CNN's "Town Hall" Meeting Deteriorates Into Infantile, One-sided Event

That town hall meeting was an abomination and showcased everything wrong with American society. How can CNN and the left think showcasing pure unidolatred hatred can be seen as proper discourse. It was pure malice aimed at fellow Americans. Might as well just put them on the gallows and ask if they had any last words for daring to defend a constitutional right
Yeah, fuck that unidolatred hatred.
 
I just read through for the first time and he seems about as uneducated and uninformed as you are

Hey, look! It's another substanceless insult from a liberal. This is how you rebuttal folks!

Translation
I don't like what CNN reports because I don't agree with it and my dear leader said they were fake news. I also don't believe that kids can think for themselves because I get told what to think from all my tribal right wing news sites.

Hey, look! It's another liberal ignoring the jeering, child-like disrespect, and hostile insults of other like-minded "lost souls" and pretending as though it is acceptable discourse.

Translation...

I believe the kid when he is saying bad things about CNN but when kid challenges NRA spokesperson kid is clearly a plant.

Hey, look! It's another liberal drawing a false equivalency by claiming that a heroic young student who respectfully called out CNN for trying to control his discourse for a "town hall meeting" is comparable to both children and adults who jeered, disrespected, and insulted a person who has different ideas than they do in an effort to silence that person.

Boy, I only wish I could be so educated and informed...
 
Last edited:
"The whole Russia thing" (whatever that happens to be). Yesterday it was Trump "collusion" with the Russians, and today is it just Russian meddling in the election or are we still on about Trump being the billionaire double-agent that became president? Accusations that severe definitely require evidence. If anything is "bad," it is deciding someone is guilty of a serious crime, and should be impeached, without having any evidence.
Yes, accusations require evidence to be taken seriously. Where is this kid's evidence? Let's start there, shall we?
 
Yes, accusations require evidence to be taken seriously. Where is this kid's evidence? Let's start there, shall we?

He didn't accuse them of a crime, and it's not a court of law, but I absolutely agree that I would like to see either Colton Haab or CNN release the e-mail thread where the discussion started.

My gut certainly isn't telling me that this kid is just making it up for attention though.
 
I don't think democrats actually want to ban guns because they keep obfuscating the issue with the "assault rifle" thing. They're trying to make people believe that it's possible to buy an automatic military-grade rifle. But it's not, what they call assault rifles are semi-automatic rifles with an "assault" appearance, yet the hardware is the same as a hunting rifle. Yet they never talk about banning all rifles. And handguns, who are also semi-automatic, are only marginally less deadly than rifles. Basically they want to give the appearance that they want to do something significant to reduce gun violence, without actually doing anything. They seem to control the media pretty well because the conversation always revolves around this moot point, every shooting.

<seedat>
 
I don't think democrats actually want to ban guns because they keep obfuscating the issue with the "assault rifle" thing. They're trying to make people believe that it's possible to buy an automatic military-grade rifle. But it's not, what they call assault rifles are semi-automatic rifles with an "assault" appearance, yet the hardware is the same as a hunting rifle. Yet they never talk about banning all rifles. And handguns, who are also semi-automatic, are only marginally less deadly than rifles. Basically they want to give the appearance that they want to do something significant to reduce gun violence, without actually doing anything. They seem to control the media pretty well because the conversation always revolves around this moot point, every shooting.

<seedat>

They are taking a phased approach to getting guns out of people's hands. They are just starting with the bump stock and semi-automatic weapons. They will move on to something else after they are successful with that. It's a slippery slope.
 
Or, CNN can provide the "proof" that his claims are false by releasing the e-mails. Both sides should have access.

Or, I don't know, maybe Tucker Carlson could have asked the kid to provide the evidence before he had him on his show. Pretty basic reporting, don't you think?
 
It's a shitty thing to straight up call a child shooting survivor a liar. Leftists have no moral compass, you're showing yourself to be lowly. Like this town hall showcases the left. And remember cnn has done this before

And what about the right-wingers saying that those survivors are actors flown in to boost the liberal agenda?

Where was your outrage then?
 
Or, I don't know, maybe Tucker Carlson could have asked the kid to provide the evidence before he had him on his show. Pretty basic reporting, don't you think?

CNN is known to do some "reporting" too.
 
Last edited:
CNN is known to do some "reporting" too.

You didn't answer my question and are deflecting. Shouldn't Tucker Carlson and Fox News have asked for the proof of this kid's claims before giving him time on the network?
 
You didn't answer my question and are deflecting. Shouldn't Tucker Carlson and Fox News have asked for the proof of this kid's claims before giving him time on the network?

Would have loved to have seen them do that. There is also nothing really stopping CNN from producing it either.
 
Or, I don't know, maybe Tucker Carlson could have asked the kid to provide the evidence before he had him on his show. Pretty basic reporting, don't you think?

What evidence would the kid have? Do you think they gave him an official document telling him his question was not considered appropriate for the town hall meeting?

This shit is all organized. I don't understand why some find it so unbelievable that questions...ALL questions were screened by CNN, and some were declined. You don't think they just got a bunch of angry high schoolers together, and let them go all out, or that the people asking the questions were picked at random, do you?
 
What evidence would the kid have? Do you think they gave him an official document telling him his question was not considered appropriate for the town hall meeting?

This shit is all organized. I don't understand why some find it so unbelievable that questions...ALL questions were screened by CNN, and some were declined. You don't think they just got a bunch of angry high schoolers together, and let them go all out, or that the people asking the questions were picked at random, do you?

1. He stated in the clip that there was an exchange of e-mails between himself and CNN.
2. CNN outright denied in their tweet that they ever screen and edit anyone's questions.
 
Didn't CNN also deny that hillary was given debate questions beforehand?
 
1. He stated in the clip that there was an exchange of e-mails between himself and CNN.

Well, in fairness, he should probably have brought the e-mails, if they showed anything. That actually could be a FOX News thing, where he told them that, and they turned it into something nefarious. The e-mails could've just been regular bullshit.

2. CNN outright denied in their tweet that they ever screen and edit anyone's questions.

Yeah, they're full of shit. They not only screen the questions, they screen the people asking them, and pick and choose. It's pretty basic protocol for something like this, even without an agenda. You don't want anyone going rogue, and shouting a bunch of crazy shit on Live TV. They still take their chances with the people they choose, but they certainly try to control it as much as possible.
 
Well, in fairness, he should probably have brought the e-mails, if they showed anything. That actually could be a FOX News thing, where he told them that, and they turned it into something nefarious. The e-mails could've just been regular bullshit.

It seems that he did bring them and attempted to read them in the clip.

You don't want anyone going rogue, and shouting a bunch of crazy shit on Live TV.

Or, maybe that is exactly what they wanted because that is what they got in their "town hall meeting."
 
Last edited:
Yes, I was being sarcastic. Try to read a little bit harder into my full statement. Technically, everyone who works at CNN is a stranger to me as well. The question is who has more credibility at this point, not who is the "stranger."

No, that's not the question. I know pretty well, because I asked it.

The question wasn't "which stranger do you trust more?" it was "do you take strangers at their word?". I just can't seem to figure out why you're afraid to answer it....
 
Back
Top