The Right Side of the News

His BS is spreading as usual with no fact checking. I've seen it on two other right wing sites.

quote:

---

After initial reports identified Patrick Crusius as the alleged gunman behind the the El Paso Walmart massacre that left 22 people dead and more wounded, Jim Hoft, founder of the right-wing conspiracy website The Gateway Pundit, presented an inaccurate picture of Crusius to his readers.

​

Selectively plucking information from the reputation management website MyLife, which can be edited anonymously by anyone, Hoft (pictured above) set about reporting that the gunman was really a Democrat, and that Leftists on the web were editing the gunman’s MyLife profile in real time. Here’s his headline from Saturday:

​

​

An archived version of The Gateway Pundit’s article on Saturday.
But Hoft’s post left out crucial information. For one thing, it asserted that the gunman’s original profile on MyLife said he was a registered Democrat.

​

However, earlier archived versions of the profile do not list any party affiliation. Here’s the first version of the profile saved on the Internet Archive on Saturday.

​

An archived version of MyLife profile for the gunman on Saturday.
A few minutes later, as the shooting became national news and after edits were made to the gunman’s page, the MyLife profile said the gunman was currently a registered Democrat Party; ethnicity is Antifa; and religious views are listed as Antifa.

​

A later archived version of MyLife profile for the gunman on Saturday.
Someone had apparently edited the page to identify the gunman as a Democrat only after he was identified as the gunman.

​

Hoft cited yet another edited version of the MyLife profile, which identified the gunman as a Democrat and his religion as Christian, as the original version of the page.

​

The Gateway Pundit referred to this edited version of the MyLife page as the gunman’s original profile at 2:46.
Within minutes, Hoft reported, the profile had been changed to identify the gunman as a Republican. Leftists changed it, Hoft claimed.

​

The Gateway Pundit used this, yet another edited version of the gunman’s MyLife page, to assert that leftists changed his political affiliation.
The conspiracy website, which was given temporary White House press credentials early in the Trump administration, did stumble upon an obvious truth about MyLife: It’s easily edited and thus not a reliable source of biographical information. And yet, for whatever reason, Hoft assumed he had witnessed to a left-wing conspiracy.

​

Only later, as the MyLife page was edited over and over again, did Hoft add an update albeit with more unproven claims.

​

UPDATE The MyLife page was created AFTER the El Paso shooting. Democrats then jumped in and changed it to make it look like he was a Republican.

​

In addition to it being unclear who edited the page and for what reason, it’s also unclear whether the profile itself was first created before or after the shooting. What is confirmed by archived versions of the page is that, initially on Saturday, it did not contain information about the gunman’s party affiliation or religious beliefs.

​

That material only appeared after Crusius’ name was connected to the massacre in El Paso when his digital footprint was a battleground of misinformation.

---

Lots more screen shots at the link.How A Conspiracy Site Spread MisInformation About The El Paso ShooterEdited by JonF, : No reason given.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.

Not sure what this has to do with the 2000 Michigan primary. That is the primary that was meaningless.Absolutely nothing you posted here has anything to with my post. Just your typical random gobbledygook.

LaRouche received .7% of the total votes in all primaries that year. So how was he ripped off?

quote:

---

Not sure what this has to do with the 2000 Michigan primary. That is the primary that was meaningless.
Absolutely nothing you posted here has anything to with my post. Just your typical random gobbledygook.

---

It has to do with Democrats being used to getting away with stealing their own votes, and preventing people from voting or being counted.It is a party tradition.

quote:

---

LaRouche received .7% of the total votes in all primaries that year. So how was he ripped off?

