16 Mar 2021, 6:41 pm
funeralxempire wrote:
Daddy63 wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
'Learn to read': GOP’s Madison Cawthorn brutally mocked for claiming bombshell Trump report was 'retracted'
Apparently this dishonest spin isn't just limited to here.
Quote:
The Washington Post recently added a correction to a report that featured a detailed look how former President Trump "urged Georgia's lead elections investigator to identify wrongdoing in the state's vote in a December phone call, saying the official would be praised for doing so."
The report, at the time of its publication, was based on an anonymous source who had been briefed about the call.
A phone recording was later released by Georgia's secretary of state, showing that the Post had misquoted a few of Trump's comments on the call. In particular, Trump never said the phrase "find the fraud."
In a tweet this Monday, Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-NC) jumped on the correction, incorrectly calling it a "retraction."
The report, at the time of its publication, was based on an anonymous source who had been briefed about the call.
A phone recording was later released by Georgia's secretary of state, showing that the Post had misquoted a few of Trump's comments on the call. In particular, Trump never said the phrase "find the fraud."
In a tweet this Monday, Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-NC) jumped on the correction, incorrectly calling it a "retraction."
Apparently this dishonest spin isn't just limited to here.
My dictionary disagrees. Telling someone to commit fraud is a full on accusation of a crime. Now saying it might be obstruction equates to a full withdrawal of the original accusation of a crime.
re·trac·tion
/rəˈtrakSH(ə)n/
noun
1. a withdrawal of an accusation
I see you're going with lie big and never concede strategy.
Nah. If I'm wrong, it's no biggie. Wouldn't be the first time.
Are you saying the dictionary is wrong about what retraction means?
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 30,571
Location: Right over your left shoulder
16 Mar 2021, 6:43 pm
Daddy63 wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Daddy63 wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
'Learn to read': GOP’s Madison Cawthorn brutally mocked for claiming bombshell Trump report was 'retracted'
Apparently this dishonest spin isn't just limited to here.
Quote:
The Washington Post recently added a correction to a report that featured a detailed look how former President Trump "urged Georgia's lead elections investigator to identify wrongdoing in the state's vote in a December phone call, saying the official would be praised for doing so."
The report, at the time of its publication, was based on an anonymous source who had been briefed about the call.
A phone recording was later released by Georgia's secretary of state, showing that the Post had misquoted a few of Trump's comments on the call. In particular, Trump never said the phrase "find the fraud."
In a tweet this Monday, Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-NC) jumped on the correction, incorrectly calling it a "retraction."
The report, at the time of its publication, was based on an anonymous source who had been briefed about the call.
A phone recording was later released by Georgia's secretary of state, showing that the Post had misquoted a few of Trump's comments on the call. In particular, Trump never said the phrase "find the fraud."
In a tweet this Monday, Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-NC) jumped on the correction, incorrectly calling it a "retraction."
Apparently this dishonest spin isn't just limited to here.
My dictionary disagrees. Telling someone to commit fraud is a full on accusation of a crime. Now saying it might be obstruction equates to a full withdrawal of the original accusation of a crime.
re·trac·tion
/rəˈtrakSH(ə)n/
noun
1. a withdrawal of an accusation
I see you're going with lie big and never concede strategy.
Nah. If I'm wrong, it's no biggie. Wouldn't be the first time.
Are you saying the dictionary is wrong about what retraction means?
I'm saying you're not correct in characterizing this as a retraction.
16 Mar 2021, 7:10 pm
16 Mar 2021, 9:25 pm
ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,741
Location: Long Island, New York
17 Mar 2021, 9:01 am
17 Mar 2021, 9:05 am
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 30,571
Location: Right over your left shoulder
17 Mar 2021, 9:07 am
17 Mar 2021, 9:13 am
funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 30,571
Location: Right over your left shoulder
17 Mar 2021, 9:22 am
17 Mar 2021, 9:26 am
ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,741
Location: Long Island, New York
17 Mar 2021, 9:41 am
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
17 Mar 2021, 9:54 am
ASPartOfMe wrote:
I see people here do not understand how these things work.
