size", 2) "Here are comparable photos from inauguration day" and 3) "Trump lied about whether or not it was raining during his inauguration speech". 

The net result of inauguration day stories was that they just exposed the MSM for their blatant lying and exposed their useful idiots' appetites for spreading known lies. Sadly, it was just a sign of things to come.  

Now ya know. Don't get this wrong again Boges. 

Edited by WestCanMan
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

It was tied for first, actually.

The other biggest lie was that "Trump lied about having the bigger inauguration crowd".

FYI, Trump said his inauguration crowd was bigger, but that was an estimate which they based on transit ridership that day. So Trump was wrong. Do you know the difference between being wrong and lying, Boges? If Trump was dropping a nuke there'd be no room for being wrong, but being wrong about something like inauguration size wasn't that big of a deal. It just exposed the MSM for their lying, it was just a sign of things to come.  

So the two biggest lies about inauguration day were: "Trump lied about his inauguration size" and "Trump lied about whether or not it was raining during his inauguration speech". 

Now ya know. Don't get this wrong again Boges. 

So, can you cite any lies Oliver made in the Tucker piece? 

Much of it was clips from Tucker's own mouth. Like his commentary on Iraqis. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Boges said:

So, can you cite any lies Oliver made in the Tucker piece? 

Much of it was clips from Tucker's own mouth. Like his commentary on Iraqis. 

I don't even have t watch it to know that it's stupidity, lies and bullshit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Boges said:

Not saying much. 

Name someone on CTV or CNN that you will vouch for? Someone whose program you can watch tonight knowing that they won't lie, twist, omit or fabricate? 

You can't. Whatever idiot you pick, I can watch their show and eviscerate their commentary. You'll clam up now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

LMAO. This reminds me of when I was younger and had roommates. I was watching Team Canada's women play the US and my roommates came home and laughed 'cause it was women's hockey. I said that they still make good plays, things just happen a bit slower.

Then an American girl went to wrist the puck out of their defensive zone and one of the Canadian girls went to catch the puck, and started actually crying when it hit her hand. 

I've watched thousands of hours of men's hockey and seen many grievous injuries including broken bones, lost teeth, dislocated shoulders, etc, I still haven't seen a single one of the men cry. 

Don't bullshit me sapper. Women are absolutely not as good as men at absorbing pain and it's not even close.

Oh, well, the hockey!  I never thought of that!

Good heavens man, did you really just make that post?  How old are you?

I would suggest you try going through labour, but I don't know how it feels, and the question we are discussing wouldn't apply to someone who hadn't been trained anyway.

Hockey...😄

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

Oh, well, the hockey!  I never thought of that!

Good heavens man, did you really just make that post?  How old are you?

Good heavens son, do you not understand the difference between crying and not crying, in a discussion about torture and pain tolerance? How old are you?

Quote

I would suggest you try going through labour, but I don't know how it feels, and the question we are discussing wouldn't apply to someone who hadn't been trained anyway.

Hockey...😄 

I get it. Women give birth. Annnnnd... let's just jump to the wrong conclusion about pain tolerance just because women give birth....?

My wife's mom had two kids and passed a kidney stone. She said the kidney stone was much worse. Lots of men have passed kidney stones. Does that prove something about pain tolerance by your weird standards? 

Little kids get cavities and earaches. Does that mean that they are somehow the champions of pain tolerance? 

Also, some women opt to get C-sections or epidurals to avoid the pain. One has serious side-effects 100% of the time, the other can cause paralysis or death in rare instances. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WestCanMan said:

Good heavens son, do you not understand the difference between crying and not crying, in a discussion about torture and pain tolerance? How old are you?

I get it. Women give birth. Annnnnd... let's just jump to the wrong conclusion about pain tolerance just because women give birth....?

My wife's mom had two kids and passed a kidney stone. She said the kidney stone was much worse. Lots of men have passed kidney stones. Does that prove something about pain tolerance by your weird standards? 

Little kids get cavities and earaches. Does that mean that they are somehow the champions of pain tolerance? 