---

His Arkansas delegates were ripped off.The media blackout.The fact that the Democratic party kept him off of some of the state ballots, like Georgia and Florida.(He got 1.91% in 2000, and 5.9% in 1996. Clinton got about 89% in 1996.)2000 Democratic Party presidential primaries - WikipediaLaRouche would have done better had there not been the dishonest reporting, which ignored everything LaRouche - to the point that they lied about candidates relative standing in the "fundraising race".He got more support than Bill Bradley at the March 25 Democratic Caucus in Wyoming. 7.28% verses 4.98%. Yet the media blackout was in full force. Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

As a convicted felon it seems like he could not be U.S. President anyway, so how indeed was he ripped off?

So a non-sequitor

[tweet=1158548808323780608A]

From Evangelical Warren Throckmorton Patheos Evangelical Blogger Says El Paso and Dayton Shootings Appear to be False Flag Operations (UPDATED) – Warren Throckmorton

quote:

---

Patheos blog Hedgerow written by Bethany Blankley yesterday called the massacres at Dayton and El Paso false flags. She wrote:

​

quote:

---

Unfortunately the tragic events of shootings in El Paso or Dayton increasingly occurring in America appear to be False Flag events perpetrated by conspirators to get rid of the Second Amendment. Once you’re familiar with the pattern, you’re able to identify them.

---

​

...

​

Once upon a time in 2017, Blankley posted a headline asking if black football players who don’t acknowledge the national anthem should be shot. A few of us complained and the headline was changed. However, the post is still up and this subheadline remains:

​

Should NFL players who don’t acknowledge the National Anthem be shot? One Dallas Baptist pastor says they would be anywhere else but in America

---

{emphasis in original}

Is the pattern "a shooting occurred"?

Done here. All you are doing is a gish gallop. Throwing random crap out in order to pretend you have won the debate. You have moved the goal posts and changed your argument numerous times. You have posted so many strawman arguments it is impossible to even count them all. I am not even sure what your actual argument is.
Seemingly you think LaRouche would have been the Democratic candidate for President at some point. This is laughable on its face. There is no evidence of more than even a modicum of support for LaRouche as President. He was a felon and a nutball. He was a racist and an anti-Semite. He marketed himself as an amazing economist, but facts show he was wrong on almost all his predictions on the economy.It seems you are a member of the cult. Good for you.
But like every time I get into a debate with you go total gish gallop and post random incoherent bs and gobbledygook. Like times before. I am done.
Good day, Sir.

Juanita Jean (the world's most dangerous beauty salon) has the perfect reply."We have those. They're called prisons."

quote:

---

Done here. All you are doing is a gish gallop. Throwing random crap out in order to pretend you have won the debate. You have moved the goal posts and changed your argument numerous times. You have posted so many strawman arguments it is impossible to even count them all. I am not even sure what your actual argument is.

​

Seemingly you think LaRouche would have been the Democratic candidate for President at some point. This is laughable on its face. There is no evidence of more than even a modicum of support for LaRouche as President. He was a felon and a nutball. He was a racist and an anti-Semite. He marketed himself as an amazing economist, but facts show he was wrong on almost all his predictions on the economy.

​

It seems you are a member of the cult. Good for you.

​

But like every time I get into a debate with you go total gish gallop and post random incoherent bs and gobbledygook. Like times before. I am done.

---

Talk about a "gish gallup"!"It seems you are a member of the cult" takes the cake.I can't even remember your initial issue.Wasn't it about delegates?

quote:

---

Seemingly you think LaRouche would have been the Democratic candidate for President at some point.

---

When did I say that?You make up so much crap, that it is unreal.I almost did not quote anything, because I did not know where to start.

This post is a question to Theodoric. It has nothing to do with my views (infact very little of what I have said about the Democratic party process - involving LaRouche - is about my own views on political positions).Theodoric said:

quote:

---

He was a racist and an anti-Semite.

