That was the prep for claiming he was wrongfully silenced.
Many of his historical lies have followed this tried and tested pattern.
Why are you surprised now?
It was obvious that he was going to complain he didn't get a chance to speak. That's why the judge offered an extension and a deadline before allowing closing arguments.
Next it will be the ineffective counsel claim and that Tacopina wrongfully advised him not to attend, or accept the offer to take the stand.
The kind of judge who understands the impact of DNA evidence extracted, or not, from an item of clothing that hasn't been stored as evidence for three decades.
I'd say that was a variation of a usual Donald Trump tactic to distract from his own failings, or wrong-doings.
It usually takes the form of accusing his 'enemies' (for that's how he views others who challenge him) of things he, or his allies have done. It reduces any counter-challenge to a playground 'no, you did it' argument. It's been quite effective for him, especially as many of his supporters' reasoning ability appears to be stuck in that era.
Here, Trump's is attempting to mitigate his non-attendance by turning 'I didn't show my face' to 'They can't face me'. It'll be interesting to see how that is embellished over time who assimilates it, particularly now that Tucker Carlson has been fired.
AI doesn't meet all the requirements for biological life. It has a need for energy, but can't seek it. It doesn't possess membrane bound cells, nor is there metabolism and homeostasis within those cells.
When we talk about the existence of life with respect to AI, we are talking about sentience, the ability to perceive, or feel things: are we destroying sentience if we cut off the energy supply, or dismantle the structure?
The trouble is, from our very first teddy bear, we do have a propensity for projecting life and sentience onto even the most obviously inanimate objects. How can we ensure objectivity?
If it was over coverage of Trump's false claims, it would have been reported as Trump's false claims and Dominion wouldn't have been defamed.
The lawsuit against Fox News was brought because the network reported with actual malice, or knowing falsity, suggesting voting machines were rigged for and/or vulnerable to voter fraud.
@ 0.59 The presenter misquotes the LA Times changing the word 'insurrection' to 'protests'.
Ummm, Fox News including Tucker Carlson. That's exactly what they did. They repeated what the audience wanted to hear with knowing falsity to maintain ratings and advertising revenue. Accusing and blaming others for wrongdoings carried out by the accuser is a very Trump era technique of deflection.
So, three minutes into the video and there are three obvious manipulations of the truth. I think I might fill up the whole blog if I were to go through the whole 25+ minutes.
The ones who leave are the ones who have the means and opportunity. Even then there will be others who won't leave elderly parents, or other family members, those who haven't the means, those who don't believe the situation will get that serious, etc.
What you have written is typical of propaganda which happens on both all sides in war. Some will take that to heart and commit war crimes and other atrocities because their hatred of the dehumanised 'other' has no boundaries.
There are always some people in war who have no choice and say the 'silent negative'.
online now!jac_the_gripper Blog Comments (2,996)
RE: TRUMP REFUSES
A bit of research for you: