Whembly's list of bad faith, hyprocrisy, fallacy usage, etc
Sept 20, 2018 21:34:08 GMT -5
bobtheinquisitor and scootypuffjunior like this
Post by Emblematic Wolfblade on Sept 20, 2018 21:34:08 GMT -5
So, long title but to continue from the other thread, this is all the stuff gathered (so far) together in case anyone ever wants to point to specific examples where whem has not argued in good faith, has employed fallacies, or whatever:
From most recent thread before politics were banned on Dakka again, and here:
Of course there's a DOJ inspector doing it, it's one, the only way to put this shit rest, and two, Trump trying to score points with his base despite the fact nothing will be found.
And yeah, if you're not against the kidnapping of kids as something to be totally horrified by, you are definitely starting down the path of cancer, which you have long since taken.
As for Benghazi, there were several reports which basically came back and said "multiple failures at several levels, but not enough to blame anyone person as the primary cause." But hey, someone pointed that out before and it hasn't stopped you from using it as partisan hackery. Also extra info to clear up your misconceptions.
As for Al Franken, that's far from actual sexual assault unlike say, Kavanaugh who's accuser just had their therapist release notes from 2012. And I know you didn't vote for Trump, but damn, the way you defend him I wonder if he let you suck his dick. Or vice versa.
But his emails!
As the "plenty of criticism for both sides" sure, except Democrats aren't locking kids up, abusing them physically and mentally, or letting them die.
As for the rest, wading through ~300 pages of dakka will take a bit, and you know that, which is why you're denying what you did fairly often when you got backed into a corner.
Page 9 on the last dakka thread:
Baron posted a link initially on page 2, I went back and found it and reposted it in response when he mentioned posting it. I mention this because it'll come up later IIRC when you ask about the same issue as if you had not already been linked it.
Then literally right below that you post an article you didn't read. You wrote
and this link thehill.com/homenews/senate/393069-schumer-rejects-gop-proposal-to-address-border-crisis In which the following quote was found
(INB4 "THAT'S SCHUMER" iirc, it was later resolved by trump's pen, exactly as stated)
I also then proceeded to point out that Guy Benson is a terrible source, working with Fox News, and Andrew Breitbart.
You then claimed the republicans needed 60 votes to pass a bill, when they only need a majority. You only need 60 to end a fillibuster, of which there was not one currently going on, nor would there be for a bill with bipartisan support.
Here you attempted to misrepresent the situation putting the blame on democrats for not ending trump's policy, misconstruing the outrage (which was from both Dems and Reps), and claiming it was a previous policy through some of the posts before.
That's just the first 15 pages of the 193. I'll do more later, but all of that points to not arguing in good faith, especially when you ignore me pointing out your source is incredibly biased and worthless.
Page 18, whataboutism and you didn't even read the article.
Page 19, Goal post moving, false equivalency
Page 20, lordofhats goes into some depth about your "both sides are equally bad" stuff
Page 21 LordOfHats again talking about your "both sides are equally bad" fallacy.
Also Page 21 Mario points out your attempt at claiming hypocrisy is wrong (as do several others, I just think their post is the best, on top of the fact not serving Sarah Sanders is different than refusing to serve gay/black/white/straight people)Page 28 No true scotsman fallacy. Further on the page you go into claims about how the Gabby shooter was not politically motivated because there was no evidence that he was inspired by the Sarah PAC map, and as if that's the only possible political motivator.
Page 38 More "both sides are equally bad" over the course of the page.
Page 44 As I said, this is where Baron's link to the ACLU case comes in. Here, after you said you'd read it, and having discussed this exact same thing, you bring it back up.
Page 45 "Republicans are totally powerless because they're not filibuster proof"
That's up to page 55.Page 63 here you showcase your hyporcrisy on the SCOTUS and election year bullshit.
Page 76 "Collusion isn't a crime," Strzok's hearing embarrassed himself instead of the other way around (go rewatch it Whem, Strzok made them look like fools), And, as Sebster made a great metaphor about the now confirmed Russian hacking: "Sure, they beat the guard in to unconsciousness, cracked open the vault, and fled, but unless you can prove their was money in there before bowingmy clients opened it, what crime did they commit?"
