Here
and
Now

opinions

Should reporters challenge or ignore election disbelievers?

32 Comments
By DAVID BAUDER

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

32 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

Perfectly appropriate for journalists to press interviewees about the credibility of sources and facts, and also to expose liars.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Absolutely challenge them. Do not be afraid to expose their fact free claims for the lies they are.

6 ( +7 / -1 )

The media's job is to investigate, not "challenge" citizens.

Really? So goodbye Woodward and Bernstein, then, and welcome back secrecy and corruption.

5 ( +8 / -3 )

And also, mail in balloting was also suspected, due to the widespread animosity of postal workers towards the Trump administration for cutting their budget.

Again, false. Mr. Trumps appointed Postmaster greatly reduced the number of available mail boxes and mail sorting equipment in the months leading up to the election but there is no evidence anywhere that postal service workers did anything other than faithfully pick up the mail and deliver it to the correct address. This is the exact sort of fact free lies that reporters have not just a right but a duty to challenge just as I challenge your erroneous claims here.

4 ( +7 / -3 )

The questioning of the legitimacy of the results is understandable considering the fact that Trump was projected the winner on election night, and it was only after other ballots were counted over the next few days were the results for Biden tabulated.

"The problem was that I wanted someone to win, but then they went ahead and counted the votes, and it turns out the winner was someone else" is not the killing argument you think it is.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Of course we know for sure 100% that the “election deniers” believe a lie, just as those who believed in the lab-leak hypothesis... oh wait!

Also believe a lie, that's right.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

To the original question as to whether persons with opposing views be allowed a platform from which to speak, more voices are always better than fewer voices. Listening to people with whom I disagree keeps me on my toes.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Why allow, literally, crazy people onto a network program to declare a false narrative as factual.

Let alone, how can they possibly be taken seriously regarding any matter they wish to discuss when they profess an outright lie as an elemental truth. Atop that is the dis-service to the Republic, promoting what is akin to seditious intent.

It resembles the lunacy of QAnon. Such individuals belong in an institution for the mentally deranged. Not on or in any form of media spewing, essentially vitriol.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The questioning of the legitimacy of the results is understandable considering the fact that Trump was projected the winner on election night, 

No he wasn't.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

The questioning of the legitimacy of the results is understandable considering the fact that Trump was projected the winner on election night, 

Only by Trump and the right-wing alternative bubble. And therein lies the problem. These people lie to each other, then use the lies they got told by the others, as justifications for the actions they take based on the lies they heard.

Those of us outside the broken American media bubble see it and shake our heads that such a thing could happen in a first-world nation.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Regarding the lab-leak idea, Biden authorized the intelligence agencies to keep an open mind. He did not say that he believes the lab leak theories, and neither should we, unless and until there is evidence that such a thing occurred.

Pandemics have been a human scourge for many thousands of years, and so far there is not one iota of proof that this pandemic was anything other than a naturally occurring event, albeit preventable. We now know that keeping animals caged and close to the restaurants where they will be consumed is a bad idea.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Someone like Trump, who got his family vaccinated and then publicly advocates for others not to get the shots, should be challenged. It is the duty of journalists to expose hypocrisy and lies.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Actually, he was and it was trending his way and then all of a sudden, the counting stopped for a bit and then it started up again, and then for some odd reason more ballots came in and it went late into the night and counting stopped until the next day (that's the msm reporting even though there were staff counting) and the rest just went all over the place after that, then when everything resumed, Biden was ahead miraculously, interesting.

I commented on this earlier in this thread. Obviously, you missed it or just chose to ignore it.

All Americans have to right to question anything they feel odd or something they feel that is undermining their political way of life. If you are going to afford the right to liberal pundits to take on and challenge people on the right, then the left needs to reciprocate as well.

And then there comes a time when you have to stop questioning something just because you don't like how things turned out, especially when it results in something like the attack on Washington on January 6. If not, it's up to the free press to call out and expose those who continue to spread lies and misinformation as well as their enablers in the government.

