Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Fake news and its effect on the community

Jack Burkeman was the other half of the robocall voter intimidation charge.
His history as a serial fabricator of stories is also documented on Wiki.
Check it out and see how many of the "big" stories on the conspiracy threads were created by Jack.

Jack Burkman


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is about the lobbyist and conspiracy theorist. For the political candidate, see 2006 Washington House of Representatives election.
Jack Burkman
220px-Jack_Burkman.jpg

Jack Burkman in August 2020
Born1965/1966 (age 54–55)[1]
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania[2]
NationalityAmerican
EducationUniversity of Pittsburgh (BA)
Georgetown University (MSFS, JD)
OccupationConspiracy theorist, lobbyist
Known forFalse claims against political figures

Jack Burkman (born 1965 or 1966[1]) is an American conservative lobbyist and conspiracy theorist.[3][4][5] Burkman has been involved, along with far-right conspiracy theorist Jacob Wohl, in multiple plots that attempted to frame public figures for fictitious sexual assaults, including in October 2018 against U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller, in April 2019 against 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg, and in April 2020 against White House Coronavirus Task Force member Anthony Fauci.[6][7][8][9]
Burkman was also involved in spreading conspiracy theories about the 2016 murder of Seth Rich, and in 2017 Burkman was shot in the buttocks and thigh and hit with a car by a man he had hired to assist him in an independent attempt to solve Rich's murder.[10][11]

Burkman drew significant media attention in 2014 for organizing a protest against the Dallas Cowboys of the NFL after the team signed Michael Sam, an openly gay football player, to its practice squad.[12][13][14]

Burkman is the president of the lobbying firm J.M. Burkman & Associates and the head of the conservative organization American Decency.[15][16] He is the host of the Behind the Curtain podcast and radio talk show.[4][17]

 
CNN Criticizes President Trump For Not Taking Full Responsibility For World War II
October 25th, 2018
article-3230-1.jpg

190.2kShares
147kSHARE
19.7kSHARE
SHARE
WASHINGTON, D.C.—In a special report Thursday, CNN's Jim Acosta took President Trump to task for failing to take any responsibility for causing World War II.

The president was criticized for not acknowledging that his rhetoric may have contributed to the conflict that spilled out across the globe in the late 1930s. While some historians acknowledge that there may have been other factors—like the Treaty of Versailles, the expansionist Japanese Empire, and a certain German fascist—a large swathe of liberal scholarship has now pinned the war squarely on Donald Trump.
"The president is quick to talk about the Germans' part in instigating the war, yet he still refuses to take any responsibility for inciting the violence that led to World War II," said Acosta. "It is obvious to everyone who watches our channel 24/7 that President Trump is the cause of every woe mankind has ever suffered, from famine and disease to war and death. And yet he stubbornly refuses to acknowledge this."
Acosta then excused himself for his customary afternoon practice of speaking encouraging words to himself in the mirror.
At publishing time, both Snopes and Politifact had rated CNN's claim that President Trump was the main cause behind the conflict that killed tens of millions 100% true.




You must become a premium subscriber or login to view or post comm
 
My God Dutchie you find and spread some of the worst xhit on the net..

We know that this is just Babble on Bee rubbish you post (although you neglect to link to it) and it is supposed to be satirical. But honestly - it's as funny as a diarrheatic dog. Just doesn't get close.:(

Honestly if it was satirical and funny, I would acknowledge it. :2twocents
 
My God Dutchie you find and spread some of the worst xhit on the net..

We know that this is just Babble on Bee rubbish you post (although you neglect to link to it) and it is supposed to be satirical. But honestly - it's as funny as a diarrheatic dog. Just doesn't get close.:(

Honestly if it was satirical and funny, I would acknowledge it. :2twocents

Are you feeling guilty or something about your own posts?

Your always trying to censor me.
 
It is currently impossible to get the news.

With all the Main Stream Media continually projecting fake news and with the social media outlets massive censoring there is nowhere to go.
 
It is currently impossible to get the news.

With all the Main Stream Media continually projecting fake news and with the social media outlets massive censoring there is nowhere to go.

here you go Dutchie this is made for you and you can make some one money as well.


 
Electoral Fraud !! Dead people voting !! Ruburb, ruburb B-S

Unusual situation on Fox when Tucker Carlson apologized for repeating a Trump story about dead people voting. A WW 2 veteran apparently died in 2006 but VOTED in the Georgia election.

Or so the story does.

Turns out the actual person who voted was his still living wife who voted under the name of Mrs James E Balcock Jnr - just like another 50 million women who are registered on electoral rolls with their husbands name.

Interesting story and shows up the problems the Trump camp has in providing any actual evidence of voter fraud.

 
Briebart Fake News report. :laugh:

Trump Would Win Easily If Only Republican Votes Counted, New Chart Shows

1605485268544.png



A new analysis by some guy on Twitter has found that Donald Trump would have been re-elected with an overwhelming majority if none of the votes for Joe Biden had been counted.

Using the hashtag #STOPTHECOUNT, the man said there was definitely something fishy going on. “Don’t you think it’s a little bit strange that as soon as you start including Democrat votes the election becomes close. But yet when you only include Republican votes it’s a Donald Trump landslide? That’s the story you’re not hearing from the mainstream media.

“You see the same thing over and over again in every state and every county. If you include only the legitimate votes – the ones from Republican voters – Trump wins easily. But yet what we’re being shown on CNN and the New York Times is different. This is voter fraud, clear and simple”.

He said he had factored in the different voting patterns of Democrats v Republican voters. “Even when you include and then discount mail-in votes from Democrat voters – it’s still a clear victory for Trump”.

He said the evidence was irrefutable. “You can see it right there in my chart. The facts that I make up don’t lie”.;)

 
I think a lot of Americans looked upon that hashtag as an auto-correct error and voted accordingly :)
 
I am continually amazed at how many people have been sucked into the MSM conditioning to believe that Trump was a bad President and person, starting before he was even inaugurated. It lasted four and a bit years and they have been very successful.
No doubt the sucked in will say, oh but Trump was a bad man (orange LOL) before he was President, but these are the people conditioned the most.
 
I am continually amazed at how many people have been sucked into the MSM conditioning to believe that Trump was a bad President and person, starting before he was even inaugurated. It lasted four and a bit years and they have been very successful.
No doubt the sucked in will say, oh but Trump was a bad man (orange LOL) before he was President, but these are the people conditioned the most.
Flip it mate, you are the one sucked in, you fell for it, hook line and sinker, but it makes sense being a graduate of Trump University
 
Ever wondered if the US aqctually made a successful manned landing on the moon? Why do more and more people seriously the moon landings were an elaborate hoax ? How did the hoax idea kick off ?

Excellent review of the whole moon hoax story. I suggest this issue under pins much of the Fake News scenarios today.

 
Ever wondered if the US aqctually made a successful manned landing on the moon? Why do more and more people seriously the moon landings were an elaborate hoax ? How did the hoax idea kick off ?

Excellent review of the whole moon hoax story. I suggest this issue under pins much of the Fake News scenarios today.

Do you think, they don't have equipment, that can see the junk left on the moon?
Maybe the space station is a netflix programme?
Maybe satellite phone calls are just downloaded tapes?
I can see why the Guardian does well.
 
And in the special world of Donald Trump and his true believers he has never lost an election. :rolleyes:
Interestingly enough the vast majority of the Republican Party still won't acknowledge that Biden won the election convincingly.

Shades on 1918 and the stab in the back.:(

 
Came across this fascinating analysis of an obscure 1950's US movie "A Face in the Crowd".

The premise of the movie is how easily Amercians fall for hucksters and grifters.

Though not a critical success in its own time, the 1957 film, written by Budd Schulberg and directed by Elia Kazan, has since been heralded as a masterpiece, praised by François Truffaut and preserved by the National Film Registry. The movie tells the story of Larry “Lonesome” Rhodes (Andy Griffith), a charismatic, populist entertainer with a dark side, who uses the new medium of television to rise to the pinnacle of American power.
... Cinephiles and politicos alike saw Trump’s political career foretold in Schulberg and Kazan’s fable. Just a few months after Trump entered the race, the conservative writer Cal Thomas devoted an entire syndicated column to the resemblance between Griffith’s demagogue and candidate Trump.

...There’s no denying that A Face in the Crowd captures aspects of Trump’s character—Rhodes’s vulgarity, his volatile mixture of ego and insecurity, and his instinctive mastery of mass media are all eerily familiar. Yet the similarities go only so far. Like Trump’s, Rhodes’s populism is a means to an end, but at least he comes by it more credibly, having walked the dusty byways of northeastern Arkansas and spent long nights in its drunk tanks.

Schulberg and Kazan’s real achievement wasn’t anticipating Trump. It was appreciating, at the dawn of the television era, how susceptible the American public would be to his pitch. As Trump’s first term comes to a close, A Face in the Crowd is worth revisiting—less for what it reveals about the president than for what it says about the rest of us.



 
Top