Also, some women opt to get C-sections or epidurals to avoid the pain. One has serious side-effects 100% of the time, the other can cause paralysis or death in rare instances. 

I can't believe you think you know what you are talking about because you saw a women cry at a hockey game.  I thought I'd made the point that it was pretty dumb, but you doubled down.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Name someone on CTV or CNN that you will vouch for? Someone whose program you can watch tonight knowing that they won't lie, twist, omit or fabricate? 

You can't. Whatever idiot you pick, I can watch their show and eviscerate their commentary. You'll clam up now.

Everyone. We already know that if asked to cite a lie from anyone at CTV and CNN, you'll post your own lie and scurry away when exposed. We played this game and you lost miserably. 

Edited by BubberMiley
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I can't believe you think you know what you are talking about because you saw a women cry at a hockey game. 

A majority of women cry fairly easily when they feel pain. Almost all men do not. That's just basic knowledge.

Quote

I thought I'd made the point that it was pretty dumb, but you doubled down.

In what percentage of your posts do you think you've ever made a point sapper? Of course you didn't make a point.

You observed that women give birth and men don't but you didn't make a comparison or quantify that in any way. That's not a point. It's a random comment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BubberMiley said:

Everyone. We already know that if asked to cite a lie from anyone at CTV and CNN, you'll post your own lie and scurry away when exposed. We played this game and you lost miserably. 

You're such a worthless liar Bubber.

We played that game and I rubbed your nose in it.

CTV said exactly what I accused them of, word for word. The fact that you're ok with their deception or that you lack the reading comprehension to fully understand how twisted their narrative was is no fault of mine. Go read a book, kid.

CNN's false narratives are legendary.

I challenged all of you leftits to name a major news story that CNN didn't skew beyond belief and the entire lot of you came up with nothing. Zip, zero, zilch.

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

A majority of women cry fairly easily when they feel pain. Almost all men do not. That's just basic knowledge.

In what percentage of your posts do you think you've ever made a point sapper? Of course you didn't make a point.

You observed that women give birth and men don't but you didn't make a comparison or quantify that in any way. That's not a point. It's a random comment.

Well, the point I made was that you thought you could assess the ability of highly trained military personnel to keep a secret based what you saw a woman do at a hockey game.

But that said, you appear to be of the opinion that women are the weaker sex, period. (no pun intended)

Fair enough.  I differ, of course, but there's not much point in arguing about it if you're going to use anecdotes such as the hockey example as your proof. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Well, the point I made was that you thought you could assess the ability of highly trained military personnel to keep a secret based what you saw a woman do at a hockey game.

It's based on a lifetime of experience, and I provided an anecdote which contains more than just the commentary about 1 girl: you'd be shocked if you ever saw an NHLer cry from breaking an arm.

If you saw your neighbour's wife cry after she broke her arm it would just be normal. I know that you won't admit to that, so I guess we're at an impasse. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sapper, try to follow:

1) If you were a member of the Canadian Armed Forces raiding a Taliban compound would you rather have 5 Rhona Rouseys with you or 5 Chuck Liddels? 

In a voluntary force, when you have your choice of who to train, you should train men.

2) If you were a member of the Israeli Defence Force, and training every man in the country wasn't enough, would you want to train the Rhonda Rouseys? Of course. 

 

It makes sense in some instances to train women for combat. In Canada it doesn't. It's just for the sake of virtue signalling, and combat is no place for virtue signalling. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

Sapper, try to follow:

1) If you were a member of the Canadian Armed Forces raiding a Taliban compound would you rather have 5 Rhona Rouseys with you or 5 Chuck Liddels? 

In a voluntary force, when you have your choice of who to train, you should train men.

2) If you were a member of the Israeli Defence Force, and training every man in the country wasn't enough, would you want to train the Rhonda Rouseys? Of course. 

 

It makes sense in some instances to train women for combat. In Canada it doesn't. It's just for the sake of virtue signalling, and combat is no place for virtue signalling. 

Again with the absolute bollocks.  I was hoping we were done when you mentioned the impasse, but no.