Just after the election and all the way up to President Biden's inauguration, Republicans had over 60 court challenges to various election results in states and lost them all, so no, their voices were heard and their arguments were rejected--some by Republican-appointed judges. Many audits were also conducted by GOP election officials in states like Georgia, and no fraud was found. Just the other day, the Michigan GOP put out the following report. You can read it here:

https://news.yahoo.com/gop-led-michigan-committee-found-201519501.html

So, it's way past the time to put this nonsense like the Arizona "Fraudit" to rest. The Michigan GOP said it best when they called for criminal investigations into those who continue to perpetuate this fraud, and I hope that the free press continues to shine a spotlight on those who are determined to destroy democracy in an attempt at holding on to power at any cost.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

When did the NYT gain the power to impeach a president?

I never said that but they did outline right after the inauguration as to what is coming Trump's way and after 3 long years, the Dems failed in removing and convicting the former President (because you have to prove a crime was committed.

You guys did it to Obama for 8 years

Now Biden will get it for the next 4 years.

Exactly like everyone who knew what they were talking about said it would on video, before it happened. It was easily predictable due to more republicans voting in person, more demoracts voting by mail.

Well, thankfully that's coming to an end in 25 States, you want to vote, get up early, shower, throw some coffee down your throat, and get in line to exercise your 1st amendment rights.

It's so weird being an observer from outside

No, that's the problem, you're an outside observer. If I view my neighbor's marriage from across the street doesn't make me an expert or having knowledge of how their marriage is.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

No, more like astonished.

that someone with no power to impeach Trump thought Trump should be impeached.

And acquitted twice.

So you guys started it by doing it for 8 years to Obama,

Well, now we have Joe and he will just have to deal with the GOP.

When your neighbor puts their marriage on a Livestream for anyone to watch, sure, it gives you exact knowledge of how their marriage is.

But it's not on Livestream, it's your next-door neighbor's site and even so, you can understand this, even if it were Livestream, you still wouldn't know what's going on.

See here's the difference, you guys only see the media bubble of your own ideological media.

As the left do as well, bluntness right there.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

So you're angry

No, more like astonished.

that someone with no power to impeach Trump thought Trump should be impeached.

And acquitted twice.

So you guys started it by doing it for 8 years to Obama,

Well, now we have Joe and he will just have to deal with the GOP.

When your neighbor puts their marriage on a Livestream for anyone to watch, sure, it gives you exact knowledge of how their marriage is.

But it's not on Livestream, it's your next-door neighbor's site and even so, you can understand this, even if it were Livestream, you still wouldn't know what's going on.

See here's the difference, you guys only see the media bubble of your own ideological media.

As the left do as well.

Sorry (not sorry) to be so blunt.

We are both blunt, good to be blunt.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

No, more like astonished.

that someone with no power to impeach Trump thought Trump should be impeached.

And acquitted twice.

So you guys started it by doing it for 8 years to Obama,

Well, now we have Joe and he will just have to deal with the GOP.

When your neighbor puts their marriage on a Livestream for anyone to watch, sure, it gives you exact knowledge of how their marriage is.

But it's not on Livestream, it's your next-door neighbor's site and even so, you can understand this, even if it were Livestream, you still wouldn't know what's going on.

See here's the difference, you guys only see the media bubble of your own ideological media.

As the left do as well, bluntness right there.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

The questioning of the legitimacy of the results is understandable considering the fact that Trump was projected the winner on election night, and it was only after other ballots were counted over the next few days were the results for Biden tabulated.

I think you forgot the fact that in many Republican states, they refused to count the absentee and other mail-in ballots until after the polls closed, and since many Democrats opted to vote by mail, it's only natural that you would see a large increase in their votes since they hadn't been counted yet.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

I also made a comment on a PUBLIC FORUM.

Unfortunately, that comment did not address my point.

But Dems didn't heed that same advice 4 years ago, just an hour after Trump was sworn in, the NYT headline read "the Impeachment begins" and for 4 long years it was resistance all the way. So it was basically ok to oppose the former President, but not this one?

