Warren put into words how i feel about Morgan better than i could have. Like, it's entertaining to watch, but it makes you feel a little dirty for enjoying it, just like jerry springer. Perfect comparison.
Hegseth did not write the comment about "Sex with Unconscious Women", he was the publisher of The Princeton Tory magazine when a guy named John Andrews wrote it
Wow. Just wow. He didn’t even write it? So then every publisher should be vilified the same way if their journalists etc write something like this. The hypocrisy and double standards are getting out of hand. 🙄😑
Could you be more specific about _your_ claim? No need to reproduce the quote, but at least cite the date of the magazine, or volume of journal in which the article appeared.
People don't answer questions because they know if they - answer honestly, it will destroy them among the general audience because their opinions are so terrible, or - answer dishonestly, it will destroy their support among their clan because that group cannot tolerate any dissent.
ikr: throw a claim of unfairness to the woman panelist, and see if that sticks and gets him out of the corner. He's also trying to prevail by talking over everybody louder, longer, and faster.
She went from saying " he said if you have sex with a passed out woman it is not really rape" to " women who are unconsciuos deserve to be raped" in the blink of an eye.
@@patrickkolodziejczyk7217 The other direction on that is true as well. Distort it, then as you repeat it you drop the distortions so that what you're saying is true but has the stink of the lie baked in. This one is often used when paraphrasing what someone else said or claimed, like a preemptive motte and bailey.
@@revwpitt2347 Kamala Harris told about a woman “bleeding out” in a parking lot. (I’m not the person to ask for the precision of that claim.) Before you know it, however, AOC claims, on the floor of Congress, that “women are bleeding out in parking lots all over America.”
Why is it that whenever I write a comment or a response to a comment, no matter how factually correct, that criticizes a liberal or Democrat political figure, even when I’m quoting that person exactly, the comment gets censored - excuse me: taken down - by the open-minded, freedom-of-expression apparatchiks at RUclips? My deleted reply to this comment is a case in point.
Those sentences mean the same thing. Sex with an unconcious person is, definitionally, rape. So if Pete really said the first quote, he would (hypothetically) be advocating for the second.
TheAdventureFamily commented: "Pete Hegseth should sue that women. He has not "written that himself". The article was written by someone else at a time he was a publisher for the paper but the current publisher has even gone so far as to say it's not currently even a role of the publisher to determine content that role is for the editor in chief. That their publishers focus on advertising and distribution." Which explains why she's the only one to bring that up. I'd be surprised if she doesn't get sued for that
It can't happen. It would have to be proven that she knew the information to be false and that she said it with the intention to damage him in some way. It's a high bar that only the professional press, who know better, can manage to get over.
You can only sue for slander if you can prove damage and the statement was said deceptively on purpose. Some idiot on Piers yapping isn’t worth the bother.
@@PuddilyOopsyes it is worth to bother. It has to stop spewing lies without consequences. If more get sued, it will stop. Now everyone can talk lies and we don't bother.
Thanks for this. Didn't find the original quote, but if Snopes got it right, this is the bit they found. > [A] bemusing yet mandatory orientation program, revolved entirely around whether an instance of sexual intercourse constituted "rape." The actual instance portrayed in the skit was in fact not a clear case of rape - at least not in my home state. (In short, though intercourse was not consented to, there was no duress because the girl drank herself into unconsciousness. Both criteria must be satisfied for rape. Unfortunately, the panelists never cited any legal definition of rape.) Yet the panel - all females in the session I attended - claimed that rape it was. Which a) was NOT WRITTEN by Hegseth and b) makes a DIFFERENT claim than what this stupid bint is trying to imply. Stating that a law defines criteria for a particular crime is not an admission of support/opposition to that particular law. "You may think you hate the media, but you don't hate those lying sacks of shit enough" - Internet
Spot on! A lot of people said the world was flat. There can be exception to this though. After a lot of people watch this video, as can be affirmed in the comment section a lot of people think this guy is an idiot. They aren't wrong.
Would they have said that, and would the press gleefully have gone along with it, if the computer had belonged to Donald Trump, Jr.? Somehow, I doubt it.
The person saying that those tattoos are extreme is the same person with a little Palestinian flag saying "from the river to the sea..." isn't antisemitic.
don't conflate those two things. They are entirely separate. Palestinian's being genocided in real time has nothing to do with Christian tattoo's. Also, broken clock syndrome is a real thing.
@@charleshill1906 you missed the point entirely, they are not comparing the 2 things but rather the mindset of people in what they call extreme and what they say is acceptable.
If this dude knew how many people in the military had a Deus Vult tattoos....ooo boy...I don't have any but I've been sooo tempted to get that more than once.
Literally one of the first things they criticized him for and gave as a reason he wasn't right for the job was that he went to the 9/11 memorial in his underwear..... He was in a bathing suit because he was part of a charity swim with Navy Seals.... They swam to some park in Manhattan and then did a run carrying flags to the memorial to honor the people who served after that as well as to raise money for homeless Veterans.
A real American would be proud to be called radical; America is radical - the very essence of America is radical. I hope for the return to the radical America that the Founding Fathers intended.
"You haven't let the woman on this panel speak" has to be one of the funniest, most self-owning things he could say. He's clearly dodging a simple question, because he knows what it'll mean when he answers. So he throws "I support strong womyns!!!!" in front of the bus bearing down on him.
Not sure what his name is, but this guy arguing against Knowles is so dishonest it’s not even funny. He always has such a smug, arrogant attitude, while repeating propaganda. He even told Piers he’d eat a crow because of how confident he was that Kamala would win, and guess what? He didn’t do it. He opted for “liver” instead. No principles, no values, just wants to win.
Pete Hegseth should sue that women. He has not "written that himself". The article was written by someone else at a time he was a publisher for the paper but the current publisher has even gone so far as to say it's not currently even a role of the publisher to determine content that role is for the editor in chief. That their publishers focus on advertising and distribution.
And it's so easy to disarm too with just a tad of humility: "I don't know, I was more interested in the book. Maybe that particular thing isn't as bad as I thought, but I still have legitimate arguments
I'm a registered Democrat that voted red in this past election. That being said; there's one tattoo in particular that Pete has that caught my attention and has me on his side and always will, the one on his shoulder. "Ne Desit Virtus" from the 187th Infantry. I'm also a Rakkasan. That man is my brother, even moreso that the one I grew up with.
Warren, I love your videos! I taught college for eight years and you're one of the best teachers I've ever encountered. I wish I had teacher like you when I was a teenager. "Oh, Captain, My Captain!" BTW, I'm 70 years old now.
Yes, you are his second-most targetted audience. Young manlings without cognitive plurality are his primary focus. Sitting ducks, the young and the old eh?
the part where he traded blows on the crusades was hilarious. people realy seem to disregard the fact that all of Europe would be islamic if it weren't for the crusades
and if it werent for vlad de tepes, who you only know of as Dracula, because the muslim smear campaign worked really well. Look it up. He was hailed as a saviour of christianity by the pope but is known today as Dracula and an allround bad man, a soullles vampire even.....why on earth is that...why are we letting the chopper-heads of people people decide that we are the bad ones...and whewre are the evidence that some people suggest, that the jews are behind it when all evidence point to the people who the best at manipulation and denying wrong doing aka the ones who have manipulated us that 1. the crucades where 100% wrong and christians where being evil and 2. that Vlad de tepes was so evil to inspire a soulless vampire when all of these historical events were all for the good of christianity. Lok im an atheist even...but heck..i know i wouldnt be if europe had been conquered by islam back then..so...yeah..im also starting to i donno..believe in some ways, simply cause i see all the evils of islam...it seems like the devil in hiding, the best manipulator.i also find it curious that islam came about around the 7th century..a century which started with the letter 6.
Although it must be said 'there are legion Jerry Springer's in politics these days. In fact: Springerism is the norm in all 'contentious' debate. Or maybe I should say that all debate is seen as contentious today.. ^_^
The Jerry Springer show had an interesting side effect, aptly named the Jerry Springer effect. It works like this. You turn on the Jerry Springer show, you watch dysfunctional people scream and fight with each other, then you return to your ordinary everyday life and feel better about yourself because you aren't like those extreme people on TV. It turns out, you can illicit this same effect with a host, four panelists, controversial topics, and a slight audio delay.
Pete Hegseth was the publisher of the Princeton Tory Magazine, he allowed the article to be published in the magazine. The article was written by another student by the name of John Andrews. The article, written in September 2002, was trying to say silence gives consent. Since she is unconscious consent is implied. I would strongly disagree with that, but people are entitled to have opinions no matter how outrageous they may be.
The depth with which these - for the greater good folk - will go to destroy one’s reputation when threatened is off the charts. Slander right there - a civil trial is what this woman needs. Who thinks she’s made a sport of such slander and vilification throughout her entire life, whilst turning a blind eye to true evil ? Where does this stop ?
All he had to say was ”I have no idea what his tattoo is and it’s immaterial to my argument”. But everyone saw through his horrible poker face and trying to weasel out of it immediately ends his credibility and hence his argument
If she doesn't know where Hedgeseth said it was OK to have sex with unconscious women, she'd better find out. She's going to need that info when he sends lawyers her way, suing for defamation. Lawsuits are the answer to lawfare.
This is a good example of why I couldn’t in good conscience align myself with today’s left. Everyone is so dishonest & manipulative; & they seem to have no problem being that way at all. She knows he didn’t say/ write that about woman, she knows she’s twisting the truth, but she doesn’t care.. he knows he is ignorant in regards to the man’s tattoos- he knows that “everyone says it” isn’t proof of anything- but he repeats the lies anyway. The same way they all perpetuated the false narrative about Trumps “bloodbath” comment, or the “fine people” hoax… I not to long ago watched a news clip with a pundit that was trying very hard to paint a bad picture about someone she was talking about,& drive it home that he was this awful guy- she kept repeating “he’s got ties to a known supremacist”… the cohost kept trying to clarify that the so called “ties” were just - he was a young unknown journalist trying to get an article or something published, he sent it out to many people, someone did publish it- who himself was rather unknown at the time.. YEARSSS later the person who published it made some racist comments or became known as being a supremacist (or something) . That’s it. She knew that was all it was.. yet she kept repeating “he’s got ties to a known supremacist” anyway- because she didn’t care about the facts, she only cared about creating some links that would cause the viewers to perceive him a certain way, & once you have that perception locked- then I guess anything they say becomes invalid🤷🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️ And I’m not saying that no one on the right side of the aisle never does this either, but it seems to me to be far more prevalent on the left. I don’t know how it took me so long to see it..
Is anyone besides me old enough to remember when Willam F. Buckley would ask a question and give his guest time to answer in full paragraphs before asking another question?
I don’t remember that but I find it infuriating when people speak over each other in a ‘discussion’. I want to know the truth and shouting over each other isn’t getting anywhere.
Little different than this, Piers asked a question, gave him time to answer, it was obvious he was full of it and was just repeating ridiculous points without even knowing the most basic things of what he'd talking about, hence why the other guy was able to explain, because he actually knew about it.
@@KaoticReach1999Sorry to disagree, but it was much different. Check out an old episode of “Firing Line.” You’ll seldom if ever find two, sometimes three or four, people talking over one another to the point where you can’t keep track of what anyone is saying. (I agree with you, however, in that that guy next to the woman was full of it. As was the woman, apparently.)
You are spot on! They just repeat stories they heard and upon a closer examination, they crumble! I’m so glad you are doing this analysis, thank you so much! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
The nagging frustration in so many debates is this snug sophistry that is applied. Not to have a meeting of minds, not to come to an agreed resolve, not with a humble mind concentrated on learning the full truth, but simply to one up others.
First, citation needed on the last point in the video? She needs to provide hard details on that kind of accusation. Second, at the end she changes her comment, first indicating that he said "that's not really r@pe" then she said he thinks "they deserve to be r@ped". It's an incremental escalation of character assassination.
So thankful that I found this channel. About time we found a reasonable and logical mind to delve into politics. I think this giys from Massachusetts my home state he should be my governor. Us new englanders use to be stereotyped as logical and reasonable people but now it's insane what we have become.
Warren, I’m truly loving your channel!! Love how you articulate what’s happening for those of us not college educated/versed in logic and reason lingo/diagrams. Your calm demeanor, even when frustrated, is a pleasure!
@ how else would you call that generation. Please enlighten me. You know? The generation that mostly believes everything they are fed through mainstream media?,
You're analyzing the rhetoric, of which the logic is a part of. When the MSM lies about someone this thoroughly, we know they're threatened by him. When the MSM is threatened and cowering - im happy
From the UK , I subscribed after you appeared on Pierce Morgan . Now am constantly talking with my wife after we watched your Jordan peterson sit down about if you were our daughters teacher. You are simply the best of us, stay humble dude, as a poorly 44 Yr old dad you give me faith and hope
Per YahooNews!: "In short, Hegseth did publish such a column while he held the role of publisher of The Princeton Tory magazine. To be clear, he did not write it himself. The column was written in the September 2002 issue by another student, John Andrews." Also, the article was discussing the legal definition not the social or moral implications.
Warren Smith I love your channel. It's not partisan. It's based on logic. Logic has no motives. It follows rules of reason. People dont always follow rules of reason. My general observations are that many young minds have been burdoned by a failure of schools to teach these neccessary and fundamental principles. They have been taught to cherry pick bits of information rather than looking at the whole and create a different narrative to support their ideas. But with no foundation these ideas are doomed to failure and open to scrutiny that will topple their house of cards.
“Too extreme for the military” I think has to do with his Christianity or Christian values vs., as you said, “the low standard’s of the military.” Great video sir!👏🏼😎🇺🇸
Imagine my surprise at them being wrong about the article as well. If I could be bothered I'd research his role "as the publisher" as well. Publisher for a school magazine 23 years ago. "Hegseth did publish such a column while he held the role of publisher of The Princeton Tory magazine. To be clear, he did not write it himself. The column was written in the September 2002 issue by another student, John Andrews."
If he did say that about passed out women, was he joking? Context matters. Having an offbeat sense of humor shouldn’t disqualify anybody from literally anything. They’re only words, people. Lighten up.
He didn't say it. John Andrews wrote an article that was making a legal argument about the aspects of the law for rape requiring duress and that someone passed out drunk is not suffering duress at the time. That kind of stuff is common in legal discussions, like the different between sedition and insurrection. Hegseth may or may not have approved the article being published in the college paper. He didn't write it.
It's not his white heritage, it's his Christian beliefs. He has served alongside black, white, Hispanic, Asian, men & women. Jews, Christian, Muslims, sihk & Buddhist...he simply wants competence & excellence at every level of the military.
Oh yes, I stand corrected. The Jerusalem Cross represents fighting along with black, white, hispanic, asian, men and women, jews, christians, muslims, sikh and buddhist against a giant windmill
I eo not understand the point. Why is the tatto so important? The guy tries to say what his reasons for believing what he believes are. Why wouod he need to know what the tattoo represents if his opinion is not based on the tattoo?
A muslim advocating for a woman to speak so that he can avoid answering a question is beautifully ironic 😂
And of course, he thinks a cross is "too extreme"
Above all surrounding the subject of Crusade symbols LOL
cowardly ironic.
You nailed it, my friend! Ironic indeed!
Wait until you find out about their Mutta marriages…hahahaha
Islam is the biggest trust me bro ideology in existence.
"The Jerry Springer of politics." Spot on.
Warren put into words how i feel about Morgan better than i could have. Like, it's entertaining to watch, but it makes you feel a little dirty for enjoying it, just like jerry springer. Perfect comparison.
Absolutely perfect
yeah it was fun when he said it, because I was like, this screaming and yelling over each other reminds me of something.
When he's gonna have the black KKK "Weeman-like" member on? Who identities as Shaq?
Very good observation
Hegseth did not write the comment about "Sex with Unconscious Women", he was the publisher of The Princeton Tory magazine when a guy named John Andrews wrote it
Epic. Nice catch bro
Wow. Just wow. He didn’t even write it? So then every publisher should be vilified the same way if their journalists etc write something like this. The hypocrisy and double standards are getting out of hand. 🙄😑
Thank you.
Could you be more specific about _your_ claim? No need to reproduce the quote, but at least cite the date of the magazine, or volume of journal in which the article appeared.
@@mon_avis2978 so. he gave the name of the rag. go look it up for yourself. snark.
Propagandists hate to answer questions because it outs them as propagandists without even calling them propagandists.
People don't answer questions because they know if they
- answer honestly, it will destroy them among the general audience because their opinions are so terrible, or
- answer dishonestly, it will destroy their support among their clan because that group cannot tolerate any dissent.
You'd think they'd be honest that they're trying to slander someone, as that's clearly what they're doing and that's all they ever do 😅
"A woman hasn't spoken yet!" Had my sides splitting ahhhhh that's crazy! Just be honest why is it so hard for these people.
Because they are pathological. Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
Me too lol. I was all "nice try" 🤣
Because they are charlatans. Faux intellectuals.
ikr: throw a claim of unfairness to the woman panelist, and see if that sticks and gets him out of the corner. He's also trying to prevail by talking over everybody louder, longer, and faster.
Cause if they're honest they're usually wrong.
That smug smile when Michael says “that is pathetic” was hilariously delivered.
She went from saying " he said if you have sex with a passed out woman it is not really rape" to " women who are unconsciuos deserve to be raped" in the blink of an eye.
Repeated Amplified Distorted
It's how most of news is today.
@@patrickkolodziejczyk7217 The other direction on that is true as well. Distort it, then as you repeat it you drop the distortions so that what you're saying is true but has the stink of the lie baked in. This one is often used when paraphrasing what someone else said or claimed, like a preemptive motte and bailey.
@@revwpitt2347 Kamala Harris told about a woman “bleeding out” in a parking lot. (I’m not the person to ask for the precision of that claim.) Before you know it, however, AOC claims, on the floor of Congress, that “women are bleeding out in parking lots all over America.”
Why is it that whenever I write a comment or a response to a comment, no matter how factually correct, that criticizes a liberal or Democrat political figure, even when I’m quoting that person exactly, the comment gets censored - excuse me: taken down - by the open-minded, freedom-of-expression apparatchiks at RUclips? My deleted reply to this comment is a case in point.
Those sentences mean the same thing. Sex with an unconcious person is, definitionally, rape. So if Pete really said the first quote, he would (hypothetically) be advocating for the second.
TheAdventureFamily commented:
"Pete Hegseth should sue that women. He has not "written that himself". The article was written by someone else at a time he was a publisher for the paper but the current publisher has even gone so far as to say it's not currently even a role of the publisher to determine content that role is for the editor in chief. That their publishers focus on advertising and distribution."
Which explains why she's the only one to bring that up. I'd be surprised if she doesn't get sued for that
Here’s to hoping.
It can't happen. It would have to be proven that she knew the information to be false and that she said it with the intention to damage him in some way. It's a high bar that only the professional press, who know better, can manage to get over.
You can only sue for slander if you can prove damage and the statement was said deceptively on purpose. Some idiot on Piers yapping isn’t worth the bother.
@@PuddilyOopsyes it is worth to bother.
It has to stop spewing lies without consequences. If more get sued, it will stop. Now everyone can talk lies and we don't bother.
“I’ve heard people say” is such a cowardly way to impugn someone’s character without having any actual evidence.
“Everyone knows” is another favorite of evaders.
@ 100%
"I let other people do my thinking for me." - Same people.
Isn’t that Trump’s most commonly used phrase before he says whatever lie he’s about to deploy?
@ huh? Who mentioned Trump?
Hegseth was the publisher of the paper. The article making those claims about women was written by another person, John Andrews.
Thanks for this. Didn't find the original quote, but if Snopes got it right, this is the bit they found.
