"Destiny Lies About AJW" Reacting To AJW's Video
Vložit
- čas přidán 3. 05. 2024
- Last night on Destiny
Destiny LIES About AJW
► • Destiny LIES About AJW
Destiny channel ► / destiny
Bestiny channel ► / bestiny
Twitter ► / theomniliberal
DGG ►www.destiny.gg/bigscreen
#Destiny
#Politics
#Debate
Piers Morgan Setting Up Hasan vs Destiny Debate
►czcams.com/video/SX3m-61_Q7A/video.html
stop being evil
A few points on the 2020 election, the FBI and social media companies suppressed the Biden laptop. After the election a poll was done where voters were asked, in the swing states, if they would have still voted for Biden. Over 5% said they would not have. Even if this was halved it would have given each state to Trump. This is election interference.
In Michigan 6,000 votes were swapped from Trump to Biden. The mistake was caught and reversed. But when the Democrat government needed to investigate, they just asked Dominion if there were any other problems, to which they said it was an issue of using the wrong flash drive and it did not happen in any other county. Imagine a sports league finding something suspicious with players on a team and they asked the team if there were any other issues. I am sure Enron said the same thing to the government, nope everything is okie dokie. To not be suspicious would be idiotic.
In Wisconsin the Board of Electors told caretakers in nursing homes to fill out ballots for those could not physically do so. When it was publicly revealed the caretakers pointed at the board of Electors. It is illegal but still tied up in court.
Also, in Wisconsin Mark Zuckerburg's Get the vote out organization broke state law by giving 10s of millions to Democrat cities. The law requires any funding to vote to be equally distributed to voting areas of both parties. Election interference, illegal and tied up in court.
In Michigan, a safehouse was discovered by sheriffs before the 2020 election. There were guns burner phones, and ballots (some filled out and others blank in piles) as well as large amounts of cash. The sheriffs brought in the FBI and what do you know the FBI cannot take about it because it is still an open investigation. 4YEARS LATER. And who was paying for this building, just a PAC for Joe Biden.
Since Destiny is not willing to bring up any of these alarming issues on the other side, I guess he is almost a grifter.
He does that because the information you deliver to the audience is just as important as you winning the debate.
Watching destiny on 2x speed while he plays commentary on 2x speed has allowed me to transcend to a new plane of existence
39:08
Watching Destiny at 2x speed while he watches a VOD of himself on 2x speed, where in the VOD, he watches a twitter clip at 1.5x speed, I have truly ascended
I love how Destiny's audience (we the people) just watch all his videos on 2x...Honestly I started doing that with my classes and then youtube now I fear I may never watch a video on 1x again
What do y’all look like I’m curious.
If I took Stevens dose of Vyvanse would I be able to comprehend that ?
@@FurnaceBLMAOOO ME TOO
I can’t wait for the reply of the reply.
Fr we eating good tonight lads
And then Destiny's reply to that.
I can’t wait to reply to your reply to the reply of the reply
Slippery Sean is going to continue to eviscerate Destiny’s bs.
@teskejon do you think slippery is a compliment lol
More AJW Destiny debates would be fun. AJW should go on Destiny’s stream.
Ajw seems cool. Debates would be cool, too. Destiny's way overblowing how much ajw is playing defense in this Instance, imo since ajw was getting to the meat of the issue.
@@lijahrock1801 Destiny just has complete and total anti-conservative brain rot in relation to anything vaguely trump related. AJW could say something as obvious and as easy a position to hold as he doesn't think trump supporters should be exiled from the country or mass killed and destiny would call him a grifter and argue that is playing defense.
@@deadzoneternity damn so many well substantiated buzz words
@@lijahrock1801how is he overblowing it? Either you think ajw is dumb or a grifter its pretty simple.
@@iankastern6513 the entire discussion is about a buzz word my guy, destiny called him a grifter, but is playing the "I didn't say those exact words," game, to deflect responsibility for calling him a grifter and act like he has never said anything negative of ajw, while simultaneously doubling down so his audience such as yourself have dedicated beliefs that he is a grifter.
And also, destiny has literally said he doesn't think conservatives particularly Trump supporters, belong in the country, but there just is not a way to get rid of them.
Destiny is calling ajw, someone he admits in this very video he recognizes as having reasonable takes and a better understanding than him on a fair bit, then goes on to call him a grifter when there is the slightest hint of anything other than flat out homicidal rage towards Trump or his supporters.
You can call it buzz words and just try and dismiss everything all you want, but destiny is just using buzz words, you are just using buzz words, evidently you don't actually care, and just don't have anything of substance to say.
Nooo my left daddy and right daddy are fighting 😢😭😭
So true. I'm gonna have to hide in my room until they stop. 😩
I’m just going to cover my ears and pretend they love each other
They’re both on the right
@@michiganmir7838 😂😂😂 good one
😂😂
Not a grifter. I think the word Steven is looking for is 'Partisan'
This would at least be more accurate, I like Destiny, I like Sean but unfortunately I do consider them both quite partisan.
The problem is Sean's audience leans in that direction. Plus the partisan point isn't even ideological, its factual. The guy did election denial and Sean skipped over him to argue semantics with Destiny. It just so happens to be that he ignored the argument his audience agrees with and fought on the one they disagree with. Either grifting or mighty coincidence.
@@daviddavidson6278 yes, so I agree with the first half of your statement but to my ears that sounds exactly partisan. Ben Shapiro does is my litmus test for what a partisan is. Ben will often make pedantic points like this that can give cover to the far right. I don't know too much about Sean's content but I do know Ben does state outright that his show is intentionally right wing. I've always been with Destiny that throwing the 'grifter' label is something that should be done sparingly
@@mannyogu8124 Here's the key different in partisan and grifter in my mind. And probably why Destiny said grifter specifically. Sean is smart and has a good thought process. He has shown this in his past debates, he's not some blind trumpist. Thats what makes his decision to overlook the insanity of the other guy in favor of arguing with Destiny so "grifty" feeling rather than just partisan.
@@Segphalt They’re both partisan, just in the opposite direction.
I always interpret AJW as being sort of an "uhm achyually" law nerd who really likes Destiny. I don't think he's a grifter or intends to do what Destiny thinks he's doing.
My exact thoughts as well.
He works at Piss Co.
Yeah he does like Destiny so I'm sure this hurt his feelings a bit. I really like Sean.
He's very intentional on what he um actuallies on. Its almost always in service if nit picking Dman's point and implicitly run cover for the way more outrageous claim Dest was opposing
@@angelmartin7310 I think a lot of conservatives/ center right destiny fans are getting there feelings hurt recently because destiny isn’t actually a Tim pool/bill maher liberal like they though he was
In fairness to Sean he’s gone at Tim Pool and Crowder when they’re incorrect before
it doesn't really matter, Destiny doesn't like him, and Destiny doesn't like Conservatives, he's always going to edge towards bad faith with them, at all times.
@@keithfilibeck2390 Oh yeah, those polite, lovely conservatives that are definitely trying to respect everyone around then
@@capcaptainmycaptain4771 plenty do, Destiny interacts with the unhinged losers, which to be fair, most of the online Conservatives are, but the well for Destiny is completely poisoned by who he interacts with.
@@keithfilibeck2390most online leftists being just losers would be an upgrade for them.
@@keithfilibeck2390 yeah and that’s pretty cringe, unbecoming behavior, especially when it’s already a 2x divorcee who is online almost 24/7.
He's mad because Destiny isn't having his baby.
Nah, he’s not mad and destiny was wrong.
@@Shane756 thats the point, they already had a kid but destiny refuses to acknowledge it
@@teskejon wrong how? oh wait it's just a bait lol nvm
@@teskejon wrong about what?
@@spacetoast7783 Everything regarding AJW.
Lawyer here. To be super clear, Standing in Article III terms typically has 3 elements: Has the plaintiff suffered a concrete and particularized injury; Did the Defendant directly cause that injury; Can the Court meaningfully redress that injury. This is "Constitutional" standing. Article III courts can only hear actual "cases and controversies," and cannot issue advisory opinions. "Constitutional standing" analysis ensures there is an actual dispute that the court is empowered to adjudicate. There can also be so-called "prudential standing" elements, which kick in under certain circumstances, like challenging a tax you personally don't like, or taking on a suit because you feel someone else has been aggrieved, that may caution a court against exercising its jurisdiction, because finding standing to this tangential plaintiffs would open the floodgates to thousands of suits and overwhelm the court.