"But, but, but...." more "whataboutism" from you--typical. The difference here is, democrats did not rile up their supporters to storm the House and Senate which resulted in deaths of police officers, now did they? They also didn't try to pass over 250 voter supression bills like the current Republican-controlled states are doing, now did they?

We know what happened, we're not obsessed with this the way the left is, 

No, you don't know what happened, and it's been proven time and time again. Not obsessed? Explain all of the voter supression legislation and more calls for the Arizona-style "Fraudit" circuses by nut-fudge grifters and their Republican enablers in state after Republican-controlled state.

Well, that's the left's position, not the right and the right will continue to talk about it 

So, I guess the right is obsessed with it after all. Nice contradiction!

And we feel the opposite about the current party that will stop at nothing to make the nation a one-party system, that won't happen

Who is "we"? The only party that is trying to make a one-party system is the Republicans with their gerrymandering, voter suppression laws, and takeover of voting by state legislatures. What hypocrisy!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Unfortunately, that comment did not address my point. 

Because I wasn't addressing your point, I was commenting and making my point.

"But, but, but...." more "whataboutism" from you--typical.

Liberals don't want to talk about opposing viewpoints I get it, the coin "doesn't" have twin heads.

The difference here is, democrats did not rile up their supporters to storm the House and Senate which resulted in deaths of police officers, now did they?

The officer that the Dems have dragged his name through the mud and we still haven't seen 5 hours of video that hasn't been released to the public which every American is entitled which makes it seem more suspicious as to why the Federal government and the DOJ are not transparent, but at the same time it answers the question as to why these people weren't charged with Insurrection and that seems to be that a charge like that wouldn't pass the test and would have to be legally thrown out because that incident carries a trespassing charge and that's it.

They also didn't try to pass over 250 voter suppression bills like the current Republican-controlled states are doing, now did they?

There is no suppression, we haven't had it since the early '60s and now all of a sudden after Obama won twice and the squad one and in Georgia, the so-called Reverend won, but we are to believe that asking for an ID is racist when Blacks overwhelmingly support voter ID, so if they support it, maybe the Dems should listen to their constituents and enforce registration and make voter ID mandatory.

No, you don't know what happened,

Neither do you, but I'm not buying what the MSM has been trying to force down our throats. I will make that decision whom to believe, no one else.

So, I guess the right is obsessed with it after all. Nice contradiction!

Inquiring and obsessing about this are two entirely different things

Who is "we"? The only party that is trying to make a one-party system is the Republicans with their gerrymandering,

But when Dems do it, it's ok? Why? 

https://www.grandforksherald.com/opinion/7062567-Port-I-guess-gerrymandering-isnt-gerrymandering-when-Democrats-do-it

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Because I wasn't addressing your point, I was commenting and making my point.

Then why bother highlighting and then commenting on my post?

Liberals don't want to talk about opposing viewpoints I get it, the coin "doesn't" have twin heads.

Someday, I hope that you will outgrow the tired "liberal this" argument. People don't want to talk to others who continually engage in bad faith arguments--no matter what political side you are on.

The officer that the Dems have dragged his name through the mud and we still haven't seen 5 hours of video that hasn't been released to the public which every American is entitled which makes it seem more suspicious as to why the Federal government and the DOJ are not transparent, but at the same time it answers the question as to why these people weren't charged with Insurrection and that seems to be that a charge like that wouldn't pass the test and would have to be legally thrown out because that incident carries a trespassing charge and that's it.

I haven't read a stream-of-consciousness screed like this since Faulkner's "The Sound and the Fury." However, no matter how you try to dismiss it, there's plenty of video of Trump supporters assaulting police officers that day--and until some of them stand trial for what they did, you cannot simply point to a "tresspassing charge" that one person just got off on who wasn't charged with assaulting a police officer.

Neither do you, but I'm not buying what the MSM has been trying to force down our throats. I will make that decision whom to believe, no one else.

And I never claimed that I did! However, I know what I saw on January 6, and from what I've been reading about all of the Republican-led voter suppression laws and threats to election officials by Trump supporters, I'd say that my grasp of reality far exceeds yours.