---

Aside from anti-Semitic stuff,when did he make racist comments against anybody?Like during the time he ran for President (1976-2004)Please show evidence and have evidence from each decade, not some random b.s. (like LaRouche, while a guest on a radio program, laughing at a caller's "monkey" joke about Obama in 2010)As for the anti-Semitic stuff, here was a New York Times review (of the Dennis King book) from:George Johnson, an editor of The Week in Review of The New York Times, is the author of ''Architects of Fear: Conspiracy Theories and Paranoia in American Politics.''

quote:

---

ARCHIVES | 1989
A MENANCE OR JUST A CRANK?
By GEORGE JOHNSONJUNE 18, 1989

​

LYNDON LaROUCHE AND THE NEW AMERICAN FASCISM By Dennis King. Illustrated. 415 pp. New York: Doubleday. $19.95.

​

It is probably safe to assume that Lyndon Hermyle LaRouche Jr. is the only person who has ever campaigned for President with a platform that included his own version of quantum theory. The currently accepted view, you see, was foisted upon the world by that archconspirator Werner Heisenberg, whose notorious uncertainty principle - a cornerstone of modern physics - was an evil ploy to demoralize the world with the notion that at the roots of reality everything happens at random.

​

Or so it appears to the hyperactive band of pseudo-intellectuals that forms the inner sanctum of Mr. LaRouche's political machine. To the orderly mind of the conspiracy theorist there is no such thing as randomness. Every coincidence, every accident is meaningful. History is a war between good and evil in which everything unfolds according to plan.

​

....

​

As Mr. King would have it, Mr. LaRouche is the leader of an organized fascist assault on the United States, a neo-Nazi whose philosophy has swung inexplicably from left to right. He even goes so far as to suggest that Mr. LaRouche's kookiness is intentional, a means of disarming his critics.

​

It is clear that the LaRouche conspiracy theory is designed to appeal to anti-Semitic right-wingers as well as to Black Muslims and nuclear engineers. But in trying to see Mr. LaRouche as a would-be Fuhrer, Mr. King may be trying to tie together the whole unruly package with too neat a ribbon. A number of loose ends hang out, not least of which is the fact that many members of Mr. LaRouche's inner circle are Jewish.

​

This is the best book that is likely to be written about this strange man and his movement. But I didn't come away convinced, as I was supposed to be, that Mr. LaRouche is dangerous. Lyndon LaRouche is less important as a threat to our political system than as a case study in the pathology of political paranoia. Of course, Mr. King might argue that that is exactly what Lyndon LaRouche would have me believe.

​

A MENANCE OR JUST A CRANK? - The New York Times

---

So, do you care to offer any actual substance, Theodoric.You are high on false accusations (which were based around issues that were NOT the topic anyway), so do you care to offer anything useful on these issues you choose to throw out?Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

And the gallop continues.I apologize for being part of the problem that has led this thread astray. Those that know my style know that I will not stand aside and let historical revisionism go unchallenged.If anyone is following this conversation I will end my participation with a couple links to the many racist and anti-Semitic comments and positions of Larouche.

quote:

---

We will present the grotesque spectacle of individuals and sections of the pop music business competing in racialist serf-identification, tribal genealogy, and racist psychosis--the psychological truth of the whole affair being perhaps best summarized in the racist and anti-Semitic adage of the old South, 'Jews are only Niggers turned inside out.'"

---

Account Suspended
Account SuspendedLaRouche on Obama - background of racist rantI understand Lamark will dismiss all of this and probably not even read the information provided. All of the above links use original source material. As a matter of fact they have links to the original source material.Prior to this discussion I knew very little about LaRouche. I understood he was a manipulative conspiracy theorist that was a perennial candidate for President. My research to counter the revisionism presented took me down many rabbit holes. My research further supports the conclusion that he was a racist and an anti-Semite. After reading the evidence presented in the links above I think reasonable minds will agree.If anyone has reasoned arguments and evidence to challenge my conclusions please start a new thread. As LamarkNewAge will just continue to move goal posts, present strawmen and gishgallop(from his last post I am not sure he understands the term), I will not be responding to him on this subject again. I will continue to respond to any new historical revisionism he attempts to present.