The plaintiff bears the burden to prove they have standing. To this end, there ARE sometimes evidentiary hearings where the plaintiff can submit some evidence of the elements. For example, if you have to prove you suffered some harm, you may at least have to tell the court how you intend to show that ("I'll show invoices that I paid out of my bank account, which I shouldn't have had to pay -- a monetary harm" -- as an example). So while you may not have to show all your evidence right away, you often have to at least explain what KIND of evidence you'll be able to use to show that you were harmed, that the defendant caused it, and that the court can fix it.
With a lot of the Trump cases, the issues were thrown out on "standing" grounds because in evidentiary hearings they couldn't do any of this. They couldn't explain, even in the abstract, how they suffered a concrete and particularized injury. They couldn't explain how the Secretary of State, or the local election board, or whoever they were suing, harmed them. And most importantly, they couldn't explain how the court was supposed to fix their issue. They were often asking for a whole new election to be held, or thousands of votes to be summarily disregarded. The courts arguably didn't even have the power to do that, and even if they did, it's unclear that even these things would fix the issue being complained about.
Accordingly, these cases largely lost on standing because, even in the abstract, the arguments they raised didn't make sense and couldn't be supported by even hypothetical categories of evidence. They largely didn't even get to the part where you show the actual evidence, because even their hypothetical evidence was so unpersuasive.
From the Tim Pool clip part, it seems Destiny was talking about Sean. Even if he was actually talking about Tim, its reasonable for Sean to see it as a personal attack.
If AJW cares about accuracy and isnt autistic he wouldnt see it that way, it was pretty clear destint wasnt attackinh ajw, its the whole legion debacle all over again. But centrist tend to be very autistic so it works.
If he's going to make an attack video, criticising Destiny for not going through full footage and context before reacting, he should probably take a more measured position on the clips himself. I do agree it was an easy mistake to make, but it really just felt like more evidence of giftiness with him squeezing reality to fit an argument that favours himself.
@@FreekinEkin2 Wait, if Destiny says he hates him and he`s a grifter .. and even goes through examples, no shit Sean brings it up. How can that be evidence of a grift
@@lakabakabut he didn't call him a grifter
@@FreekinEkin2this exactly. It actually does make me reconsider Sean's honesty.
Yeah, AJW is a smart guy, but the ballot harvesting discussion really isn’t a good look by him. “I was trying to clarify the point” while the guy next to Destiny is saying “there would millions of fraudulent” ballots isn’t clarifying, it’s taking time to intentionally try to get Destiny to undermine his point (which is correct, btw) while not doing anything to address the obviously false claim made by the other dude.
You’re as bad as the ballot guy because you’re saying truth and facts don’t matter - that’s what AJW was doing -- he definitely wasn’t siding with or supporting that guy, he was correcting a blatant inaccuracy.
Did you even watch the panel?? AJW WASN’T supporting the ballot guy - he was being impartial and correcting information and everything he said was valid. Truth and fact matter and trying to gaslight about what he said isn’t supporting either and is hypocritical.
Watch more critically. Shawn pulls a fallacy of equivocation by trying to pass off the 27 states as the same type of evidence Destiny is asking for, which is very clearly about fraudulent ballots. He is absolutely valid to feel like Shawn is sanitizing Pasta's points. @@HostileTakeover555
@@HostileTakeover555man I respect you fighting in these comments trying to show people the truth. That being said it’s a lost cause, fanboys will just blindly defend D and shit on you. Good luck though.
@@albeon81so you can't read 😂did it say ajw supported the ballots guy or that he wouldn't challenge him. But I guess words are hard
I feel Destiny hedges all the time (nothing wrong with that), but Sean can't?
This is how I see it too. I feel like Destiny doesnt give the ground he asks others to give him.
@@skepticinall one of the many debate tactics that many people who speak to destiny realize but are usually not smart enough to verbalize
Sean isn't hedging, he's providing a shield for crazy conservatives by arguing over precise technicalities that don't address the actual meat of the argument.
@@ignotuscapillary8313you mean like how destiny does
@@amphetaminedaydream Bruh, for who? The crazy progressives hate destiny specifically because he doesn't do that.
Destiny wearing the same shirt and sitting in the same spot is really funny to me and I don't know why
Ok. I'm 3 minutes in and I've had 3 ads. What the hell.
Google is desperate for Destiny clout I guess lol
ublock origin
@@stefanmironov6405 I have it. Just not on mobile.
