Sorry pedes, this is not the righteous whooping we hoped for.
Facts: news lady did not downplay the seriousness of the doctored evidence. She simply attempted to list the incidents of doctored evidence, for her viewers that might not be familiar with the specifics.
She even went on to clarify that this was her intention, after Van Der Veer finished his rant.
Watch the video again. SHe was not guilty of the sin of making light of the doctored evidence. If Van Der Veer was slightly more diplomatic, he could have used this as an opportunity to highlight the actual incidents of evidence doctoring.
Instead, it devolved into a character attack. Don't get me wrong, MSM deserves character attacks in general due to their ridiculous bias against our side.
But in this specific instance, our side overreacted.
Just watch the video again. Pay attention to what she says.
She attempts to explain that she was trying to list the incidents of doctoring, since the viewers might not know what that referred to.
After an initial awkward cross talking exchange, she actually shuts up and allows him to speak his mind, and remains remarkably restrained during his rant. Only to respond later, after he has petered out and given her a chance to reply. At which point she does not even argue, she instead attempts to clarify her intentions.
This heated exchange was actually a good opportunity for Van Der Veer to hone in and specifically highlight the precise incidents of doctoring. And to also solicit the reporter's confirmation that said doctoring occurred, and was bad. I think she would have agreed, had her character not been attacked, lumped in with the greater failings of her fellow MSM "journalists".
If he did that, it would have been a righteous red pill moment. Then we could have all clapped and pwned the libs, or something.
Instead, we get angry guy shouting at news lady, the results of which are most of the normies getting the wrong idea, and looking past the doctoring. Exactly the opposite of what we needed to happen.
Look at what I wrote. I support the indignation and disdain for biased MSM propaganda. But this particular exchange is not something we should be huddling around as some big win.
Except that it is not. The lady never made the suggestion that the doctored evidence was unimportant.
That suggestion was entirely fabricated by Van Der Veer, full stop.
Watch the video over and over again if you have to. The lady simply did not make this assertion, at any time. In fact, she attempted to clear the air about it, but couldn't get a word in edgewise, because Van Der Veer was going off.
For the record, I think Van Der Veer is a patriot and absolute beast. He absolutely slayed it in Congress and is a hero.
However, pairing him up with the lady journalist was a colossal mismatch. He is a ferocious lion and she is barely a kitten. A better pairing would have been McEnany and news lady.
Note I have no idea what news lady's name is nor do I care. She is just another MSM droid to me. Having said, our side looks dumb when we rally around quixotic battles like this one and feed into our own paranoia.
Yes, MSM is hopelessly biased at best, and mockingbird propaganda at worst. But in this particular exchange, our side jumped down the throat of the other side prematurely and unnecessarily and it made us look unhinged.
Winning is a nuanced art and this particular exchange was not a victory for our side.
The overall impeachment hoax was a resounding victory, however, and we have Van Der Veer to thank for it, in part.
Sorry pedes, this is not the righteous whooping we hoped for.
Facts: news lady did not downplay the seriousness of the doctored evidence. She simply attempted to list the incidents of doctored evidence, for her viewers that might not be familiar with the specifics.
She even went on to clarify that this was her intention, after Van Der Veer finished his rant.
Watch the video again. SHe was not guilty of the sin of making light of the doctored evidence. If Van Der Veer was slightly more diplomatic, he could have used this as an opportunity to highlight the actual incidents of evidence doctoring.
Instead, it devolved into a character attack. Don't get me wrong, MSM deserves character attacks in general due to their ridiculous bias against our side.
But in this specific instance, our side overreacted.
Respectfully disagree. It was in her tone and her phrasing.
Just watch the video again. Pay attention to what she says.
She attempts to explain that she was trying to list the incidents of doctoring, since the viewers might not know what that referred to.
After an initial awkward cross talking exchange, she actually shuts up and allows him to speak his mind, and remains remarkably restrained during his rant. Only to respond later, after he has petered out and given her a chance to reply. At which point she does not even argue, she instead attempts to clarify her intentions.
This heated exchange was actually a good opportunity for Van Der Veer to hone in and specifically highlight the precise incidents of doctoring. And to also solicit the reporter's confirmation that said doctoring occurred, and was bad. I think she would have agreed, had her character not been attacked, lumped in with the greater failings of her fellow MSM "journalists".
If he did that, it would have been a righteous red pill moment. Then we could have all clapped and pwned the libs, or something.
Instead, we get angry guy shouting at news lady, the results of which are most of the normies getting the wrong idea, and looking past the doctoring. Exactly the opposite of what we needed to happen.
Look at what I wrote. I support the indignation and disdain for biased MSM propaganda. But this particular exchange is not something we should be huddling around as some big win.
Except that it is not. The lady never made the suggestion that the doctored evidence was unimportant.
That suggestion was entirely fabricated by Van Der Veer, full stop.
Watch the video over and over again if you have to. The lady simply did not make this assertion, at any time. In fact, she attempted to clear the air about it, but couldn't get a word in edgewise, because Van Der Veer was going off.
For the record, I think Van Der Veer is a patriot and absolute beast. He absolutely slayed it in Congress and is a hero.
However, pairing him up with the lady journalist was a colossal mismatch. He is a ferocious lion and she is barely a kitten. A better pairing would have been McEnany and news lady.
Note I have no idea what news lady's name is nor do I care. She is just another MSM droid to me. Having said, our side looks dumb when we rally around quixotic battles like this one and feed into our own paranoia. Yes, MSM is hopelessly biased at best, and mockingbird propaganda at worst. But in this particular exchange, our side jumped down the throat of the other side prematurely and unnecessarily and it made us look unhinged.
Winning is a nuanced art and this particular exchange was not a victory for our side.
The overall impeachment hoax was a resounding victory, however, and we have Van Der Veer to thank for it, in part.