These announcements that so and so has decided to leave the company based on a joint decision are usually not a joint decision at all but a employer one. The euphemistic language is like all euphemistic language designed to make the bad seem less bad, to spare feelings. These “joint decisions” usually do not fool anybody but they keep on doing it anyway. Why? I don’t know. It is an NT corporate world thing.
My guess is that Mr. Morgan will find employment in America again but where? As a Trump supporter the choices seem obvious but as a rabid gun control supporter he is going to antagonize that potential audience. Plus he has a consistent record of getting his employers in legal trouble. Yet they keep on hiring him so these companies must be deciding that the short term jump in audience due to curiosity is worth the cost.
These announcements that so and so has decided to leave the company based on a joint decision are usually not a joint decision at all but a employer one. The euphemistic language is like all euphemistic language designed to make the bad seem less bad, to spare feelings. These “joint decisions” usually do not fool anybody but they keep on doing it anyway. Why? I don’t know. It is an NT corporate world thing.
My guess is that Mr. Morgan will find employment in America again but where? As a Trump supporter the choices seem obvious but as a rabid gun control supporter he is going to antagonize that potential audience. Plus he has a consistent record of getting his employers in legal trouble. Yet they keep on hiring him so these companies must be deciding that the short term jump in audience due to curiosity is worth the cost.
Are you telling me I didn't see & hear video of him storming off the set and leaving?
Sure looked like someone quitting a job to me.
As for corporate announcements - they try to maintain an air of professionalism, even when someone publicly quits their job like that. Why trash talk him? Especially in the USA where everyone sues everyone over nothing. What would be the point of his former employer hopping on the airwaves and saying "F that guy, he quit," especially if they don't want to alienate his audience that helps their network pay their bills. It's a business decision to make some kind of neutral statement while navigating a minefield of public opinion.
I'd say we have a better understanding of how these things work than you think we do.
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.funeralxempire
Veteran
Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 40
Gender: Non-binary
Posts: 30,571
Location: Right over your left shoulder
17 Mar 2021, 9:56 am
Both of them have a long history of being quite terrible. Good riddance to Piers and to Sharon. 
ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 36,741
Location: Long Island, New York
17 Mar 2021, 2:05 pm
goldfish21 wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
I see people here do not understand how these things work.
These announcements that so and so has decided to leave the company based on a joint decision are usually not a joint decision at all but a employer one. The euphemistic language is like all euphemistic language designed to make the bad seem less bad, to spare feelings. These “joint decisions” usually do not fool anybody but they keep on doing it anyway. Why? I don’t know. It is an NT corporate world thing.
My guess is that Mr. Morgan will find employment in America again but where? As a Trump supporter the choices seem obvious but as a rabid gun control supporter he is going to antagonize that potential audience. Plus he has a consistent record of getting his employers in legal trouble. Yet they keep on hiring him so these companies must be deciding that the short term jump in audience due to curiosity is worth the cost.
These announcements that so and so has decided to leave the company based on a joint decision are usually not a joint decision at all but a employer one. The euphemistic language is like all euphemistic language designed to make the bad seem less bad, to spare feelings. These “joint decisions” usually do not fool anybody but they keep on doing it anyway. Why? I don’t know. It is an NT corporate world thing.
My guess is that Mr. Morgan will find employment in America again but where? As a Trump supporter the choices seem obvious but as a rabid gun control supporter he is going to antagonize that potential audience. Plus he has a consistent record of getting his employers in legal trouble. Yet they keep on hiring him so these companies must be deciding that the short term jump in audience due to curiosity is worth the cost.
Are you telling me I didn't see & hear video of him storming off the set and leaving?
Sure looked like someone quitting a job to me.
As for corporate announcements - they try to maintain an air of professionalism, even when someone publicly quits their job like that. Why trash talk him? Especially in the USA where everyone sues everyone over nothing. What would be the point of his former employer hopping on the airwaves and saying "F that guy, he quit," especially if they don't want to alienate his audience that helps their network pay their bills. It's a business decision to make some kind of neutral statement while navigating a minefield of public opinion.