Page 79 He misrepresents what was actually quoted from "Mitch McConnell torpedoed a bipartisan effort to condemn the Russians" into "Republicans were mean to Obama, so he didn't do anything? What a joke!"
Page 82 Where Whem says judges shouldn't push political agendas... which is why he supports Kavanaugh who was handpicked by the Heritage Foundation to advance their agenda (Cue the rolling of eyes)
Page 83 "both sides are equally bad" again
Page 85 "Obama bad, ignore what evils the GOP and NRA committed."
Page 87 Start of the disproved claim about toddler prisons under Obama. Also the start of "we need voter IDs!" bullshit
Page 92 Return of the toddler prison defense. But remember, Whem cares.
Page 93 Please refer to 87, as whem has his own words come back to bite him.
Page 93 Also Conveniently forgets we've covered the ground of people who have not committed a crime being separated from their kids. See the page 9 link (at the top), page 18 link, page 19 link, the Page 44 link, page 87 link, and the other page 93 link. Impressively forgetful.
Page 95 Defense of the toddler prisons yet again by saying they're not at all like what the nazis did, which is mostly true, the administration and prisons are just supported by actual nazis.
Page 102 Start of "The Steele Dossier is unverified and is primary cause of the Mueller investigation!" Despite all the confirmed parts of the dossier by separate sources, and the thing bit we knew at the time about the Aussie ambassador tipping off the FBI. Will be referenced later as someone explains all this to him.
Page 102 Also Whembly links a ~410 page document that no one will read as his "proof"
Page 102 Also, Also Whembly ignores facts of that the DNC reported their funding of the Steele Dossier as required after they picked it up when a conservative group (who's name escapes me) stopped paying for it. But that doesn't matter, regardless of who paid for it, it has contained tons of confirmed intelligence.
Page 117 Hypocrisy/double standard.
Page 120 More incorrect info on the Dossier.
Page 120 Also Another "both are equally bad" comparing Steele with Russians (aka a national of an allied country who has not attacked the US in any form, versus a country that actively undermined the US election system). Also ignores the fact the Steele Dossier was originally funded by a conservative group, and thus it's bad that the democrats did it.
Page 121 More Dossier stuff
Page 121 Also Original post, followed by Asherian Command explaining what laws trump broke.
Page 125 More "but her emails!/Benghazi"
Page 127 More voter ID stuff despite the previous discussion about how it unfairly targets minorities and low income households.
Page 131 Attempt to give trump credit for "avoiding war" with NK... despite the fact trump is the reason tensions were ratcheted up in the first place. Not a fallacy per say, but a dishonest claim.
Page 134 Whembly starts in on the Iranian deal without reading his sources, expects everyone else to read them all in case one proves his claims, and doesn't post a quote from ONE of them. Here is the response where someone actually reads some of them and points out whem is wrong, and he ignores it.
Page 137 Whem reads the headline, ignores the actual article.
Page 138 Flat out lies about trump voters (for reference, trump has maintained an 80-90% republican voter approval rating)
Page 138 Also Equating Alex Jones and someone who most people probably have not heard of or recognize as equally bad.
Page 140 Ignoring the given reason by trump and co Comey was fired for.
Page 140 also further sports team mentality on the attempt to impeach Rosenstein
Page 160 Start of the "IRS was weaponized to attack conservative groups!" lie that has been disproven. A break down here by Vakathi
Page 161 return of "liberals made us elect trump!"
Page 164 "forgets" the previous discussion of how clearance works and why it's not immediately revoked upon leaving an organization.
Page 164 Also Misrepresents tweets from Brennan
Page 170 Return of the dossier party line being illegally funded/totally baseless and unproven/start of the investigation. He then takes it PMs, and his source is an outdated analysis, and at the time he started the PMs, it was 6 months, and roughly 3 weeks out of date, along with the entire FISA warrant... all 412 pages.
