[itsoktocry]

>You’re making the claim. Show me.

The fact that you are unaware of it means you've got your head-in-the-sand.

"Calling on Americans to get vaccinated against Covid-19, Biden said, “If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in the ICU unit and you’re not going to die.”"

Are those facts?

https://www.cnn.com/2021/07/22/politics/fact-check-biden-cnn...

[JumpCrisscross]

> If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in the ICU unit and you’re not going to die

What part of this says “you won't get COVID, you won't spread COVID”?

[raincole]

> But then, during a third exchange, Biden said that since the vaccines “cover” the highly transmissible Delta variant of the virus: “You’re not going to get Covid if you have these vaccinations.”

It's... literally the next paragraph. Right next to the part you quoted.

[JumpCrisscross]

> literally the next paragraph

I see it now. That's misleading. It contains a nugget of truth inasmuch as a vaccinated person has lower odds of a SARS-CoV-2 infection turning into Covid, but it's not a guarantee. (Nothing in immunology is, but that's a punt.)

It should have been couched, it wasn't, and I can see someone seeing that as lying.

That said, if Biden had used more delicate words, do you think these folks would have taken their MMRs? Are people who make stupid decisions for the next decade because Trump lies about everything sympathetic because they couldn't evaluate source authority?

> Right next to the part you quoted

I was quoting the comment I responded to.

[itsoktocry]

You asked for a source. I gave you one. It had multiple lies in it. You didn't even open the link.

Now you are pretending that someone can't go on YouTube and find more lies about the vaccines from the likes of people like Rachel Maddow. People have assembled long clips, it's a meme.

"Nuggets of truth", my lord, pure delusion.

"But but but what about some hypothetical scenario where the president didn't lie?"

We will never know, will we?

[itsoktocry]

Exactly. For those following along, take note about how this interaction with JumpCrisscross went.

These people will lie. Deny. Gaslight. Move goalposts. Ask for sources they have no intention of looking at. Then lie some more.

Imagine claiming, "No one lied about the vaccines" in 2025 and asking for proof when challenged. It's absurd.

An yet, he has a long posting history here; we know he's not oblivious. So what are the incentives to pretend it never happened?

[itsoktocry]

What a pathetic reply.

You made the claim: >Nobody lied about vaccines.

I posted a link from a left-leaning source, fact-checking the PRESIDENT literally lying about vaccine efficacy. Then you move on to something else.

Well, that's in there too, but you didn't read, did you?

"You’re not going to get Covid if you have these vaccinations.”"

I posted one resource, I'm not doing your research for you. The fact that you deny this indicates you are completely brain-rotted. Enjoy.

[tzs]

You said they lied when they said "you won't get COVID, you won't spread COVID".

Someone doubted you. You responded by posting a quote from President Biden: "If you’re vaccinated, you’re not going to be hospitalized, you’re not going to be in the ICU unit and you’re not going to die."

That does not support your earlier claim. There is support for your earlier claim at the site you took the quote from, but the usual convention here is that if you quote a site you quote the part that supports your argument.

[itsoktocry]

Yeah, ignore the 3 lies in the quote I posted, then ignore the other lies in the article. That's your convention, I get it.

[tzs]

No, you don't get it.

When someone asks you a question, and your response is to post some quotes from an article and a link to the article, people assume that the quotes are meant to answer the question. Most won't follow the link unless they either want to make sure you quoted accurately or they want to see if there is more interesting stuff in the article.