> [A] bemusing yet mandatory orientation program, revolved entirely around whether an instance of sexual intercourse constituted "rape." The actual instance portrayed in the skit was in fact not a clear case of rape - at least not in my home state. (In short, though intercourse was not consented to, there was no duress because the girl drank herself into unconsciousness. Both criteria must be satisfied for rape. Unfortunately, the panelists never cited any legal definition of rape.) Yet the panel - all females in the session I attended - claimed that rape it was.
Which a) was NOT WRITTEN by Hegseth and b) makes a DIFFERENT claim than what this stupid bint is trying to imply.
Stating that a law defines criteria for a particular crime is not an admission of support/opposition to that particular law.
"You may think you hate the media, but you don't hate those lying sacks of shit enough" - Internet
Thank you. So it was a lie.
@@charetjc THANK U SO MUCH FOR CLEARIFYING!
Thank you for this info!!
Who is John Andrews?
I just love the smile on Knowles' face as the whole thing unravels.
Me too!
And Dave Ruben. 😅
They were both having a great time. I was also enjoying their enjoyment 😂
I was listening to this while in the kitchen and could hear that smile.
@@saltyk9869 😂
"A lot of people said..."
Yeah and 51 intelligence "officials" signed their names saying hunters computer was russian disinfo
Spot on! A lot of people said the world was flat. There can be exception to this though. After a lot of people watch this video, as can be affirmed in the comment section a lot of people think this guy is an idiot. They aren't wrong.
Would they have said that, and would the press gleefully have gone along with it, if the computer had belonged to Donald Trump, Jr.? Somehow, I doubt it.
All 51 are guilty of election interference.
I believe Elon Musk humiliated a journalist by asking who said it when they accused him of something during an interview.
Now let's be fair. They only said that it was reminiscent of something that Russia, Russia, Russia, would do. i.e. the back door was left wide open.
“Questions have a power because they must be contended with” Great quote.
"A woman hasn't spoken yet."
Best unironic joke of the interview.
"uh excuse me...I think you mean A cis gendered woman hasn't spoken yet."
Did he just assume her gender?
The person saying that those tattoos are extreme is the same person with a little Palestinian flag saying "from the river to the sea..." isn't antisemitic.
Says it all
I’m on your side, but who cares what a bunch of arabs are doing to each other.
don't conflate those two things. They are entirely separate. Palestinian's being genocided in real time has nothing to do with Christian tattoo's. Also, broken clock syndrome is a real thing.
@charleshill1906 no genocide happening at all.
@@charleshill1906 you missed the point entirely, they are not comparing the 2 things but rather the mindset of people in what they call extreme and what they say is acceptable.
I'm less concerned about someone screaming "Deus Vult" than I am someone screaming "Allahu Ackbar".
One usually precedes an explosion.
💯👍🏽
💯👍🏽
Make "Deus Vult" great again!
Allan Snackbar.
If this dude knew how many people in the military had a Deus Vult tattoos....ooo boy...I don't have any but I've been sooo tempted to get that more than once.
Literally one of the first things they criticized him for and gave as a reason he wasn't right for the job was that he went to the 9/11 memorial in his underwear..... He was in a bathing suit because he was part of a charity swim with Navy Seals.... They swam to some park in Manhattan and then did a run carrying flags to the memorial to honor the people who served after that as well as to raise money for homeless Veterans.
"extremist" "far right" "radical" all words that hold no meaning in 99% of political contexts when talking about Americans.
Other countries, same framing.
Yup, it's just a snarl word.
I wish it was saved for the *actual* far right extremist radicals out there... The Boy Who Cried Wolf is really lost on people these days.
Dirty dirty smear merchants.
That's all they are.
A real American would be proud to be called radical; America is radical - the very essence of America is radical.
I hope for the return to the radical America that the Founding Fathers intended.
I adore your calm demeanor. It balances with the screaming from the clips . . . LOL. Thank you.
The practice of just vomiting words to evade answering a question is so childish. You wouldn’t let your four year-old get away with it.
Exactly!
Do people even realize they do this or do they honestly believe they are answering the question? Maybe imprisonment until they answer?
@@sdrc92126yeah, why not... slander is still a crime in some US States I believe
"You haven't let the woman on this panel speak" has to be one of the funniest, most self-owning things he could say. He's clearly dodging a simple question, because he knows what it'll mean when he answers. So he throws "I support strong womyns!!!!" in front of the bus bearing down on him.
Your approach to critical topics and the thought process in presenting them is a breath of fresh air on this platform.
@@DesertJoe thank you so much DesertJoe
"Piers Morgan is the Jerry Springer of politics" won me over - SUBSCRIBED 😎
Not sure what his name is, but this guy arguing against Knowles is so dishonest it’s not even funny. He always has such a smug, arrogant attitude, while repeating propaganda.
He even told Piers he’d eat a crow because of how confident he was that Kamala would win, and guess what? He didn’t do it. He opted for “liver” instead.
No principles, no values, just wants to win.
Piers needs a mute button for blabbering guests who won't shut up.