I do agree with Destiny here that it does seem that AJW carries water for the far right (even though I don't think he does it on purpose), but it definitely seemed like he was implying that Sean had the redpill position on initiating divorce (even though I think he didn't intend to)
That just felt like a miscommunication between the two of them to me.
Sean is carrying a dam on his back for the right
Bcoz he is depending on those money
He really doesn’t though. Just bc someone doesn’t criticize the fringes doesn’t mean they carry water for them. He’s a centrist
@@scarletsletter4466 lol if he is centrist then Mike pence is progressive
Sean is definitely just Grifting, he knows his "points" are barely on topic half the time, and it's painfully obvious when he starts obfuscating through sophistry.
I hope you and AJW just get on a call and talk it out because I think that would help.
That standing vs evidencery grounds is bit wonky. Sean is law student ofcourse he want to correct if standing is used incorrectly. If I understand standing it's that if you want to win some compensation on law case. You need to have got damges. So that i cant get money out of tobacco law case if i dont even smoke so tobacco damages dont concern me. I don't have standing on the case.
I dont know if the case is question is valid/invalid because standing or evidenciary grounds but surely the are two different things.
such a dumb point for him to make destiny multiple times during any debate will interrupt the flow of conversation to clarify definitions. He's done it on the word "geno" "cide" a thousand times this month alone. But I guess no one else can do it.
@@74rocktiger74good point
I'm not sure who person Destiny is talking about it but Yea to me it sounds like the court will look at evidence pertaining to wether or not you have been affected or suffered damages and looks at wether or not what your asking for can be given or is realistic by a favorable ruling.
To me it doesn't read as if they are looking at the strength or weakness of evidence yet.
@@lee155912000 Don't doubt yourself. You are 100 percent correct. Destiny is making a dishonest reading of it because it helps his argument.
Sean is not a law student, and as the video shows, he tried to argue against Destiny by replacing a correct definition with an incorrect definition. And the label for what was happening isn't even important anyway. Sean was just ultra fucking wrong here and he's coping hard.
1:01 am I wrong or are almost all of the debates AJW has done with Destiny been 1 on 1 debates?..
There doesn't need to be another right winger there. It could just be someone asking him about Trump and him playing it off as that wacky Trump rather than dealing with Trump as an actual actor like he would for a democrat.
Has he ever done one? I've only ever seen him in groups.
Did you read the whole page about standing? Just curious, because it didn’t look like you did.
He didn’t, he read the first sentence 😂
@@DadsCigaretteRun that’s what I thought. Destiny is a smart dude but he’s often incorrect about the law. I don’t blame him though, it can be confusing, especially if you just look at one sentence. Like one sentence could make it seem like you’re right, but then if you read the full paragraph or page you’ll see there are other qualifiers.
A recent example I can think of is when Destiny said a cop can’t approach you with probable cause if you have alcohol in a brown paper bag. What he failed to realize is that reasonable suspicion is a thing. Now I’m skeptical any legal claims destiny makes lol
@@Exhumami yeah that was a weird one, I hope he was just making a joke…it can be hard to tell sometimes
@@DadsCigaretteRun good point, that could’ve been the case and it wouldn’t surprise me at all.
Destiny is arguing for the meat of the topic not the nitty gritty part of the topic
When you only criticize one side, people will assume you believe everything the other side is saying. AJW spent the entire debate trying to debate destiny while not saying a single word of criticism to the insane guy.
If AJW wants to play both sides and take a moderate position, show that with your actions during the debate. Not after the debate.
Clearly you ddin't watch the debate.
@@blondymonk1535show some examples of
@blondymonk1535 name a single substantial criticism ajw made to the conservatives on the panel. The only thing he said was that Trump was stupid for not following bars advice.
@@Jankyito Ok... so you didn't even watch AJW's video? Damn bro...
@blondymonk1535 I'm talking about the debate. I don't care what he says in a video. In the debate, he picked every single one of his fights with destiny and made no comments on the ridiculous claims of the other panelists.
Nice goal post shift btw, from "you didn't watch the debate" to "you didn't watch his video". What's next? Do I have to read his book too?
I think Destiny is having a problem that some conservatives and even leftists have with Destiny himself. And that he very selectively paints a one-sided bias to Sean even when he's looking at and hearing things that contradict what he's accusing Sean of.
