Katie Britt, terrible person

[VakAttack]

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/11/katie-britt-state-of-the-union-00146221

Truly unbelievable.

*said in breathy theatrical whisper*

[Wrestleknownothing]

17 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/11/katie-britt-state-of-the-union-00146221

Truly unbelievable.

*said in breathy theatrical whisper*

She really is an awful person

[Husker_Du]

what's worse - a politician spinning something to use as a PR prop

or

that fact that sex trafficking across the border happens and happens in volume? 

i don't see you guys start threads or participate in the existing ones about the latter. 

 

[Wrestleknownothing]

7 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

what's worse - a politician spinning something to use as a PR prop

or

that fact that sex trafficking across the border happens and happens in volume? 

i don't see you guys start threads or participate in the existing ones about the latter. 

 

For me the answer is I do not read all the threads, here or elsewhere. I pick and choose. I picked this one because I saw Katie Britt's performance the other night and it struck me as overly dramatic, like she was acting. I even commented to that effect.

To then find out she lied was not a surprise. My reaction is she cares more about sex trafficing in the US as a calculated political device to gain power, than as a human evil. If she truly cared about the problem she would not make up lies about it, because when the lies are exposed it detracts from efforts to solve the problem. Always does.

Edit: that Vak started the thread matters, too. I find him to be a reliable narrator with interesting thoughts. There are many unreliable narrators on this part of the board. I generally avoid their threads, but not always, as you can see from recent posts.

Edited March 12 by Wrestleknownothing

[Le duke]

what's worse - a politician spinning something to use as a PR prop
or
that fact that sex trafficking across the border happens and happens in volume? 
i don't see you guys start threads or participate in the existing ones about the latter. 
 

She used a fabricated story about sex trafficking in an attempt to damage another person.

As opposed to using that story to inform good, sound bipartisan policy that could actually get signed into law and, you know, help actual victims of sex trafficking.

That’s about as shitty as it gets.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ionel]

11 hours ago, VakAttack said:

https://www.politico.com/news/2024/03/11/katie-britt-state-of-the-union-00146221

Truly unbelievable.

*said in breathy theatrical whisper*

From the article:

"the woman whose story Sen. Katie Britt appeared to have shared in the Republican response to the State of the Union last week,"

"Britt defended her use of the graphic story and declined to clearly state that the incident in question had not occurred during the Biden administration."

So they don't really know if the article is true.  And she declined it had not occurred ...  A nice double negative but also doesn't tell us how she "declined" if she wasn't asked is that a decline, if she couldn't remember is that a decline?

Where does Britt disclose who this person is?  What they put in quotes says Britt went down there and she claims Biden's policy is a disgrace.  Both those things can be true and don't have to be directly link.  The "journalist" could've done some research and let us know when these alleged events occurred but didn't.  Given that, it makes it look like a hit piece not good journalism.  

 

[Paul158]

10 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

what's worse - a politician spinning something to use as a PR prop

or

that fact that sex trafficking across the border happens and happens in volume? 

i don't see you guys start threads or participate in the existing ones about the latter. 

 

The last sentence,  and we never will. 

[VakAttack]

3 minutes ago, ionel said:

From the article:

"the woman whose story Sen. Katie Britt appeared to have shared in the Republican response to the State of the Union last week,"

"Britt defended her use of the graphic story and declined to clearly state that the incident in question had not occurred during the Biden administration."

So they don't really know if the article is true.  And she declined it had not occurred ...  A nice double negative but also doesn't tell us how she "declined" if she wasn't asked is that a decline, if she couldn't remember is that a decline?

Where does Britt disclose who this person is?  What they put in quotes says Britt went down there and she claims Biden's policy is a disgrace.  Both those things can be true and don't have to be directly link.  The "journalist" could've done some research and let us know when these alleged events occurred but didn't.  Given that, it makes it look like a hit piece not good journalism.  

 

LOL.  The victim of the crime used by Britt is literally quoted in the story.  Also she didn't "declined it had not occurred" she "declined to state it had not occurred."  That's not a double negative.

Here's ANOTHER story confirming the identity.

https://nypost.com/2024/03/11/us-news/karla-jacinto-romero-rips-katie-britt-over-stou-rebuttal/

Quote

Karla Jacinto Romero, who Britt’s (R-Ala.) communications director confirmed was the victim the senator referenced in her speech

 

[VakAttack]

10 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

what's worse - a politician spinning something to use as a PR prop

or

that fact that sex trafficking across the border happens and happens in volume? 

i don't see you guys start threads or participate in the existing ones about the latter. 

 

This presumes we can only talk or care about one of these things.

Sex trafficking is bad, nobody is arguing that.  The reason that I don't tend to engage in most of those threads is because we all agree on the main point, but people on the conservative side of the aisle act as if Democrats are pro-sex trafficking, whereas people on the progressive side of the aisle believe people on the conservative side of the aisle don't ACTUALLY care and are just trying to score political points.  Also people on the conservative side of the aisle like to act like sex trafficking only happens during Democrat presidencies, and thus is caused by Democrats.

Let me state it clearly: sex trafficking is bad.  I don't think one party is to blame for it.  I don't think it's happening in nearly the numbers you do.

[ionel]

14 minutes ago, ionel said:

From the article:

"the woman whose story Sen. Katie Britt appeared to have shared in the Republican response to the State of the Union last week,"

"Britt defended her use of the graphic story and declined to clearly state that the incident in question had not occurred during the Biden administration."

