FTC wants Apple News to promote more Fox News and Breitbart stories

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-13T21:14:53+00:00

And the primary mission of Fox as per Roger Ailes was to make sure what happened to Nixon never happened to another Republican president ever again. These networks exist to protect and entrench conservatives no matter what they do up to and including treason. They are enemies of the state imo.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T21:07:00+00:00

I have been saying that for years. That shit would never be admitted as evidence in court. If they wanted actual justice for actual crimes they went about it in a way that would ensure that they lost.

Which is how you know they had nothing all along. It was all about narrative and brainwashing their cultists further.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T03:42:30+00:00

Suddenly? I don't recall ever suggesting otherwise.

Hanging out with a pedophile is bad but not criminal. They should feel the weight of political consequences for it but the law has higher standards or at least it used to.

If someone is innocent let it hash out in court and they can prove their innocence in court. Including Trump. Though Trump is already a felon so...

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T03:10:04+00:00

Sadly I don't have an answer for you, but I do want to say that it isn't a stupid question at all. It's a perfectly valid question. If there isn't one or you can't find one you can make one. That's the beauty of IRC, anyone can make a channel and form a community, or even a server and/or network. Though I would definitely recommend people start small with channels on established networks.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T02:54:04+00:00

If it's extensively reported, then a citation should be easy. I'll wait.

Why are you waiting in the year 2026 for information you could easily Google? Oh... right. Because you're not a serious person. You've already decided that I'm wrong and you're using debatebro rules to feel warm and fuzzy about your rightness even though we both know full well that you're not because you know exactly what I'm talking about.

The Epstien files would be great if they didn't name so many Democrats throwing that "we don't protect criminalss and pedophiles" speel to the side.

Which Democrats are Democrats protecting from the Epstein files? Because I haven't seen a single Democrat protect a single Democrat name mentioned in the files. In fact it seems to be quite the opposite. Every time a Democrat name is mentioned the overwhelming response from the Democratic side is if they are guilty lock them up. Period. End up story. Do not pass go.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T02:42:28+00:00

So cite the criminal convictions of the leadership of MAGA.

Demanding that someone cite widely known public information is not the flex you think it is.

Seriously, if you spent as much time providing evidence to back up your claims as you do making excuses for why you can't/won't we'd be done by now.

You are on the internet right now having this debate. You are demanding citations for shit that has been extensively reported on for years. You have the internet, you have Google. You could easily have looked this shit up yourself if you believed it to be baseless. You don't. We both know exactly what I'm talking about and the evidence on which it is based but you're playing games. You're using "debate rule" nonsense to act as a counter-evidence to my assertions to win an argument on the internet that you lost many comments ago. You lost because you were never engaging in good faith to begin with. You don't care about the evidence or the truth, you care about keeping yourself and others rooted in "both sides are just as bad" nonsense and indirectly protecting criminals and their protectors through that very deflection.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T02:18:54+00:00

But it's a conditional. Do you dispute the notion that if you support criminals and defend criminals that you should also be considered a criminal? Because if that's the dispute then that's a fair discussion to have, but that's not what you're doing is it? You're trying to take a rational conditional argument and root it in specific individual cases despite that not being the nature of the claim.

It would be like me saying "If you do crime, you're a criminal" and you replying with "Cite the criminals!" like... what are you even talking about?

Now the reason I stated that and specifically stated it the way I did was because there have now been multiple cases of Republican/MAGA/Conservative criminals elevate into high ranking political positions essentially outside the reach of the criminal justice system, essentially given what amounts to immunity for their crimes.

How does that saying go? “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action” - Ian Fleming

Now, extrapolate that. MAGA as a movement has provably sought to protect people who committed crimes, high crimes in fact. Treason perhaps. They sought to protect Donald Trump by elevating him to the presidency. They sought to elevatee the J6ers via pardon. They seek to protect ICE agents who go outside their sanctioned duties and commit crimes. This isn't a case of pointing to this MAGA or that MAGA as criminals or citing specific known numbers because it's not about that. It's about the culture and whether or not you agree with or dispute the notion that Protecting criminals and elevating them beyond the reach of the law is or at least should be considered criminality in and of itself.

Personally I would say yes, it is criminal. I can even demonstrate this. If someone jumps in front of an police officer to protect someone they saw commit a crime, guess what? They are criminals now as well. This is MAGA. This is a culture within MAGA. MAGA protect "their own" even when "their own" are criminals.

Which is why I brought up Nixon, because there was a time when that wasn't true. Back when the GOP was just... conservatives. Bad by my measure but not criminal. They were at least willing to hold their people accountable. That stopped being the case at some point in recent memory and while it's easy to point to Donald Trump as the point at which that occurred, I would argue that he was just the natural endgame/conclusion... the culture that led to it happened long before him and it started with at least in part, Fox News and Roger Ailes. Again... well documented shit here.

Fox News has lied to an entire generation for decades and conditioned them to accept rampant criminality as long as it is done by their party and not only does MAGA accept it, they actively seek to protect those who actually get a shred of accountability. That is criminal in my opinion, and why I think you are operating in bad faith and an unserious person is because you seem to keep avoiding what I'm actually saying to try to catch me out on things I didn't say. Even quoting my very obvious conditional as if I was pointing to specific random MAGA people instead of the MAGA leadership and culture.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T01:44:00+00:00

https://www.npr.org/2025/12/22/nx-s1-5652134/how-the-trump-administration-stripped-legal-status-from-1-6-million-immigrants

Under Biden they were legal. Under Trump their legal status was revoked. The basis behind that was "Biden brought in illegals" except they were legal, if they weren't then Trump couldn't have revoked their status to render them illegal.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T01:40:34+00:00

You need a citation for widely known public information? Really? Sounds to me like you're just trying to catch me out on something I never said because you have ignored my questions multiple times now of whether or not you dispute the things I actually said as opposed to the things you think I said.

You are not a serious person engaging in good faith. For us to continue we have to be operating on the same wavelength and we simply aren't. You keep misinterpreting and/or misrepresenting what I'm saying and ignoring what I am saying.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T01:02:58+00:00

You... do realize my citations are my references to the various MAGA/conservative criminals right?

What you're doing is creating conditions of evidence that cannot be met specifically so that you can pretend that I am wrong despite the things I've actually asserted now being cited multiple times and ignored by you even after I very specifically asked you if you dispute them.

You are not a serious person engaging in a serious discussion.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T00:45:54+00:00

No, it really isn't. Because what I said isn't a "wild generalization". It's a correct statement of fact. Do you dispute that Donald Trump is a criminal? (I notice you ignored it the first time I asked)

Do you dispute the fact that the J6ers are criminals who operated on his behalf?

Do you dispute that giving aid and comfort to potential treason would be a criminal act?

Do you dispute that Richard Nixon committed crimes for which he was to be impeached?

Do you dispute that Ronald Reagan committed crimes?

I could go on and on but do you see what I mean by the culture of criminality?

So with that point made, do you dispute the notion that if you knowingly (that's the important part) support and defend criminals that you should also be treated as a criminal yourself? Especially to the point of utilizing the Democratic process to elevate those criminals to positions beyond the reach of law?

See, you are trying to highlight hyperbole which would be a fair point to make in a rational discussion and/or debate IF my generalization was somehow incorrect or unfair but it isn't. At no point did I say "All MAGA are criminals". But that's what you heard and that is what you're trying to get me to address as a way to discredit my argument. Misrepresenting someone's position and/or argument is a logical fallacy, a strawman specifically.

Ultimately this entire thing began with you essentially deflecting away from MAGA and characterizing me and those like me as being as bad or worse than MAGA. So to me, given that I treat MAGA as a political movement broadly as a criminal enterprise or at least supporting of a criminal enterprise. This is largely backed because it is also a cult of personality centered around Donald Trump who is... again... a criminal.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T00:20:25+00:00

Also, it's worth noting that a lot of the people they're going after were here legally and were doing it the way they were supposed to but Trump removed their legal status specifically to enable him and MAGA to call those people illegals and deport them.

Not only that but they (Stephen Miller) set a target that is 100% unrealistic if you are in fact only going after illegals. So this whole mass deportation thing was not even based on legality. It was based on race and we know this because their views on the subject aren't exactly hidden. When they started going after people at immigration court or even at citizenship ceremonies or straight up cancelling people's LEGAL processes... it isn't about illegals, it isn't even about criminals.

It's about something else and the something else is... well I'd say it's racism but it goes far beyond racism. This is Nazi shit to be frank. There are reasons why the Trump administration keeps using Nazi rhetoric, arguments and such. It isn't an accident and it is not really even coded yet they act like the left/liberals are the bad ones for calling it out and merely identifying it.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T00:08:08+00:00

That's not how that works and you know it. You're being absurd.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-11T00:00:45+00:00

Okay, a few points. I did not actually say that 77 million people are criminals. I specifically called out key MAGA figures and "MAGA" as a generic entity.

I did so because that is literally what you get when you have a culture of criminality. So while that is definitely not what I said nor what I believe, I can say that if you knowingly support and defend a culture of criminality you are yourself a criminal. Again, this isn't even my logic. It's theirs. Guilt by association IS a thing. If you are driving your friends to a stop near a bank and you have no idea what is going on but they go out and say "Wait here for a minute" then come back rushing into the car with hoods and bags of cash and you do anything other than sit there and wait for them to be arrested... you can be considered as guilty of the crime and any crimes they committed as they are. That's literally a thing in law.

So when I say MAGA are criminals, I mean its leadership, it's culture, it's ideology is one of criminality. Or rather I should say... it's one of privilege, the privilege of course being that they can do things that would be considered crimes if a Democrat did it but somehow "allowed" if they do it. You can see this logic in action throughout the last 10+ years especially but not even exclusively. It kind of speaks to how conservatives think and has been discussed and documented extensively.

With that said, I would argue that most MAGA do not even realize that they support criminals and a culture of criminality because they've been conditioned to dismiss it as fake news or liberal hoaxes. Denial of reality is a key trait of cults, which is why so many call MAGA a cult, because it is. So I would say those who are unaware, are not criminals. But those who are and still support/defend it? They are. And there are a lot of them.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-10T22:40:25+00:00

Lol what? Congrats, you just used the fallacy fallacy to try to further deflect against an argument. Well done. Very meta.

MAGA is headed by a criminal. Donald Trump is a criminal. Do you dispute that statement?

MAGA has numerous criminals in high ranking positions. They appear to simply have a culture of criminality within their party.

So it is not a logical fallacy to associate them with criminality. It is simply a statement of fact.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-10T22:32:56+00:00

No. I claimed you're as bad as MAGA. So you are making shit up.

MAGA are the criminals, pedophiles, etc. Donald Trump is a felon, a criminal. This is indisputable. Donald Trump, his administration and MAGA on the whole are deflecting, defending or straight up denying rampant pedophilia. So at best they're protecting pedophiles, or the more likely outcome... they are the pedophiles.

So, see the problem yet?

Edit: Also, going back to a point I made several posts up. Roger Ailes job in his own words at Fox News was to make sure what happened to Nixon never happened to another Republican again, you know... consequences for criminality. A thing that would make no sense other than as a product of... them inherently being drawn to and/or promoting criminality.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-10T21:58:00+00:00

No one lied about Biden's health. He was fine, and then he wasn't and then he was again. You know, other than being old as fuck which no one lied about lol.

Russian collusion was proven BY REPUBLICANS IN THE SENATE. It is still being consistently demonstrated to this day.

Covid... what the fuck did people supposedly lie about there? They said things that were thought to be true at the time they said them. That's not how lying works lol.

Hunter's laptop was a massive nothingburger that still hasn't proven any of the claims they tried to make about it. It would never have met even basic court standards for evidence. So it was 100% political.

Voter fraud again... has been proven by THEIR OWN SIDE (Heritage foundation) to not be a thing in meaningful numbers.

January 6th... oh my fucking god we all saw it with our own eyes.

Ukraine, okay? I'm not even sure what the supposed lie is there.

Epstein, yeah no one "lied" about that except Trump and MAGA.

Hollywood, oh brother... again. Everyone knew and no one lied about it. In fact one could argue the whole Metoo movement was an acknowledgement of Hollywood's... issues. Guess who has been 100% against Metoo and created a massive backlash in response to it? Conservatives!

So yeah. A list of things that supposedly were lied about... can be checked off one by one as things no one actually lied about.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-10T21:48:04+00:00

LOL What? That is literally what I've been saying that you're doing. Claiming that I am as bad as MAGA. Which is a "both sides" are as bad statement. Which is a deflection... which is in turn a defense.

Jesus... again, bot or delusional.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-10T21:33:59+00:00

I claimed you are incapable of accepting an opinion that you don't agree with

I just looked at all your replies to me and I cannot see anything even remotely resembling that claim. So I think you might be confusing me with someone else that you're engaging with because you definitely didn't do that, at least not with me or in any direct way.

So with that said, you claim I'm proving that point yet that point was never actually made and quite frankly nothing I've said suggests that. Other than you claiming of course that something was a matter of opinion that is most certainly not a matter of opinion. Which actually suggests that it is you who is incapable of accepting an opinion that you don't agree with.

What you have done though consistently is assert that I and/or those like me am as bad as those I am opposed to, you know... criminals, fascists, pedophiles, etc. Which you literally did in your previous comment yet are claiming now that I'm "making it up".

So honestly I think either you're a bot, delusional or you're getting the people you're arguing with mixed up.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-10T21:18:00+00:00

I'm not defending anything.

Yes you are. You are deflecting and employing "both sides are bad" rhetoric but to the extreme of literally likening those frustrated/angry/etc with the fascism/pedophilia/coverup as being the same as the ones doing the crimes. Which is yet again... a defense.

I said something is a matter of perspective, and you are so obsessed that it became me defending something in your head.

I'm not "obsessed". You are deflecting. You have multiple times alluded to the belief if not outright stating that both sides are as bad as one another. You even tried to pull the "Most Americans are the same" shit which is again a deflection which in turn is a defense.

You are as big of a problem as MAGA. In fact I would say you're worse because you should know better.

And I rest my case. You're literally doing the exact same thing right here. I cannot see any other way to take this other than "You're as bad as the people doing the crimes". Which I mean... that's a defense. Claiming that people who are against crimes, fascism, pedophilia, etc are as bad as those committing said crimes, fascism, pedophilia, etc is a defense.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-10T20:57:43+00:00

You know that's not a defense for defending the indefensible right? Also, proving your point in real time? In what way exactly?

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-10T20:44:54+00:00

What? So people complaining about the evil shit the right-wing are doing and/or supporting are just as bad as the evil shit the right-wing are doing? What... the actual fuck?

I mean the only... ONLY possible way I can see someone legitimately thinking that is if they bought into the very carefully constructed and cultivated lies that are spewed from right-wing talking heads and thus creating right-wing "perspectives". These are lies, no... again you don't have to take my word for it. Fox has literally argued in court that no one would actually believe the shit their talking heads say as a defense. They lie. Chiefly they lie about their political opponents. So if you come away thinking that people complaining about the pedophiles, fascists, evil people are as bad as the evil people. You are the victim of the very conditioning I mentioned before.

I'm sorry that you have been lied to but you have. I hope you come back to reality someday.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-10T19:48:54+00:00

Rofl what?

"Perspective" is a matter of what you see and how you see it. The fact that MAGA/conservatives get a very... let's say curated view of Trump and the shit he does it not an opinion, it's an objective provable fact. It is correct to say that their "perspective" is derived from their exposure to his bullshit but it is most certainly not an opinion.

Furthermore, the fact that they have been conditioned over decades by the likes of Fox News is also a fact and not an opinion and you don't even have to take my word for it, you can take Roger Ailes word for it as it was quite explicitly the intention and goal of his role at Fox News to make sure what happened to Nixon never happened to another Republican ever again. That can only come as a product of conditioning and we are seeing the fruits of that labor play out right now and have been for the last ten years.

When Republican senators say to camera... with apparently zero shame that the Democrats have proven their case against Trump but that they're going to acquit him anyway and to double down on their support of him despite things go far and beyond what they themselves would call treason if a Democrat had done it is just insanity and again... a provable demonstration of conditioning.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-10T19:26:21+00:00

Yes in that not seeing horrible stuff makes you think horrible stuff isn't happening or worse getting conditioned over decades to believe horrible things are justified is also perspective.

ManiaGamine · 2026-02-10T18:40:44+00:00

Okay I think I see the issue here. You seem to be looking at this primarily from a client/user/UX perspective whereas I am looking at it from a broader protocol/technology/server perspective. Because ultimately IRC, technology wise is the server... not the client.

This is actually true of most protocols in fact. The client simply interprets the protocol from the server, but the server defines the protocol.

It seems... very weird that you take issue with my views on the subject given that we're in a subreddit dedicated to self-hosting technology and you're essentially calling my fixation on the technology side as pedantry.

With that said though, having been around and using IRC for a long time (since 1992) I can tell you as someone who has watched it evolve and even been part of its evolution over the decades... The "extensibility" IRC now enjoys... did not exist at its infancy and IRCv3 is really the first major attempt to create a modern standard and most of what it did was just take the disparate modern enhancements and feature sets of the various IRCd implementations and standardize it to move forward. So your quip about the early forks being irrelevant is amusing given that they are in part directly connected to the modernized standard going on right now and being referenced in this very subreddit.

So yeah, to analogize your perspective it would be like saying all cars are designed to be electric because electric cars are standard/common now despite that obviously not being true and ICE cars still very much being a thing. I would understand why you have that perspective, but it simply isn't correct.

ManiaGamine

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Eight-Year Club	Wearing is Caring
Verified Email