But when Dems do it, it's ok? Why? 

There you go again . . . "but , but, but." I'm for getting rid of all gerrymandering by any party. Can you say the same? Ditto for the other provisions in the "For the People Act" as well as the "John Lewis Voting Rights Bill." How about sending a link that is not an opinion piece but instead just giving your own thoughts--or is that too much to ask?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Then why bother highlighting and then commenting on my post?

Because I can

Someday, I hope that you will outgrow the tired "liberal this" argument.

I ask the exact same thing about the left

I haven't read a stream-of-consciousness screed like this since Faulkner's "The Sound and the Fury." However, no matter how you try to dismiss it, there's plenty of video of Trump supporters assaulting police officers that day

Again, I care about the footage that we haven't seen, which leads me to suspect there could be something that could embarrass the agency and that is why they won't allow us to see it, American citizens have the absolute right to view the video and that now makes more sense as to why they couldn't hit these people with an insurrection charge. 

--and until some of them stand trial for what they did, you cannot simply point to a "tresspassing charge"

Yes, you can. That and maybe illegal and unlawful breaking and entering. So basically, these people having time served should be out very soon, time served and I hope some of these people will sue the Federal government for lack of due process and transparency. 

And I never claimed that I did! However, I know what I saw on January 6, and from what I've been reading about all of the Republican-led voter suppression laws and threats to election officials by Trump supporters, I'd say that my grasp of reality far exceeds yours.

Nope, don't think so, once again, if that were true why did Obama win twice, the Squad, yeah....the left can scream about it and we will just small and call it for what it is, crap.

There you go again . . . "but , but, but." I'm for getting rid of all gerrymandering by any party. Can you say the same?

Sure, but neither side will give it up.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

But it's not on Livestream

America is on livestream mate. It's not like the media bubbles you watch aren't available to the rest of the world. We can all see them. Then we also see the other side, and the outside. And we watch those of you who clearly only read your own bubble and talk as if you have authority, and shake our heads at the pathetic ignorance.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

As the left do as well, bluntness right there.

Um yeah. The left in America do only watch their own media bubbles. Both of your teams are pathetic. As I said, looking from the outside, we shake our heads at the sheer degree of willful ignorance in the US. Sad.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Absolutely challenge them. Do not be afraid to expose their fact free claims for the lies they are.

I couldn't agree more.

No he wasn't.

Actually, he was and it was trending his way and then all of a sudden, the counting stopped for a bit and then it started up again, and then for some odd reason more ballots came in and it went late into the night and counting stopped until the next day (that's the msm reporting even though there were staff counting) and the rest just went all over the place after that, then when everything resumed, Biden was ahead miraculously, interesting.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

The questioning of the legitimacy of the results is understandable considering the fact that Trump was projected the winner on election night, and it was only after other ballots were counted over the next few days were the results for Biden tabulated.

And during the election, hundreds of thousands of senior citizens were sequestered from family members in nursing homes and care facilities due to Covid restrictions, lending an air of mystery as to how their votes were actually cast.

And also, mail in balloting was also suspected, due to the widespread animosity of postal workers towards the Trump administration for cutting their budget.

And since Biden took office, the US has surrendered to ransomware attacks, Biden has stopped a US pipeline and halted opposition to a Russian pipeline, when before and during the election he accused Russia of election collusion and meddling, yet after Biden won we were assured that the election was impossible to tamper with.

So, it is understandable to wonder how legitimate the election was.

That is exactly correct and the problem, the real problem about this, you are not allowed to ask the question of irregularities, you are supposed to like with anything that comes from the left whether it deals with the virus, the vaccine, nursing homes, CRT in our schools, transgenders, entitlements, immigration, healthcare, racism, our military, the last election, you can't have an open discussion, the left won't allow it, big tech won't (they're on a clock finally) as well as the MSM, you have to just accept all of it without question and that is now how democracy works.