Page 176 "But her emails!"
That covers up to page 193 so far of the last thread, and you'll notice some differences in the quotes in this thread vs the original quotes posted in this forum because I'm too lazy too currently go and remake the list for right now, however changes are the previous "here" link goes directly to the post in question, and I expanded on the page 19 (no, catch and release is not equivalent to open borders). So far responses have ranged from him accusing me of political hackery, to just a "difference in opinion."
Will start the previous thread eventually.
Its ironic that whembly is okay with the investigation, considering if the FBI did an investigation of HRC and her email servers and then decided not to talk to HRC or investigate the server (since kavanaugh and ford were not questioned) he would be throwing an absolute shit fit that would match kavanaugh's senate hearing.The FBI doesn't do criminal investigation (subpena/grand jury) in this scenario. They only take statements.
Because Kavanaugh defended himself and the rest of the GOP recognized for what it was... a partisan Democrat ploy to Bork Kavanaugh.But you sold me a sob story about how it was destroying his life reputation! So in the end it didn't?
What about the rest of the population, those don't count?
Well I guess I was right when I wrote “If you surround yourself with terrible people that won't care, you won't be affected. See Polanski.”
Right now, there's a DOJ inspector general going over this and will make recommendations... *thats* the process I want to see.
Say, yeah... I don't see the double standard.In one case you want to see the case investigated over and over again. In the other case you are fine with a very quick and superficial investigation.
In one case you jump to the conclusion that Clinton is guilty, in the other one you really really care about “innocent until proven guilty”.
But you don't see the double standard.
The politician who was never found guilty in her long career is the most corrupt, the one who was is less corrupt. But no double standard.
You never see double standard, it's quite practical!
I see you've already convicted him based on a standard that wouldn't even pass a civil lawsuit (not to mention a criminal case).
Here we see the double standard/hypocrisy of the HRC investigations vs the Kavanaugh investigation.
Bill #’s?Smorgasbord:
www.congress.gov/search?q=%7B%22source%22%3A%5B%22legislation%22%2C%22house-communications%22%5D%2C%22bill-status%22%3A%22passed-one%22%7D
www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20180321/NEWS/180329984
www.speaker.gov/general/top-10-bipartisan-jobs-bills-blocked-senate-democrats
www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-immigration-plan-20180215-story.html
www.voanews.com/a/senate-blocks-20-week-abortion-bill/4230730.html
Again, Dusa goes through each of the links and points out what they actually are in response to whem's lie about dems filibustering, and also proving whem does not read what he posts.
Here We see whem strawmanning excessive use of force into "you want want open borders!" (And also supporting the way Israel treats their borders, namely gunning civilians down)
From most recent thread before politics were banned on Dakka again, and here:
Of course there's a DOJ inspector doing it, it's one, the only way to put this shit rest, and two, Trump trying to score points with his base despite the fact nothing will be found.
And yeah, if you're not against the kidnapping of kids as something to be totally horrified by, you are definitely starting down the path of cancer, which you have long since taken.
As for Benghazi, there were several reports which basically came back and said "multiple failures at several levels, but not enough to blame anyone person as the primary cause." But hey, someone pointed that out before and it hasn't stopped you from using it as partisan hackery. Also extra info to clear up your misconceptions.
As for Al Franken, that's far from actual sexual assault unlike say, Kavanaugh who's accuser just had their therapist release notes from 2012. And I know you didn't vote for Trump, but damn, the way you defend him I wonder if he let you suck his dick. Or vice versa.
But his emails!
As the "plenty of criticism for both sides" sure, except Democrats aren't locking kids up, abusing them physically and mentally, or letting them die.
As for the rest, wading through ~300 pages of dakka will take a bit, and you know that, which is why you're denying what you did fairly often when you got backed into a corner.
Baron posted a link initially on page 2, I went back and found it and reposted it in response when he mentioned posting it. I mention this because it'll come up later IIRC when you ask about the same issue as if you had not already been linked it.