So they don't really know if the article is true.  And she declined it had not occurred ...  A nice double negative but also doesn't tell us how she "declined" if she wasn't asked is that a decline, if she couldn't remember is that a decline?

Where does Britt disclose who this person is?  What they put in quotes says Britt went down there and she claims Biden's policy is a disgrace.  Both those things can be true and don't have to be directly link.  The "journalist" could've done some research and let us know when these alleged events occurred but didn't.  Given that, it makes it look like a hit piece not good journalism.  

 

Like I said, could've done better research and put the facts together.  Victims family doesn't like what Biden did.  Thread title could've been: Joe Biden, terrible person.

But you didn't go with that. 

[Le duke]

Like I said, could've done better research and put the facts together.  Victims family doesn't like what Biden did.  Thread title could've been: Joe Biden, terrible person.
But you didn't go with that. 

Where is there a quote from the victim or the victim’s family in either of the links posted about Biden or his actions?

It’s not “put the facts together”, it’s “not fabricate a story”. Multiple administrations have come and gone since the events in question took place. The events in question happened in a different country.

What’s next? Did Joe Biden shoot Archduke Franz Ferdinand?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ionel]

16 minutes ago, Le duke said:

Where is there a quote from the victim or the victim’s family in either of the links posted about Biden or his actions?
 

Did anyone say there was?

[VakAttack]

1 hour ago, ionel said:

Like I said, could've done better research and put the facts together.  Victims family doesn't like what Biden did.  Thread title could've been: Joe Biden, terrible person.

But you didn't go with that. 

...what are you talking about, the whole point of this thread is that Joe Biden has nothing to do with the situation, despite Katie Britt's attempts to insinuate otherwise.  If you want to start a thread where you claim Joe Biden is a terrible person, feel free, it would be one of many.  A refreshing change of pace from the last several months where he was senile.

[headshuck]

It’s a little harsh of a title don’t you think? You’ve researched her lifetime body of work to reach your conclusion?

[ionel]

22 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

...what are you talking about, the whole point of this thread is that Joe Biden has nothing to do with the situation, despite Katie Britt's attempts to insinuate otherwise.  If you want to start a thread where you claim Joe Biden is a terrible person, feel free, it would be one of many.  A refreshing change of pace from the last several months where he was senile.

No thanks, I'm not into gotcha titles and making such claims about someone I don't really know.  I do disagree with some of his policies but that's another story.  

[Husker_Du]

6 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

 

Edit: that Vak started the thread matters, too. I find him to be a reliable narrator with interesting thoughts. There are many unreliable narrators on this part of the board. I generally avoid their threads, but not always, as you can see from recent posts.

it seems to me you generally avoid the truth

[mspart]

This is a game many can play.   George Stephanopolous, while interviewing Nancy Mace, said repeatedly that Trump was held liable for rape.   He was not.   I guess he must be a terrible person as well.  

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/found-liable-attack-trump-claims-e-jean-carroll-made-false-accusations-rcna142637

In May, a jury did not find Trump liable for the alleged rape but awarded Carroll $5 million after finding the former president liable for sexually abusing and defaming her.

The jury deliberated and did not find Trump liable for rape, period.   But that didn't stop George and ABC News from repeatedly stating this as the case.   Yes, this happens on all sides and is no longer surprising.  A news organization should be able to get it right but they didn't want to obviously.   So George S is a terrible person. 

mspart

[Offthemat]

Such a terrible person.  Makes me wonder at what age she stops showering with her son. 

[Le duke]

Such a terrible person.  Makes me wonder at what age she stops showering with her son. 

She’s from Alabama, so, he’ll likely father at least one kid with her.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Wrestleknownothing]

32 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

it seems to me you generally avoid the truth

Since you generally think the truth is what you want to believe, I am ok with avoiding your truth.

[BigRedFan]

13 hours ago, Husker_Du said:

what's worse - a politician spinning something to use as a PR prop

or

that fact that sex trafficking across the border happens and happens in volume? 

i don't see you guys start threads or participate in the existing ones about the latter. 

 

What did you do that causes these non-wrestling topics to show on my home page, and how do I get them to stop?

Some upgrade/update you did...

[mspart]

Probably the one where BobDole's dead face all of the sudden appeared on every post. 

mspart

[Husker_Du]

39 minutes ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Since you generally think the truth is what you want to believe, I am ok with avoiding your truth.

where did i suggest that (that the truth is what i want to believe)?

i listen/read/consider everything.

you admitted you avoid information and perspectives, which isn't very conducive to being educated or aware.

but stay in your silo if it makes you more comfortable. 

[Wrestleknownothing]

6 minutes ago, Husker_Du said:

where did i suggest that (that the truth is what i want to believe)?

i listen/read/consider everything.

you admitted you avoid information and perspectives, which isn't very conducive to being educated or aware.

but stay in your silo if it makes you more comfortable. 

What you heard is I avoid information and perspectives, what I said was I avoid unreliable narrators.

Their perspective is not conducive to being educated. And the only way I know they are unreliable is to read and evaluate them first. When I realize who they are, I stop wasting my time on them.

[Paul158]

2 hours ago, headshuck said:

It’s a little harsh of a title don’t you think? You’ve researched her lifetime body of work to reach your conclusion?

No, they didn't . Democrats really, really, really, hate accomplished, intelligent, strong conservative women.