At 1:07 Destiny accuses Sean of having "....nothing to say of criticisms in the right, ever." And doesn't retract that even while he saw that Sean had video on Jan.6 criticizing the ones who charged the capitol, or when he sees in his channel, videos criticizing Steven Crowder and Tim Pool.
Destiny also discounts Sean's criticism of Trump at 13:30 when he said Trump has no claim to the unconstitutionality of mail-in ballots. Destiny does this by saying Sean should have made a position on whether or not voter fraud existed despite the two subjects being entirely different
Also at 20:44 Sean explains how he was calling nonsense on the point that the guy to the right of Destiny was making. Sean was saying it made sense that Biden won by that much because there was a greater population now, and somehow Destiny interprets that as Sean discounting Biden's loss when Sean's point was already agreeing with his.
This in addition to the fact that Sean has criticized red pill talking points and was also on the stream with Destiny, Layman, and Lauren Southern, where Sean clearly took the side against Lauren Southern's position of being a NIMBY
I really think that Destiny's accusation of Sean "being close to a grifter" is kind of disingenuous and at worst, incredibly petty. He says he holds Sean to a higher standard, but it just seems like "higher standard" to Destiny means making more criticisms of the right than Sean already has. And even when he does like he saw and heard from the video he was playing, he either downplayed it or ignored it entirely.
Ok I won't even read the rest of the comment the first paragraph is crazy enough.
HOW is a single video about jan 6th that was done day after enough for 4 years of jan 6th being an issue and an issue in court as a channel that does law as content? He rather does individual crimes of black people.
@@karljonson3287overall AJW doesnt do politics bro. He focuses on local and national crimes and crime trends, and debunking crime talking points.
He reiterated why he covers a lot of black crime about a month ago, it's his belief that because of BLM and progressive orthodoxy black people are made to be "angel Aladdins who aren't capable of crime."
Anyways, D man was way off in this video just like the initial "close to a grifter" instance. D is wrong and he can't be shaken off it. Fortunately he did say "i couldve went back 15 seconds, yeah"
@@Squibtorious that is absolutely not true. He DOES cover politics all the time and he DOES cover cases relating to politics but when its democrats in question.
@@karljonson3287 You're just wrong.
@@blondymonk1535 about what
Destiny saying he was right on standing, after reading what sounds like Sean was right. His original claim was about evidence.
1 minute is crazy
That was pretty bad faith there at 21:46. The other guy claims it's suspicious that biden beat Obama in votes and AJW challenged that idea by saying we have more people whether he's wrong or right it seems clear to me he wasn't saying that as a underhanded way to dismiss Biden's achievement.
Yeah that came off as willing bad intent into the world from destiny lol
Yeah I thought the same thing about having a higher population now, having higher voters turnout doesn't negate that fact
Yeah I agree. The guy was saying there’s no way Biden is more popular than Obama and Sean just challenged that by saying we have a bigger population so it’s not surprising more people voted for Biden, it was just an off the cuff reply. Nowhere did he undercut Biden’s popularity or the “true” reason he won, yet Destiny went on some unhinged 30 second rant about how Sean is making a BS point and he’s lying to undermine Biden’s popularity etc. Like bruh, way to inject ill intent into such a lukewarm statement. THAT was bad faith.
Careful now, if Destiny catches you calling him bad faith he will cross-permaban you on everything lol
It's extremely obvious that Sean was dismissing Biden's achievement (or Trumps' failure if we're being honest). Suit guy and Destiny were both speaking to Biden's popularity and level of support at the polls. Sean steered off into absolute numbers, derailing the conversation.
AJW is great. Especially his ❤❤❤❤ for Anna
He definitely wacks off to her
He got embarrassed by destiny in multiple debates
Anna is pretty lolol. Too bad she has goofy woman opinions.
I think he's targeting Emma now lol.
AJW has been a clown for a while now, half of Trump's court cases for the election were legit tossed out because of a lack of evidence, in a few cases Trump's team even admitted they didn't actually have evidence.
The was right about the judges not going against the system. In no world would they let it come to light that things weren't on the up and up. Whether cheating happened or not, no good will come from that being shown to the world. The results of people thinking they were cheated is peanuts compared to what would happen if they admitted cheating happened.
A bit hypocritical of Destiny when the criticism of Sean here is exactly what Krystal Ball criticised him for after Breaking Points debate.