Then literally right below that you post an article you didn't read. You wrote
So... to those who keep saying that the GOP has unbridled power to pass whatever they need to "fix" the issues of the day?
Democrats need to play ball too:
Democrats need to play ball too:
Again, the president can change it with his pen,” he said, warning that Republicans would likely try to add poison-pill provisions to any immigration bill that came to the floor.
“Unacceptable additions have bogged down every piece of legislation we’ve done,” he said.
“Unacceptable additions have bogged down every piece of legislation we’ve done,” he said.
I also then proceeded to point out that Guy Benson is a terrible source, working with Fox News, and Andrew Breitbart.
You then claimed the republicans needed 60 votes to pass a bill, when they only need a majority. You only need 60 to end a fillibuster, of which there was not one currently going on, nor would there be for a bill with bipartisan support.
Here you attempted to misrepresent the situation putting the blame on democrats for not ending trump's policy, misconstruing the outrage (which was from both Dems and Reps), and claiming it was a previous policy through some of the posts before.
That's just the first 15 pages of the 193. I'll do more later, but all of that points to not arguing in good faith, especially when you ignore me pointing out your source is incredibly biased and worthless.
Page 18, whataboutism and you didn't even read the article.
Page 19, Goal post moving, false equivalency
Page 20, lordofhats goes into some depth about your "both sides are equally bad" stuff
Page 21 LordOfHats again talking about your "both sides are equally bad" fallacy.
Also Page 21 Mario points out your attempt at claiming hypocrisy is wrong (as do several others, I just think their post is the best, on top of the fact not serving Sarah Sanders is different than refusing to serve gay/black/white/straight people)
Page 38 More "both sides are equally bad" over the course of the page.
Page 44 As I said, this is where Baron's link to the ACLU case comes in. Here, after you said you'd read it, and having discussed this exact same thing, you bring it back up.
Page 45 "Republicans are totally powerless because they're not filibuster proof"
That's up to page 55.
Page 76 "Collusion isn't a crime," Strzok's hearing embarrassed himself instead of the other way around (go rewatch it Whem, Strzok made them look like fools), And, as Sebster made a great metaphor about the now confirmed Russian hacking: "Sure, they beat the guard in to unconsciousness, cracked open the vault, and fled, but unless you can prove their was money in there before bowingmy clients opened it, what crime did they commit?"
Page 79 He misrepresents what was actually quoted from "Mitch McConnell torpedoed a bipartisan effort to condemn the Russians" into "Republicans were mean to Obama, so he didn't do anything? What a joke!"
Page 82 Where Whem says judges shouldn't push political agendas... which is why he supports Kavanaugh who was handpicked by the Heritage Foundation to advance their agenda (Cue the rolling of eyes)
Page 83 "both sides are equally bad" again
Page 85 "Obama bad, ignore what evils the GOP and NRA committed."
Page 87 Start of the disproved claim about toddler prisons under Obama. Also the start of "we need voter IDs!" bullshit
Page 92 Return of the toddler prison defense. But remember, Whem cares.
Page 93 Please refer to 87, as whem has his own words come back to bite him.
Page 93 Also Conveniently forgets we've covered the ground of people who have not committed a crime being separated from their kids. See the page 9 link (at the top), page 18 link, page 19 link, the Page 44 link, page 87 link, and the other page 93 link. Impressively forgetful.
Page 95 Defense of the toddler prisons yet again by saying they're not at all like what the nazis did, which is mostly true, the administration and prisons are just supported by actual nazis.
Page 102 Start of "The Steele Dossier is unverified and is primary cause of the Mueller investigation!" Despite all the confirmed parts of the dossier by separate sources, and the thing bit we knew at the time about the Aussie ambassador tipping off the FBI. Will be referenced later as someone explains all this to him.
Page 102 Also Whembly links a ~410 page document that no one will read as his "proof"
Page 102 Also, Also Whembly ignores facts of that the DNC reported their funding of the Steele Dossier as required after they picked it up when a conservative group (who's name escapes me) stopped paying for it. But that doesn't matter, regardless of who paid for it, it has contained tons of confirmed intelligence.