I don't know who Rhona Rousey or Chuck Liddel are, but if we're playing a game, I'd rather have one Ellen Ripley than five Private Hudsons.

This is fun!  But I'm okay with the impasse too.  One can only take so much bollocks!

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, WestCanMan said:

It's based on a lifetime of experience, and I provided an anecdote which contains more than just the commentary about 1 girl: you'd be shocked if you ever saw an NHLer cry from breaking an arm.

If you saw your neighbour's wife cry after she broke her arm it would just be normal. I know that you won't admit to that, so I guess we're at an impasse. 

Honestly, you and crying.  What do you do when a movie gets to you?  Hide it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Again with the absolute bollocks.  I was hoping we were done when you mentioned the impasse, but no.

I don't know who Rhona Rousey or Chuck Liddel are, but if we're playing a game, I'd rather have one Ellen Ripley than five Private Hudsons.

FYI, Ellen Ripley is fictional. Personally I'd go with Superman if we get to choose fictional characters.

FYI Rhonda Rousey and Chuck Liddel are elite MMA fighters, former champions. If they fought the odds would be 95 trillion to one in favour of (spoiler alert!) Chuck. The only reason the odds aren't a division by zero equation is, apparently there's some dude in BC who might be dumb enough to bet on the chick. 

Quote

This is fun!  But I'm okay with the impasse too.  One can only take so much bollocks!

Really Sapper? Are you out of bollocks? 

Don't you have another sandbox insult to throw down when you're out of facts (as if you ever had any)?

Just stick tour formula:  Part 1) [Insert sandbox insult of the day here. Lately we've been using "That's Bollocks!"] Part 2) [Insert virtue signalling or complete idiocy here, like using fictional characters in the military]! Part 3) [Insert another sandbox insult here. Either a new one, or a beefed up comment about bollocks again, like total bollocks, or absolute bollocks]. 

I'll even write your reply here, you can just copy and paste it:

Quote

 

Again with the malarkey WCM!

I don't care about MMA fighters. FYI fictional heroines have proven over and over again that women can bitchslap men.

Are you out of malarkey yet? Sheesh. 

 

Click quote, hilite the above text, hit Ctrl 'c' (PC) or command 'c' (Mac), and then instead of making up your own random BS  - just hit Ctrl or Cmd 'v'. Smile, smugly. Pat your back. You're an elite SJW now.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

FYI, Ellen Ripley is fictional. Personally I'd go with Superman if we get to choose fictional characters.

I said it was a game.  I can't help it if you're actually serious.

 

59 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Really Sapper? Are you out of bollocks? 

Yes.  One can only go so far in such a discussion.  If what the other person says it utterly ridiculous (Bollocks, garbage, rubbish, whatever) one does get sick of pointing it out.

I do understand you think women are the weaker sex, generally.  You think this is because they cry more often.  If that's not the case, just say so and I'll rethink my views.

I differ.  I disagree completely.  I don't think crying matters, and now that I know who Rhonda Rousey is, I think I can say without fear of contradiction that she would kick both our arses if we ganged up on her.  So much for the weaker sex.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, bcsapper said:

I said it was a game.  I can't help it if you're actually serious.

 

Yes.  One can only go so far in such a discussion.  If what the other person says it utterly ridiculous (Bollocks, garbage, rubbish, whatever) one does get sick of pointing it out.

I do understand you think women are the weaker sex, generally.  You think this is because they cry more often.  If that's not the case, just say so and I'll rethink my views.

I differ.  I disagree completely.  I don't think crying matters, and now that I know who Rhonda Rousey is, I think I can say without fear of contradiction that she would kick both our arses if we ganged up on her.  So much for the weaker sex.

Yeah but it's actually just not bollocks to realize that men are far stronger and have a higher pain tolerance. Those things really matter and in life and death situations virtue signalling is worthless.

Men also lack the 'get out of jail free card' that women possess, aka a womb. In this modern age of the technical warrior you can waste a ton of time and money on training people who suddenly become unavailable at the only time when they're really needed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...