Arguing the minutiae instead of engaging on the broad point.
Destiny responds to a video calling out him being bad faith is to use more bad faith defenses
How?
@@slykeren8371 For example automatically assuming ill intent from Saun (first point being made in the video) whenever he wants to correct some minor inaccuracy? I mean sure, it may not relate too much to the point being made, but assuming he says that only to obfuscate the debate and oppose Destiny wherever he can, that feels literally like a bad faith interpretation. And then AFTER doing this Destiny goes off to search the topic up to actually check if he is right or not.
@@justalearnerwhostillknowsn5571 Sean covered for the far rightie who was saying there were millions of fraudulent ballots despite knowing better That is the grift.
Bad faith is when my favorite content creator gets direct criticism 😢 Destiny is so mean to Sean. 😢
@@justalearnerwhostillknowsn5571And he was correct! Did you even watch?
AJW is one of the more better faith actors on the libertarian right. Despite some clear disagreements, Sean seems like a pretty reasonable guy. IDK why Destiny would go out of his way to insinuate he's a grifter, then respond by basically doubling down on all of his points. This is why I really wish Exskillsme was still around...
I'm guessing it has more to do with Sean being friends/friendly with ppl further to the right who Steven really hates?
I agree Sean is defintely better than his political peers but Destiny did lay out his reasons here, I'm wondering what your counter would be. To summarize, Sean heard two people arguing and decided to argue against a trivial point while ignoring the fantastic idiocy on the other side. He was selective in his criticism and Sean just so happened to be selective in the manner that his audience agrees with.
He’s not a libertarian by his own admission, he’s conservative. But yes, anyone who isn’t continually damning the right as the worst thing ever with the same amount of tds as he has he attacks as thinking they’re running cover.
They’re just not as passionate as he is and he can’t grasp that
Destiny demonstrated pretty well that Sean is grifting and carrying water for the far right
He's definitely one of the better ones, still a moron though. AJW was trying to muddy the waters but half of Trump's court cases were tossed out because of a lack of evidence. Instead of being honest, Sean tries to downplay why Trump's court cases were thrown out.
@@famalam943 Sean has referred to himself as a libertarian numerous times. He's pretty lax on drug-related issues and holds the "adults can do what they want" whenever trans issues are brought up. He's obviously more on the conservative side of the aisle, specifically when it comes to criminal justice reforms, but he's far from being a Trump Republican or Christain Conservative.
So yeah, I'd consider Sean being labeled as a "libertarian conservative" a pretty fair assessment.
Oh no AJW actually challenges the things I say and supports claims of people he might not even support. That should make him more credible than anybody that you've ever really debated. I don't know what the hell happened but something broke your brain man
honestly, policies about how someone votes dont matter and is always the main point of contention that something CAN go wrong
It's always about taking away methods to vote or putting barriers before you can vote, never about the transparency or verification of votes. It's like they don't believe anyone would vote for a Democrat unless they were paid, a plant or dont really exist as a real citizen.
22:18 Just because AJW says that there’s more people in the 2020 election than in 2008 or 2012 doesn’t mean he doesn’t think the turnout percentage is higher nor that he’s undervaluing Biden’s win??? How is saying that disingenuous or bullshit?
Bc AJW was playing into all the election fraud claims during the mindfest debate.
@@goddessrick8734 - I watched it and he definitely wasn’t…his stance was clear - that if the Trump side didn’t want mail in ballots they should have taken care of it way earlier on and they didn’t.
Destiny probably felt that just stating "The population is bigger" without adding any more context (like higher percentage voter turnout) implies that the only reason Biden won is that. That is especially true when you are trying to discredit his impressive vote count.
He's refuting Biden's win by record numbers and comparing campaign turnout to Obama. The claim is that Biden is actually not more popular we just have a larger population. Destiny refutes the claim by bringing up the higher percentage of people voting, therefore proving larger public support was not solely due to a larger public.
Yeah this point was a reach. I do think destiny is downplaying that sean at least appears to be making arguments that would be anti-right wing here and there. I think you'd have to make a broader point that while sean engages in some anti right wing stuff and some shady obfuscation, that the obfuscation is doing more harm and is more indicative of bad faith than the concessions are fighting that point.
