Another out-of-context video. Tired of the 'Karen' campaign. Without context, it's knee-jerk judgment. Already have people that making bad judgements about others without enough data.

That said...appears there was a man at the edge of the walkway - why didn't she address him? Sounded like he said...

"I'll talk to Cory. He's on the town board."

Doubt that political signage would be a violation (or enforceable) as it treads too close to the 1st amendment.

Have seen ramp walkways and handicapped ramps on homes. Those would look great with a "install your own President resistant walkway today!" sign beside them.

NOTE: don't let 🦜 bob fool you. he sent me a link to him and his band...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZPDiwwSVqg

Sleepy Joe's own words.

Not edited nor out of context.

One side was goaded to be deplorable at a 2/10, one side was just himself at a 9/10 deplorable level.

If you quote Trump, you're bringing up false Trump statements, because 98.6% of what he says is false.

Trump didn't have an iota of self control, he's like a three year old hippie child with ADD and parents that don't believe in discipline, manners, civility, or honesty. He was so out of control the moderators will have a mute button on him the next two debates, so expect Trump to no show. If it's not going to be a circus, there's not a place for a clown like him.

America lost....3 years and <11 months ago.
Nothing was taken out of context at all, liar. He was asked to denounce white supremacy and direct his people to remain calm after the election and not resort to violence, he insisted on a specific group because he won't denounce white supremacy, (not even David Duke or the KKK, who he DOES know well despite his lies to the contrary, he's spent months ranting about a democratic candidate that should have dropped out because Duke said something nice about them a few years back, he certainly knew who David Duke and the KKK were then, but can't denounce either today). He was given a group to denounce, the racist and terroristic proud boys, and he said "stand back and stand by", in no way a denouncement nor a direction to not resort to violence, in fact it was a direction to prepare for violence and is their new slogan. When given another chance the next day to denounce them and call for no violence on his behalf, he failed again. It wasn't a mistake, out of context, and he has never denounced white supremacy by name and has publicly excused and applauded them committing murders and other violent acts more than once. Trump doesn't just support white supremacy, he relies on it as his base. They use his words as their slogans, and he loves it.

Have you denounced your pedophilic actions and remarks? No? Why not? Why won't you agree to stop raping little boys?

That was a disgrace of a debate. Both sides deplorable.
Biden constantly pulling up false trump statements and Trump stopping him every time.

No one won. America lost.
As for racist remarks, again taken out of context and yes Trump has denounce time and time again.

But has Biden denounced his racist remarks?

It took me two seconds to figure out this was fake or at best a total misrepresentation, and under two minutes to find plenty of evidence to that effect.

They only look bad when viewed totally out of context. This was edited to create a false narrative that some random innocent meek individual supporting rational discourse was attacked by a violent gang of anti free speech liberals, which is asinine and a blatant lie. He's a professional racist instigators defending racist ideologies at a racist propaganda center being protested, not free speech but his freedom to espouse racial hatred unopposed and uncontradicted.
I'm sad this bullshit is still getting passed around without explanation three plus years later.

I bet if we saw the five minutes before this conveniently edited video started, no one could question them calling him a Nazi and shouting him away, since he is in fact one, one who actively and publicly works to legitimize Nazism and other racist ideologies...he is a long time professional public aggressor and race baiter.

He has every right to discuss his ideas, the rest of us have every right to vocally disagree. When his ideas are actually supporting racial violence, it's pretty disingenuous to complain when they spark some "verbal violence".

This is nothing,except out of context biased video. Trump way on top of this.

Who would you rather be tackling his? Biden Bernie or Trump?

Also most of the numbers are made up or out of context or wild guesses. The general idea is interesting.

I appreciate your response to my question earlier, @bobknight33.

I don't mean to try to drag you back into the thread here if you're trying to disengage -- I dunno what you mean by #walkaway. Anyway, this doesn't require a response.

I largely agree with you on the specific subtopic of both parties being pretty dirty and frequently engaging in "government theater" just to draw attention to trivialities while promoting their own self interests. I also largely agree with Trump being a "true outsider" in the sense that he holds no particular allegiance to party machinations, etc.

However, even though I was willing to give him a chance after the election, at this point I have zero trust in Trump's intentions. Trumps friends -- the "best people" -- have this interesting trend of becoming his detractors and enemies. Trump wants us to accept the word of people that vouch for him, but days, weeks, or months later they fall out of favor and suddenly he says that they are scum and we shouldn't listen to a word they say.

That's a "cry wolf" or "fool me once" sort of problem. Sessions, the guy you mentioned as protecting Trump from the "witch hunt", has been pretty relentlessly bashed by Trump for the weighty offense of allowing investigators to investigate. Giuliani spouts nonsense, doublespeak and contradictions. Huckabee-Sanders refuses to answer very basic questions from the press (which is her job) not because they misquote her or take things out of context (which would be legitimate gripes) but because she's been bitten in the ass a few too many times by people pointing out blatant contradictions in Trump's statements. And that's just the current people.
There's a large list of short-term Trump appointments that end up out of favor.

What all that stuff says to me is ... "something is rotten in the state of Denmark". Is it possible that there's a vast conspiracy against him in the media, justice department, etc.? Um, well, maybe -- but Occam's Razor tells me that other possibilities are rather more likely. Like, for example, that Trump being a "true outsider" doesn't preclude him from holding the same self-serving motivations that are unfortunately common in slimy career politicians. That he acts shady and dirty because he is shady and dirty.

I dunno. It just seems like it takes a lot of work to keep up with Trump's revolving door of steadfast allies that become traitorous enemies.