I'd say we have a better understanding of how these things work than you think we do.
They alienated his audience by firing him, no neutral or professional euphemistic “explanation” is going to fool his fans or gain an audience from his enemies. The only way they might keep some of his audience is hire a clone that knows what line not to step over. Or the could go the other way apologize, hire a progressive, fire all the people that hired him, bring in an outside organization to purge the organization of systematic racism and attract a new audience. But neh, they will probably hire a Piers light satisfy no one, and hope not offend enough people to do real damage. That is probably enough. I image most of those that watched him are primarily a “Good Morning Britain” audience not Piers Morgan audience.
People come the set obviously inebriated/stoned, sometimes they storm off. Some celebs “retire” enough times it becomes a joke. If a company wanted to keep the person in the old times they would say the person was in the hospital for “exhaustion”. Now the celeb often announces they are in rehab please respect my privacy, the
‘s come in on social media, a nice sympathy audience is gained for their “comeback”.
17 Mar 2021, 2:12 pm
goldfish21
Veteran
Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 22,612
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada
17 Mar 2021, 3:21 pm
ASPartOfMe wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
ASPartOfMe wrote:
I see people here do not understand how these things work.
These announcements that so and so has decided to leave the company based on a joint decision are usually not a joint decision at all but a employer one. The euphemistic language is like all euphemistic language designed to make the bad seem less bad, to spare feelings. These “joint decisions” usually do not fool anybody but they keep on doing it anyway. Why? I don’t know. It is an NT corporate world thing.
My guess is that Mr. Morgan will find employment in America again but where? As a Trump supporter the choices seem obvious but as a rabid gun control supporter he is going to antagonize that potential audience. Plus he has a consistent record of getting his employers in legal trouble. Yet they keep on hiring him so these companies must be deciding that the short term jump in audience due to curiosity is worth the cost.
These announcements that so and so has decided to leave the company based on a joint decision are usually not a joint decision at all but a employer one. The euphemistic language is like all euphemistic language designed to make the bad seem less bad, to spare feelings. These “joint decisions” usually do not fool anybody but they keep on doing it anyway. Why? I don’t know. It is an NT corporate world thing.
My guess is that Mr. Morgan will find employment in America again but where? As a Trump supporter the choices seem obvious but as a rabid gun control supporter he is going to antagonize that potential audience. Plus he has a consistent record of getting his employers in legal trouble. Yet they keep on hiring him so these companies must be deciding that the short term jump in audience due to curiosity is worth the cost.
Are you telling me I didn't see & hear video of him storming off the set and leaving?
Sure looked like someone quitting a job to me.
As for corporate announcements - they try to maintain an air of professionalism, even when someone publicly quits their job like that. Why trash talk him? Especially in the USA where everyone sues everyone over nothing. What would be the point of his former employer hopping on the airwaves and saying "F that guy, he quit," especially if they don't want to alienate his audience that helps their network pay their bills. It's a business decision to make some kind of neutral statement while navigating a minefield of public opinion.
I'd say we have a better understanding of how these things work than you think we do.
They alienated his audience by firing him, no neutral or professional euphemistic “explanation” is going to fool his fans or gain an audience from his enemies. The only way they might keep some of his audience is hire a clone that knows what line not to step over. Or the could go the other way apologize, hire a progressive, fire all the people that hired him, bring in an outside organization to purge the organization of systematic racism and attract a new audience. But neh, they will probably hire a Piers light satisfy no one, and hope not offend enough people to do real damage. That is probably enough. I image most of those that watched him are primarily a “Good Morning Britain” audience not Piers Morgan audience.
People come the set obviously inebriated/stoned, sometimes they storm off. Some celebs “retire” enough times it becomes a joke. If a company wanted to keep the person in the old times they would say the person was in the hospital for “exhaustion”. Now the celeb often announces they are in rehab please respect my privacy, the
‘s come in on social media, a nice sympathy audience is gained for their “comeback”.Times change. Why so resistant to purging the airwaves of racists & 'phobes?
_________________
No
for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.
