I struggle to imagine situations where corrupt businessmen aren’t in the wrong for stealing government documents.
Mar-A-Lago Raid
- Thread starter thebobmaster
- Start date
You know, people pointed out that Trump does this all the time in 2015. Including those GOP who debated
And now we STILL have people doing *shocked Pikachu meme* and saying it can't possibly be true
What a decade.
Thank you.
What part of citing legal fact from experts in law is "pretend?" Do yourself a favor, actually watch the video, and fact-check anything you feel to be a lie, misleading, or outright incorrect, then make this claim again with proof of your own. Not liking someone who doesn't like someone you like does not make their sentiments "pretend."
Man, if Devon was held to the same level of scrutiny as Dave Rubin or Tim Pool or Joe Rogan or Praeger U, there is no way you could call him click-bait
But, of course, standards are very different
I don't have to watch the video to find the first fault. The title is faulty. "How long will Trump Go To Jail?" The question presumes Trump will go to jail.
All of those are click-baity. It's the same genre of content at this point.
By definition, clickbait only gets you to click on something. If the content is then found informative and representative of facts, it being "clickbait" doesn't discount its content. Here's some old-fashioned clickbait for ya':
Quite hyperbolic, isn't it? Glad the "idiots" making these headlines weren't on any fronts of the war itself; God knows where we'd be with their hubris leading the charge.
Watch the video if you want to argue its merits. If the title so puts you off that you can't be bothered to actually watch it, then don't argue against it.
The way I've seen it used is that it is only clickbait if it formulated in a way that is in some way deceptive. My go to example being the headline "Halo coming to more platforms" about how Bungie had made a short game interpretation of what the series would look as an Atari 2600 title.
I don't think that headline qualifies as clickbait. France was invaded, it's the truth, and a lot of Allied soldiers landed in Northern France, it's the truth. The most inaccurate thing I can say is that the word "pouring" might've been a bit sensationalized. Also, technically, you cannot really click that newspaper to get the news story, so not really clickbait.
Jesus... did you really need to state something so obvious?
My point is simply that sensationalism is nothing new, and not objectively indicative of misinformation. If tstorm wants to debate the content of a video he's dismissed as "clickbait," at the very least he should watch enough of it to have more then an assumptive opinion. But if you want to debate the semantics of a term over the context of its use, save your breath. Of course you can't "click" a physical newspaper's headline; thanks for pointing that out.
Evidently, since I genuinely thought you meant that any headline with a bit of a splash to it is clickbait; the key component people talk about when talking about clickbait is the deceptiveness, so that's why I interjected.
No objections here.
I know* that you know that, but the purpose of last post was mostly about semantics, so I felt I might as well cover it.
*well, technically, I assumed.
Yes, the entire premise is "If Trump is guilty of all charges, what sort of sentence would normally be placed on such a person after being convicted? Let's walk through the sentencing guidelines and figure that out!" But that's...err...long for a video title. Even just adding "If convicted, " to the start makes it long for a video title.
I won't go forth expecting that Trump will not spend a single day in jail. The trial might not even start until the 2024 election and it definitely won't end by then. If he does, happy surprise, but I'm not holding my breath.
I just watched the video through. Normally LegalEagle use legal jargong I don't understand so I lose focus, but this one was comprehensive, with Magic the Gathering inspired cards as visuals. And I think your description is 100% accurate. The headline can be read as clickbaity, but they make it clear from the outset that the objective is to establish jailtime provided he is convicted.
"Could" and "would", even "should" are not meaningfully longer than "will".
Don't be mad at other users for noticing your response is bad. Clickbait is about lying in the title to get people to click. It doesn't matter if the content is accurate or informative if it's not the info you were promised.
Oh, I'm not mad at @Bedinsis; I just felt the response was unnecessary as my intention was clear enough without niggling semantics.
And what do you believe Legal Eagle lied about in the title exactly? Do you or anyone think Devin actually knows Trump "will" go to jail for his crimes and that title was meant to lead viewers to believe so? Your selective indignation allows for immediate dismissal without actually examining the content and gives you the warm and fuzzies.
I'm actually on tstorm's side in this particular subject. He has been burned before by Legal Eagle and therefore considers it a waste of time to watch any of his videos. I respect that decision, there's only so many hours we get on this earth so not watching someone one has found lacking in what they're supposed to deliver is entirely reasonable. And the title of that video can only be called accurate if Trump goes to jail for this so one can read deceptiveness into the intention of the titling of the video, which if one already has a negative view of Legal Eagle is likely. I mean, they aren't exploring the possibility that his jailtime ends up being 0 days. (other than acknowledging that there are a myriad of other factors that can throw their reasoning off course).
Though since I've actually watched the video, I know they make it clear that the subject is "if he goes to jail for how long will it be?". Which I offer the benefit of the doubt to say that the title was probably chosen to not be cumbersome.
Though since I've actually watched the video, I know they make it clear that the subject is "if he goes to jail for how long will it be?". Which I offer the benefit of the doubt to say that the title was probably chosen to not be cumbersome.
Last edited:
Here's what I want you, or Tstorm to do.
Paraphrase what everyone who replied to Tstorm stated in two sentences.