Everything before that in this video was pretty clearly dumb from sean, I'm not even sure how his own audience can defend that he's being pedantic and obfuscating. He acts like playing clips makes it obvious what he was doing and it's right, it makes it obvious he's doing exactly what destiny said he's doing.
destiny is a womans name
Interesting. This is new information.
*woman of colour
No way :0
SWEATSTINY
Jesse was right, Melina didn’t obey him that’s why she initiated the divorce smh
I think the reason AJW doesn't consider evidence as a part of standing is likely because at the start of a court case, the court assumes all allegations are true. The idea is then judge if the case is even worth bothering with by seeing if the steelman'd version of the plaintiff's side would amount to anything. To be clear, AJW is still wrong on that issue, but his position is not crazy.
The court does not just assume all allegations are true. They just use a low standard of proof to determine the presented evidence actually reflects wrongdoing.
36:00 so when you directly address something ajw says you expect him not to think your applying it to him? Even I thought that you were applying it to him. you say he holds water the far right based on assumption of intent but he consistently goes out of his way to correct and debunk them. How can he hold water for them and at the same time go out of his way to debunk and correct them? That makes no logical sense.
34:27 you called him a grifter, straight up, now backing out with softer language 😂
Nope even Sean acknowledged that wasn't what Destiny said
"straight up" meaning "sort of accusing in a partial way as a possible explanation for some actions"
So straight. So up.
My mistake, "close to a grifter" 🤡
Destiny just thinks EVERY conservative is stupid, there's no other reason anyone would be conservative. So if AJW is smart he must be a grifter.
he is
You are the one making that connection. Destiny actually complimented Sean’s intelligence in this damn video! Wow this is a bad look.
Do you really not know what a grifter is?
People will promote particular things to appeal to a certain group…they will then continue to focus only on the things that will definitely make that audience happy…regardless of value or benefit.
Tim Pool is a prime example. Crowder also. The entire MSNbC lineup and Hassan fit the bill on the others side.
The reason this is frowned upon is that eventually nothing matters aside from getting those clicks…not honest, integrity or morality.
Fox News is the final form of going down this road…even more than msnbc but both are guilty.
Sean is more guilty because he has shown the intelligence to recognize why it is bad yet he has still slowly drifted toward it.
@@anthonyshoop575 Yes Destiny grudgely said Sean was "reasonably intelligent" before call him a partial grifter. Because Sean can't believe what he says because he's reasonably intelligent and all conservatives are dumb.
@@woodsmand Destiny has called Sean intelligent before when they debated. The key point here is Sean glossing over lies by other conservatives to argue semantics with Destiny. Its fine to hold conservative positions, where you get into problems is when you overlook lies on your side like Sean did. Sean's past history and reasonable thought process are why Destiny is saying "grifter" rather than "regarded"
@@daviddavidson6278 Okay is it seans duty to personally debunk every bad argument from anyone even vaguely right wing? because i don't see destiny doing a lot of that either. Sure he goes after the tankies and insane lefties but he never has any criticism for the democratic establishment at least not that i've seen. But then i don't think Destiny really follows anything the democrats do.
Still think its funny that Steven cant say what the issue he was wrong about on the standing. He can point all day that je wanted to tefer to the evidence parts. But the issue is that the current election system doesnt allow someone to show how they were harmed from states not following their own constitutions.
And a federal appeals court isnt gonna try to say a state that held an election wasnt following their own procedures and throw out a result of that process.
So trumps court cases were claiming that the states caused the harm and that the election process was mishandled. But the courts and judges are gonna say tough luck, because you cant prove a harm was done.
4:20 Looks like the man wants you to make a manifesto!
Remember folks, technicalities on legal matters only matter when you're debating Palestinian activists. If it's about Trump then you're being pedantic. :)
Yes!!!! Specific language is specific for a reason, and Destiny knows that when it benefits him
THANK YOU!
I feel like Destiny's intentionally cutting Sean off before everyone can hear what he's about to say so that Destiny can pre actively Poison the well
What part of the video did he skip?
Example?
@@spacetoast7783 it has nothing to do with skipping it has to do with "poisoning the well" which means you lay a negative premise for what someone is about to say before they say it that way everybody can go into what they're about to say with a certain mindset
@@my_master512 Example?