The entire thing is bias, not factual, or at best misleading because of intentional omission of fact. I can't say what fact is false if there's no fact. Opinion about perceived/alleged bias isn't factual.
A lie by omission is a lie. The whole thing is that kind of lie.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/feb/05/devin-nunes/nunes-memo-twists-james-comeys-words-steele-dossie/

The "unverified and salacious" (not wrong or debunked, mind you) part was personal accusations, you know, the golden showers with Russian hookers part, which was NOT used to get a warrant. He was clear that was not his opinion about the entire thing.

Yes, as I've told you at least twice now, I read it twice before commenting on it looking for anything in it and found nothing but biased whining. "Steele said bad things about Trump, so he's an untrustworthy liar" is hardly even an honest accusation, much less evidence he lied about anything, and farther from proof that this one piece in the puzzle of evidence against Trump's administration was key. One statement by one person taken out of context and misrepresented is not even an indication, much less proof that this was THE key bit of evidence, without which there was no case, but that's what this is all about. it was likely the most damning bit that tipped the scales from 'could just look bad' to 'this is something that needs investigation today'.
Recall, the continuing investigation already actually found criminal activity PROVEN, ADMITTED, AND CONVICTED.

As I've told you repeatedly, they (democrats , the fbi, and the DoD) tried to block it because 1) they wouldn't let the FBI screen it for secrets/classified information/pure lies and 2) republicans blocked (and continue to block) releasing the full story because it paints a completely different picture from the memo. Don't pretend to be so dumb you don't understand that.

Just keep saying bombshell, that will make it real...Jebus Christ.

I'm sure it is just the tip....of the ass fucking the Republicans are giving our democracy and system of checks and balances. What it's not is the tip of some insane conspiracy iceberg between liberals and top law enforcement.

Get your head out of your ass. No one is ever going after Obama or Clinton, as they committed no crimes, they've both been investigated with pure malice and bias for years and Republicans found nothing, this is just more nothing. It's almost funny you would even consider that, but it's actually sad you are that deluded you could keep thinking such nonsense after so many disappointments.

Really? A pure bias opinion piece from ' the hill' is your evidence? It was factless, logic free garbage that actually referenced Benghazi as one of Obama's prosecutable crimes, I'm dumber for having read it. You should feel shameful.

Clearly you don't recall that Obama's administration had zero convictions for misuse of power, zero indictments, how many has Trump's had already? 5? 6? 10? At least 4 high ranking members have been convicted or plead guilty already before year one or the first investigation is complete. Only Nixon's record was worse, and that only after he left office after Watergate.
Trump has by far the worst criminal conviction record for sitting administrations on record....by FAR!

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/1/11/1619079/-Comparing-Presidential-Administrations-by-Arrests-and-Convictions-A-Warning-for-Trump-Appointees

"Mark Hamill on the latest Star Wars films."

He really isn't speaking specifically about the latest Star Wars films. This is one of many videos of interviews with Mark Hamill in which people try and take things out of context and make it sound like he is trashing the new films. He is not. This video is from 2016 and is posted by an account named "Jar Jar Abrams", if you were looking for any clue as to the intent of this person. I don't know when the interview was initially filmed, but it would be helpful to know when, relative to the release of The Force Awakens.

He is pointing out that Hollywood judges the success of movies only by the money they make, hence Transformers. He notes that companies, such as Disney, buying up other movie companies, should be cause for concern. How will Disney judge success of The Force Awakens? Probably on revenue, since TFA did about $2 billion. Does that make it a success or a good movie? That is actually the point he is making, that pure revenue doesn't judge success. I think his point is more that Star Wars makes a shit-ton of money, Transformers makes a shit-ton of money, but does that make Transformers a better/more successful franchise than Star Wars?

Rotten Tomatoes has most Transformers movies at sub-50%. Are they a failure? The last 2 Star Wars movies are sitting at 90+% on Rotten Tomatoes. Does that mean they are a success? I found TFA to be a fun, nostalgic Star Wars film, but it wasn't The Best Evar. I have seen TLJ twice in the last week. I think it is fantastic, almost as good as Empire, but it still has its problems.

The user review on Rotten Tomatoes for TLJ is 54%. Does this mean the movie is a failure? Or are user reviews just the internet rage machine, concentrated? I am done with aggregated/collected game and movie reviews on the internet. Too much hate, too much agenda-ranting. Nowadays, I have found some game and movie reviewers that seem to see games and movies like I do. I read their reviews and then judge for myself.

Be critical of the things you love.

I feel like we’re not getting the whole story here.

Out of context, it’s hard to know why she said anything about white male privilege (and no, that’s not a racist statement, it’s a sociological fact).

It’s equally hard to see why he got so upset he was disciplined.

It is as if they were trying to warn people about the dangers of interpreting things out of context. The only problem is in real life the Privileged rarely have to deal with consequences.

CNN uses more facts in a day than FOX has total since the days I watched it day in and day out and railed against the commie left, and the dangers of the Demoncrats some 11 years ago (here's a prior version of me on an account I couldn't recover: https://videosift.com/video/Fox-News-takes-Rep-Wexler-from-the-Colbert-Report-out-of-context-I-enjoy-cocaine-because#comment-12957 ... I thought there was another post under that account where I blasted evolution but I don't see it)... had I not opened my eyes and started vetting, I'd probably be right there with you though, so you go and do your thing.

Out of context. Typical leftest methods .

And Chomsky! flies his hypocritical colours at full mast in those comments. So the Spanish anti-fascists/anarchists (that he loves so dearly) were fighting the good fight but Antifa and Redneck Revolt are mere tools of the Neo-Nazis? The first time the US left has displayed some chutzpah in years and he's spouting slander!

Those comments are so woefully off that I wonder if he's just been massively taken out of context or something.