It's part of the spectacle. I'm sure he could have such a button if he wanted. Viewers getting annoyed with guests drives engagement. :)
He has one, but for some reason, he didnt use it in this episode. He was enjoying himself 😂
The mics should auto-mute when someone else is talking. Lol
Pete Hegseth should sue that women. He has not "written that himself". The article was written by someone else at a time he was a publisher for the paper but the current publisher has even gone so far as to say it's not currently even a role of the publisher to determine content that role is for the editor in chief. That their publishers focus on advertising and distribution.
Finally, some answered lol
Damn, that's such a slimey way to smear someone. He's connected but not the one who did it. Smh
It's astounding how easy it is to catch people with their pants down with a simple question.
And it's so easy to disarm too with just a tad of humility: "I don't know, I was more interested in the book. Maybe that particular thing isn't as bad as I thought, but I still have legitimate arguments
@@thomaslacroix6011 Yes, that would have been a very effective response.
I'm a registered Democrat that voted red in this past election. That being said; there's one tattoo in particular that Pete has that caught my attention and has me on his side and always will, the one on his shoulder. "Ne Desit Virtus" from the 187th Infantry. I'm also a Rakkasan. That man is my brother, even moreso that the one I grew up with.
Based
The world thanks you for your Red vote (and your service) ❤
Warren, I love your videos! I taught college for eight years and you're one of the best teachers I've ever encountered. I wish I had teacher like you when I was a teenager. "Oh, Captain, My Captain!" BTW, I'm 70 years old now.
Yes, you are his second-most targetted audience. Young manlings without cognitive plurality are his primary focus.
Sitting ducks, the young and the old eh?
Oh Captain, My Captain! - I am happy that I am not the only person who thought about Walt Whitman!
RIP Robbin Williams
Michael right there like the Joker, just laughing and watching the whole thing burn to the ground. 🤣
If she does not produce evidence supporting her claim, she needs to be sued for slander.
the part where he traded blows on the crusades was hilarious.
people realy seem to disregard the fact that all of Europe would be islamic if it weren't for the crusades
and if it werent for vlad de tepes, who you only know of as Dracula, because the muslim smear campaign worked really well. Look it up. He was hailed as a saviour of christianity by the pope but is known today as Dracula and an allround bad man, a soullles vampire even.....why on earth is that...why are we letting the chopper-heads of people people decide that we are the bad ones...and whewre are the evidence that some people suggest, that the jews are behind it when all evidence point to the people who the best at manipulation and denying wrong doing aka the ones who have manipulated us that 1. the crucades where 100% wrong and christians where being evil and 2. that Vlad de tepes was so evil to inspire a soulless vampire when all of these historical events were all for the good of christianity. Lok im an atheist even...but heck..i know i wouldnt be if europe had been conquered by islam back then..so...yeah..im also starting to i donno..believe in some ways, simply cause i see all the evils of islam...it seems like the devil in hiding, the best manipulator.i also find it curious that islam came about around the 7th century..a century which started with the letter 6.
It's easy to disregard something that's not true
@vegaspony your comment is the lie
@@docsavage8640 no u
@@vegasponyGo read up on your history and get back to us bud.
The Jerry Springer of politics! Awesome!
Although it must be said 'there are legion Jerry Springer's in politics these days. In fact: Springerism is the norm in all 'contentious' debate.
Or maybe I should say that all debate is seen as contentious today.. ^_^
Some people feel they are “being honest” by repeatedly attempting to evade questions they are asked.
It's like he denies the existence of any lying that isn't directly stating something that isn't true
Michael murdered the opposition in this panel. This gal came at Michael thinking he didn’t know church history, big mistake, huge.
You’re doing a wonderful job with this website, thanks!!
Muslim: "He's an extremist!"
Normal person: "why?"
Muslim: "He ate his goat and married his daughter! That's the wrong way round!"
A lot of people say Islam permits the brutalisation of children, it must be true!
You marry your daughter?
@@koreymenefee3983 Well I admit I didn't see myself walking into that one.
Thx Warren for putting out content like this.
I appreciate you for the work that you put in.
The Jerry Springer show had an interesting side effect, aptly named the Jerry Springer effect. It works like this. You turn on the Jerry Springer show, you watch dysfunctional people scream and fight with each other, then you return to your ordinary everyday life and feel better about yourself because you aren't like those extreme people on TV.
It turns out, you can illicit this same effect with a host, four panelists, controversial topics, and a slight audio delay.
Yep
The symbol of Hegseth’s tattoo was found on the cover of Jimmy Carter’s funeral program.
Also on the floor of the national cathedral.
They cant admit theyre wrong ever. Its literally impossible...
She should be sued for lible and defamation. He didn't write that, and she's KNOWS it.
Wajahat Ali is tattoophobic
What a maroon.
He wouldn't like me then...haha...says the girl with 2 full sleeves and 10 other tattoos lol.
A Muslim is calling someone else s extremist?!?!?
I appreciate your measured response and concise evaluation of topics that sound so messy. Thank you!
Pete Hegseth was the publisher of the Princeton Tory Magazine, he allowed the article to be published in the magazine. The article was written by another student by the name of John Andrews. The article, written in September 2002, was trying to say silence gives consent. Since she is unconscious consent is implied.
I would strongly disagree with that, but people are entitled to have opinions no matter how outrageous they may be.
The depth with which these - for the greater good folk - will go to destroy one’s reputation when threatened is off the charts.
Slander right there - a civil trial is what this woman needs. Who thinks she’s made a sport of such slander and vilification throughout her entire life, whilst turning a blind eye to true evil ? Where does this stop ?
All he had to say was ”I have no idea what his tattoo is and it’s immaterial to my argument”.
But everyone saw through his horrible poker face and trying to weasel out of it immediately ends his credibility and hence his argument
Warren, I love the book collection over your shoulder!!! Your logic's not bad either. 😁
MLK said judge me by character not my skin couler! Obviously the Fool who can't answer a simple question is pure EVIL!
Michael was loving it. Piers did a great job steering the conversation; keeping on topic.👌
If she doesn't know where Hedgeseth said it was OK to have sex with unconscious women, she'd better find out. She's going to need that info when he sends lawyers her way, suing for defamation. Lawsuits are the answer to lawfare.
This is a good example of why I couldn’t in good conscience align myself with today’s left.
Everyone is so dishonest & manipulative; & they seem to have no problem being that way at all.
She knows he didn’t say/ write that about woman, she knows she’s twisting the truth, but she doesn’t care.. he knows he is ignorant in regards to the man’s tattoos- he knows that “everyone says it” isn’t proof of anything- but he repeats the lies anyway.
The same way they all perpetuated the false narrative about Trumps “bloodbath” comment, or the “fine people” hoax… I not to long ago watched a news clip with a pundit that was trying very hard to paint a bad picture about someone she was talking about,& drive it home that he was this awful guy- she kept repeating “he’s got ties to a known supremacist”… the cohost kept trying to clarify that the so called “ties” were just - he was a young unknown journalist trying to get an article or something published, he sent it out to many people, someone did publish it- who himself was rather unknown at the time.. YEARSSS later the person who published it made some racist comments or became known as being a supremacist (or something) . That’s it. She knew that was all it was.. yet she kept repeating “he’s got ties to a known supremacist” anyway- because she didn’t care about the facts, she only cared about creating some links that would cause the viewers to perceive him a certain way, & once you have that perception locked- then I guess anything they say becomes invalid🤷🏻♀️🤦🏻♀️
And I’m not saying that no one on the right side of the aisle never does this either, but it seems to me to be far more prevalent on the left.
I don’t know how it took me so long to see it..
Knowles is so logical and reasonable. I bet you two would have some really great conversations.
He plays a yes or no game...would love to see you both on that one
@@bakon2 sometimes this, which kind of undermines his good arguments unfortunately.
Something to look forward to.
Is anyone besides me old enough to remember when Willam F. Buckley would ask a question and give his guest time to answer in full paragraphs before asking another question?
I don’t remember that but I find it infuriating when people speak over each other in a ‘discussion’.
I want to know the truth and shouting over each other isn’t getting anywhere.
Yes this! I end up clicking out because I can’t stand it and can hear no one. It’s totally pointless.
Little different than this, Piers asked a question, gave him time to answer, it was obvious he was full of it and was just repeating ridiculous points without even knowing the most basic things of what he'd talking about, hence why the other guy was able to explain, because he actually knew about it.
@@KaoticReach1999Sorry to disagree, but it was much different. Check out an old episode of “Firing Line.” You’ll seldom if ever find two, sometimes three or four, people talking over one another to the point where you can’t keep track of what anyone is saying. (I agree with you, however, in that that guy next to the woman was full of it. As was the woman, apparently.)
Your content has been constantly improving. Love it, keep it up!
I've only recently discovered your channel. I love your work.your reasoned measured explanations are perfect.
Bro really used a woman as a meatshield?
Not surprised.😂😂😂
A long standing Muslim tradition.
You are spot on! They just repeat stories they heard and upon a closer examination, they crumble!
I’m so glad you are doing this analysis, thank you so much! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼
The nagging frustration in so many debates is this snug sophistry that is applied. Not to have a meeting of minds, not to come to an agreed resolve, not with a humble mind concentrated on learning the full truth, but simply to one up others.
OVERWHELMINGLY, it's only one side that does that.
“Piers Morgan, the Gerry Springer of politics” 💀
It's easy to find out what it means, they choose not to.
It's not about ease, it's about benefit. There is no benefit to them finding out, so why would they bother?
@theevermind true
I love the smile on Michael Knowles hahaha
Bro, I cannot wait for you to analyze today’s episode. It was a banger!
The rape quote was not written by him.
First, citation needed on the last point in the video? She needs to provide hard details on that kind of accusation. Second, at the end she changes her comment, first indicating that he said "that's not really r@pe" then she said he thinks "they deserve to be r@ped". It's an incremental escalation of character assassination.
He didn't say it. John Andrews wrote it in a college paper where Hegseth was on the masthead.
Thank you Warren!!
Love the calm analysis of this channel
So thankful that I found this channel. About time we found a reasonable and logical mind to delve into politics. I think this giys from Massachusetts my home state he should be my governor. Us new englanders use to be stereotyped as logical and reasonable people but now it's insane what we have become.
What a poor guy he can't even shill properly
Warren, I’m truly loving your channel!! Love how you articulate what’s happening for those of us not college educated/versed in logic and reason lingo/diagrams. Your calm demeanor, even when frustrated, is a pleasure!
Warren, you're going to skyrocket with content like this. This is the best kind of video to turn liberal Boomers around. Thank you.
>"...kind of video to turn Boomers around."
It's so gross and cringe when people say boomers 🤢🤢
@ lol ok boomer.
@ how else would you call that generation. Please enlighten me. You know? The generation that mostly believes everything they are fed through mainstream media?,
@ The weak minded resort to generational stereotypes.
You're analyzing the rhetoric, of which the logic is a part of.
When the MSM lies about someone this thoroughly, we know they're threatened by him. When the MSM is threatened and cowering - im happy
And isn't it curious how the MSM seems to lie about, and feel threatened, by the same people Moslims lie about and feel threatened by?!?
From the UK , I subscribed after you appeared on Pierce Morgan . Now am constantly talking with my wife after we watched your Jordan peterson sit down about if you were our daughters teacher. You are simply the best of us, stay humble dude, as a poorly 44 Yr old dad you give me faith and hope
Well done. I like your style. An excellent example of how critical thinking is done.
Dave Ruben did a great Cheshire cat impersonation 😅 he was loving it!
Per YahooNews!: "In short, Hegseth did publish such a column while he held the role of publisher of The Princeton Tory magazine. To be clear, he did not write it himself. The column was written in the September 2002 issue by another student, John Andrews." Also, the article was discussing the legal definition not the social or moral implications.
Thanks Warren
The grin on Knowles face - priceless.
Why have someone on a talk show, when they literally refuse to answer the question you pose to them. The audience deserves an answer
Warren Smith I love your channel. It's not partisan. It's based on logic. Logic has no motives. It follows rules of reason. People dont always follow rules of reason. My general observations are that many young minds have been burdoned by a failure of schools to teach these neccessary and fundamental principles. They have been taught to cherry pick bits of information rather than looking at the whole and create a different narrative to support their ideas. But with no foundation these ideas are doomed to failure and open to scrutiny that will topple their house of cards.
Why does Warren talk like he's trying to not wake his mother up?😅
Joe rogan got me here.
“Too extreme for the military” I think has to do with his Christianity or Christian values vs., as you said, “the low standard’s of the military.”
Great video sir!👏🏼😎🇺🇸
That guy got majorly schooled 😂
"...ironically, no one is going to crucify you" 🤣🤣 and he still couldn't get it
Thank you, as always, for your superb analytic presentation 😊
We all need to learn to “think” instead of “spout”
Real life parascope down. This is LITERALLY the plot of that movie.
I literally called piers the jerry of journalism the other day hahahahaha great minds. Great video
Its always entertaining to watch someone refuse to acknowledge that they don't know.
He tried to move the goal posts like 20 times. 😆😆😆😆😆
Imagine my surprise at them being wrong about the article as well. If I could be bothered I'd research his role "as the publisher" as well. Publisher for a school magazine 23 years ago.
"Hegseth did publish such a column while he held the role of publisher of The Princeton Tory magazine. To be clear, he did not write it himself. The column was written in the September 2002 issue by another student, John Andrews."
If he did say that about passed out women, was he joking? Context matters. Having an offbeat sense of humor shouldn’t disqualify anybody from literally anything. They’re only words, people. Lighten up.
He didn't say it. John Andrews wrote an article that was making a legal argument about the aspects of the law for rape requiring duress and that someone passed out drunk is not suffering duress at the time. That kind of stuff is common in legal discussions, like the different between sedition and insurrection.
Hegseth may or may not have approved the article being published in the college paper. He didn't write it.
@ So it’s just another example of braindead NPC’s twisting something to fit their narrative? Gee, what a shocker.
"The Jerry Springer of politics." Perfect!
Dude, You have to start a podcast. Ill follow you
FUN FACT: When Albert, Prince of Wales (later King Edward VII), visited Jerusalem in 1862, he had a Jerusalem cross tattooed on his arm.
Guilt by accusation
How dare Hegseth be proud of his white heritage!! Unacceptable!!!
It's not his white heritage, it's his Christian beliefs.
He has served alongside black, white, Hispanic, Asian, men & women. Jews, Christian, Muslims, sihk & Buddhist...he simply wants competence & excellence at every level of the military.
Oh yes, I stand corrected. The Jerusalem Cross represents fighting along with black, white, hispanic, asian, men and women, jews, christians, muslims, sikh and buddhist against a giant windmill
Dude has Potter, Thrones, and Bezerk behind him. Awesome!
I eo not understand the point. Why is the tatto so important? The guy tries to say what his reasons for believing what he believes are. Why wouod he need to know what the tattoo represents if his opinion is not based on the tattoo?
It's even better if you continue the clip, she gets schooled on the crusade its amazing