Page 117 Hypocrisy/double standard.
Page 120 More incorrect info on the Dossier.
Page 120 Also Another "both are equally bad" comparing Steele with Russians (aka a national of an allied country who has not attacked the US in any form, versus a country that actively undermined the US election system). Also ignores the fact the Steele Dossier was originally funded by a conservative group, and thus it's bad that the democrats did it.
Page 121 More Dossier stuff
Page 121 Also Original post, followed by Asherian Command explaining what laws trump broke.
Page 125 More "but her emails!/Benghazi"
Page 127 More voter ID stuff despite the previous discussion about how it unfairly targets minorities and low income households.
Page 131 Attempt to give trump credit for "avoiding war" with NK... despite the fact trump is the reason tensions were ratcheted up in the first place. Not a fallacy per say, but a dishonest claim.
Page 134 Whembly starts in on the Iranian deal without reading his sources, expects everyone else to read them all in case one proves his claims, and doesn't post a quote from ONE of them. Here is the response where someone actually reads some of them and points out whem is wrong, and he ignores it.
Page 137 Whem reads the headline, ignores the actual article.
Page 138 Flat out lies about trump voters (for reference, trump has maintained an 80-90% republican voter approval rating)
Page 138 Also Equating Alex Jones and someone who most people probably have not heard of or recognize as equally bad.
Page 140 Ignoring the given reason by trump and co Comey was fired for.
Page 140 also further sports team mentality on the attempt to impeach Rosenstein
Page 160 Start of the "IRS was weaponized to attack conservative groups!" lie that has been disproven. A break down here by Vakathi
Page 161 return of "liberals made us elect trump!"
Page 164 "forgets" the previous discussion of how clearance works and why it's not immediately revoked upon leaving an organization.
Page 164 Also Misrepresents tweets from Brennan
Page 170 Return of the dossier party line being illegally funded/totally baseless and unproven/start of the investigation. He then takes it PMs, and his source is an outdated analysis, and at the time he started the PMs, it was 6 months, and roughly 3 weeks out of date, along with the entire FISA warrant... all 412 pages.
Page 176 "But her emails!"
That covers up to page 193 so far of the last thread, and you'll notice some differences in the quotes in this thread vs the original quotes posted in this forum because I'm too lazy too currently go and remake the list for right now, however changes are the previous "here" link goes directly to the post in question, and I expanded on the page 19 (no, catch and release is not equivalent to open borders). So far responses have ranged from him accusing me of political hackery, to just a "difference in opinion."
Will start the previous thread eventually.
What about the rest of the population, those don't count?
Well I guess I was right when I wrote “If you surround yourself with terrible people that won't care, you won't be affected. See Polanski.”
Say, yeah... I don't see the double standard.
In one case you jump to the conclusion that Clinton is guilty, in the other one you really really care about “innocent until proven guilty”.
But you don't see the double standard.
The politician who was never found guilty in her long career is the most corrupt, the one who was is less corrupt. But no double standard.
You never see double standard, it's quite practical!
*cough* Hillary *cough*
Here we see the double standard/hypocrisy of the HRC investigations vs the Kavanaugh investigation.
www.congress.gov/search?q=%7B%22source%22%3A%5B%22legislation%22%2C%22house-communications%22%5D%2C%22bill-status%22%3A%22passed-one%22%7D
www.modernhealthcare.com/article/20180321/NEWS/180329984
www.speaker.gov/general/top-10-bipartisan-jobs-bills-blocked-senate-democrats
www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/politics/ct-trump-immigration-plan-20180215-story.html
www.voanews.com/a/senate-blocks-20-week-abortion-bill/4230730.html
Again, Dusa goes through each of the links and points out what they actually are in response to whem's lie about dems filibustering, and also proving whem does not read what he posts.
Here We see whem strawmanning excessive use of force into "you want want open borders!" (And also supporting the way Israel treats their borders, namely gunning civilians down)