This is one reason why the left is after Tucker Carlson because they can't silence the guy or shut him down in any capacity or even block or delete anything he puts up and it drives the MSM and the Democrats insane and just forget Tucker for one moment, this is about the absolute right to question election irregularities. Now on the internet or TV, you can be blocked all day, but not in public, not face to face, and more people are speaking and asking questions in the open where the media doesn't have a poison reach to silence them.

All Americans have to right to question anything they feel odd or something they feel that is undermining their political way of life. If you are going to afford the right to liberal pundits to take on and challenge people on the right, then the left needs to reciprocate as well.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

I commented on this earlier in this thread. Obviously, you missed it or just chose to ignore it.

I also made a comment on a PUBLIC FORUM.

And then there comes a time when you have to stop questioning something just because you don't like how things turned out, especially when it results in something like the attack on Washington on January 6.

But Dems didn't heed that same advice 4 years ago, just an hour after Trump was sworn in, the NYT headline read "the Impeachment begins" and for 4 long years it was resistance all the way. So it was basically ok to oppose the former President, but not this one?

Republicans had over 60 court challenges to various election results in states and lost them all, so no, their voices were heard and their arguments were rejected--some by Republican-appointed judges. Many audits were also conducted by GOP election officials in states like Georgia, and no fraud was found. Just the other day, the Michigan GOP put out the following report. You can read it here:

We know what happened, we're not obsessed with this the way the left is, Biden is in, got it and now the GOP are heavily focused on the House and beyond and the Dems....well, their priority is to continue talking about Jan. 6 and good on them, they can talk and talk and talk, that helps the GOP.

https://edition.cnn.com/2021/05/04/politics/democrats-cheri-bustos/index.html

So, it's way past the time to put this nonsense like the Arizona "Fraudit" to rest.

Well, that's the left's position, not the right and the right will continue to talk about it and as I have stated before, social media can block people from inquiring information detailed about the election, but they can't on FNC and FN.

I hope that the free press continues to shine a spotlight on those who are determined to destroy democracy in an attempt at holding on to power at any cost.

And we feel the opposite about the current party that will stop at nothing to make the nation a one-party system, that won't happen

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

it was trending his way and then all of a sudden, the counting stopped for a bit and then it started up again,

Exactly like everyone who knew what they were talking about said it would on video, before it happened. It was easily predictable due to more republicans voting in person, more demoracts voting by mail.

It's so weird being an observer from outside America's media bubble, and seeing a good half of Americans entirely clueless because they never look outside their own media bubble.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

But Dems didn't heed that same advice 4 years ago, just an hour after Trump was sworn in, the NYT headline read "the Impeachment begins"

When did the NYT gain the power to impeach a president?

and for 4 long years it was resistance all the way.

You guys did it to Obama for 8 years, and the Democrats didn't start an insurrection. Sorry, no equal fault this time. Some left wingers made some stupid statements after Trump was elected. Trump and his cronies instigated an insurrection, and hundreds of lawasuits, and continue to perpetuate this fraud of there having been massive election fraud.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The questioning of the legitimacy of the results is understandable considering the fact that Trump was projected the winner on election night, and it was only after other ballots were counted over the next few days were the results for Biden tabulated.

And during the election, hundreds of thousands of senior citizens were sequestered from family members in nursing homes and care facilities due to Covid restrictions, lending an air of mystery as to how their votes were actually cast.

And also, mail in balloting was also suspected, due to the widespread animosity of postal workers towards the Trump administration for cutting their budget.

And since Biden took office, the US has surrendered to ransomware attacks, Biden has stopped a US pipeline and halted opposition to a Russian pipeline, when before and during the election he accused Russia of election collusion and meddling, yet after Biden won we were assured that the election was impossible to tamper with.

So, it is understandable to wonder how legitimate the election was.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

The media's job is to investigate, not "challenge" citizens.

-6 ( +3 / -9 )

Of course we know for sure 100% that the “election deniers” believe a lie, just as those who believed in the lab-leak hypothesis... oh wait!

-7 ( +1 / -8 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites