Pats story was on MSNBC today

[Leonard Rhomberg]

No one ever explains how it is a technicality or misapplication. Because it's not. They just want the laws to change, not that a judge is misinterpreting it. the changes they want fundamentally break free speech.

Or address that he is willfully a public figure. Sports fans publicly wish for players to blow their knees out all of the time. It’s not nice but it’s not illegal. Pat puts himself out there so he is subject to commentary about him.

Edit: the only time the law was broken was with the swatting. There is no evidence anywhere on this site of organizing that and those that endorse it are told to fuck off. It’s obviously some guy in an eastern Europe ghetto willing to commit high grade felonies for 50 dollars a pop

 

[World Wide Web Wyyzrd]

Streisand Effect’s a bitch huh…

 

[patrick is fat]

found it, it's the same piece that NBC News aired, no new Pat footage

@24:27 if timestamp doesn't work


skip to @27:29 for when they start talking in the studio about it and Section 230

specifically mentions "Pat and Nikki" are facing contempt for not paying legal fees, retard calls it a "misapplication" of S230

"these two could lose their house, they could even go to prison"

i hope patrick will stop spreading misinformation on twitter now that msnbc has weighed in. that would destroy our democracy

 

[1073waaf]

 

[FurBurger]

I can’t wait until they have to do retractions once it’s discovered Pat was paying someone to call in the swats so he could sue the city and get famous.

That might be why they're covering him now, after Torswats has claimed he was paid by Pat, and Pat's admitted to having a crypto account.

EDIT: They get to do a follow-up story with very little effort, and shake their heads at the state of the world. Classic journalism.

 

[IGotATreeOnMyHouse85]

They didn't even look into it. lmao. This is journalism folks. When they come back to the hosts after, the guy says

"The misapplication of section 230 *mumbles lower* according to the people we've been speaking with" , you couldn't idnk have one of the thousands of lawyers fucking NBC has on retainer to take 5 minutes and tell you they're full of shit?

According to two biased people who aren't attornies, and are going to be held in contempt, they told us the law was misapplied.

I don’t want to sound political but this is a great example of why so many don’t trust the media and the number keeps growing. Now with every story you have to look up different sources just to get the full (If you can) story.

For example multiple news outlets ran a story about how a man who was a funder on “Sound of Freedom” was arrested for kidnapping a child - and purposely mislead people with how much of a donor he was. The film had a large crowdfunding campaign (over 1k donators) and this guy maybe donated 10 bucks or something yet they worded it like he was a major finance / producer of the film. Of course people like Jim Stewartson tan with it and purposely mislead his followers. Even Pat retweeted it.

 

[Will Tate]

Reminder that a coked up Joe Scarborough was having an affair with a staffer who mysteriously hit her head and died in his office and he then left active politics despite being tipped to be a shoe-in future Senator.

I do, but for the folks at home why don't you explain.

 

[SFWA liaison]

Who the fuck actually watches Morning Joe?

Pat's followers are all liberal cat ladies who think CNN is run by jew hating skinheads

and he only got a single person xeeting him about it

that should give you a sense of how irrelevant boomer media really is

 

[IGotATreeOnMyHouse85]

Also, funny how all the swatting stopped.

 

[PickleRickle]

I do, but for the folks at home why don't you explain.

View attachment 141104

lol this is good shit. I was trying to find Joes cringe as fuck music video he put out a few years ago. I think its been memory holed. It was really fucking gay.

 

[Cuphead]

Also when he talks about section 230 they act like that alone was what prevented them form getting Quasi's identity. No, it's because your dumb lawsuit failed to demonstrate that he had defamed you in anyway. Pretty sure the video of that hearing is here somewhere and would be a shame if it made it to any of these outlets.

 

[Leonard Rhomberg]

I don’t want to sound political but this is a great example of why so many don’t trust the media and the number keeps growing. Now with every story you have to look up different sources just to get the full (If you can) story.

For example multiple news outlets ran a story about how a man who was a funder on “Sound of Freedom” was arrested for kidnapping a child - and purposely mislead people with how much of a donor he was. The film had a large crowdfunding campaign (over 1k donators) and this guy maybe donated 10 bucks or something yet they worded it like he was a major finance / producer of the film. Of course people like Jim Stewartson tan with it and purposely mislead his followers. Even Pat retweeted it.

“Sound of Freedom” was a great example of how bad a state we are in. People wanted to smear a movie that’s anti child trafficking because i guess Caviezel is a Christian/republican?

 

[RickReternal]

Also, funny how all the swatting stopped.

Heads on a swivel on that score, I’m afraid.

 

[IGotATreeOnMyHouse85]

“Sound of Freedom” was a great example of how bad a state we are in. People wanted to smear a movie that’s anti child trafficking because i guess Caviezel is a Christian/republican?

What’s even worse is how they’re so against it, I can’t figure out why they hate it so much. Child trafficking / sex traffic has been going on for decades - it’s not a fake / made up problem.

It wasn’t reported much but FBI found more than 200 sex tracking victims and arrested 125 suspects over a two week operation in July. But you’ve got media telling people it’s nonsense.

 

[Honey Badger]

found it, it's the same piece that NBC News aired, no new Pat footage

@24:27 if timestamp doesn't work


skip to @27:29 for when they start talking in the studio about it and Section 230

specifically mentions "Pat and Nikki" are facing contempt for not paying legal fees, retard calls it a "misapplication" of S230

"these two could lose their house, they could even go to prison"

This drives me insane every time. No one asked Pat to file a lawsuit, or keep it going when it was clear he would lose. And we most certainly didn’t ask him to avoid paying his court ordered fees.

Minus the SWATtings, all his woes are 100% his doing (and the jury’s still out on the SWATting)

 

[T. Booth Willy]

This drives me insane every time. No one asked Pat to file a lawsuit, or keep it going when it was clear he would lose. And we most certainly didn’t ask him to avoid paying his court ordered fees.

Minus the SWATtings, all his woes are 100% his doing (and the jury’s still out on the SWATting)

Dan posted just the preamble by the faggot tech reporter and it's pretty defamatory. He doesn't mention this place by name but he said Patrick sued the site where the swatters congregate. He does say they could lose their house, which is pretty funny, but the rest of it is just fat lies and spin.

 

[BonnieMcFarlaneMe2]

Dan posted just the preamble by the faggot tech reporter and it's pretty defamatory. He doesn't mention this place by name but he said Patrick sued the site where the swatters congregate. He does say they could lose their house, which is pretty funny, but the rest of it is just fat lies and spin.

No spin class zone

 

[BoomerSperg]

found it, it's the same piece that NBC News aired, no new Pat footage

@24:27 if timestamp doesn't work


skip to @27:29 for when they start talking in the studio about it and Section 230

specifically mentions "Pat and Nikki" are facing contempt for not paying legal fees, retard calls it a "misapplication" of S230

"these two could lose their house, they could even go to prison"

Haha he says they "CANT" pay.

Poor and fat.

 

[Officer Chase]

No one ever explains how it is a technicality or misapplication. Because it's not. They just want the laws to change, not that a judge is misinterpreting it. the changes they want fundamentally break free speech.

Are they not, even with Quasi's anonymity, defaming him by saying Patrick has to pay his "harassers"? That's what I took away from this. That they said the forum owner is a harasser despite a court finding he wasn't and that MSNBC is declaring that the tweeting about Patrick is synonymous with him being swatted, with zero proof or explanation. Very dangerous and deliberate attacks on freedom of protest, speech, and association. MSNBC is evil.