@@spacetoast7783 the first time he does it is at 4 minutes and 9 seconds 🤯
Now you can keep writing the word example as if I don't know what I'm talking about but you haven't proposed anything against what I proposed all you're doing is poking at the position I've laid out 💯
If you feel I'm wrong actually engage with the statements I've made I'm no longer going to do any more research for you I don't know why you think you're entitled to write the word "example" why simultaneously being too lazy to watch the video and see him do it over and over again 🤯🤨
I’m confused by Destiny’s lack of at least a reasonably charitable interpretation for someone who he says he respects. Of course I might be misunderstanding but to me it seems as if Destiny is a little too emotionally invested on this and should take a step back and look over the situation calmly.
Destiny could be right in some of his criticisms but that doesnt mean Sean doesn’t at least have some valid counters that should be treated as such. For instance it’s possible someone didn’t hear something, misremembered something, or misunderstands something. Additionally, Sean is speaking through the lens of his intentions and thoughts at that time which can alter the interpretation of this video.
Honestly, I’m annoyed with Destiny enough to want to debate him on this a little bit. I don’t think he’s making strong points overall here.
Than email him
I love how none of you people hold this same opinion when he goes after anyone on the left. I doubt a middle ground can be struck between the two Sean is willing to elect trump as the next president over Biden, someone destiny sees as a national threat and embarrassment and we’ve seen their arguments between the two in the past destiny is either frustrated or unamused
@@williams1704 Well look at it from our point of view... we see Biden as someone who's completely weekend the US on the global stage and allowed our enemies to make moves, while ignoring our border, and all while having the media generally running defense for him. You can say "but Trump is a threat" or "but Trump is an embarrassment", but if you can't point out the positives he did and admit he was, overall, an alright president, then why would we ever bother discussing in good faith?
I could admit Biden has surprised me as president and done *some* things I like. Good on him for not totally abandoning Ukraine and screw the Republicans that are pushing into isolationist garbage. But every time I try to get some one-on-one with lefties regarding Trump they can't *ever* see past Jan 6, or his "fine people" comment (which wasn't even a real thing, by the way). If I point out that Jan 6 was a result of four years of leftists calling for insurrection and overthrowing the system and that being met with little to no reaction from the Democrats, they will always pivot to something else. The most even Destiny's admitted here is that it's "not good" for people like Hillary or Nancy Pelosi to have called Trump "illegitimate", but he never concedes that this behavior may have factored into Jan 6 at all.
So it's just feeling pointless sitting down to talk.
I think it boils down to his number one priority, in any situation, being maximum posturing and attaining the appearance of winning for his audience. Doesn’t matter if it’s a political debate or personal drama. As a result, when he makes a mistake like impugning Shaun’s character, there’s really no going back for him; if he can’t double down, he’ll try to posture himself into plausible deniability.
I’ve seen this guy admit to an L without BSing maybe like, two or three times since I’ve started watching after 2020/covid.
@@williams1704 I feel Destiny likes to think he can change his mind, but even looking at him here, he's just so... angry... like, he went and said Sean was drifting at the bit where Sean said "we have more people now" while ignoring that... Sean was *agreeing* with him... he said claiming Biden got "more votes than any president" was a dumb argument because, duh, we have more people now. But Destiny just hyperfocused on saying Sean was drifting...
No. When people talk about ballot harvesting, they are indeed talking about picking up ballots and dropping them off for people. It is abused by people targeting locations where the likelihood of the voter of that area will vote in the direction you want. Then, exclude the locations where the likelihood of the voter will be to vote against your intended direction.
give us literally any data or evidence for this other than “you know the democrats are gonna be democrats, wink wink”
turn the brain on bro, how come literally every case was thrown out in all 50 states by half republican maga judges…
what you’re mis-prescribing is gerry mandering, and it’s certainly not caused by something that only conveniently became a problem when trump lost.
This is one of the most embarrassing takedown attempts I've seen online recently. Sean is being completely genuine and forthcoming in his responses only to be met with mega cringe bad faith arguments...
🤫🧏♂️
If you think this is supposed to be a takedown, the only one being embarrassing here is you
Where were the bad faith arguments?
@daviddavidson6278 sean reasonably says that there are more people so the claim that biden cheated is false is met with he is trying to handwave bidens win is super disingenuous.
@@daviddavidson6278the entire mentioning population growth since Obama is disingenuous is bad faith and smooth brained af.
This is a low time in destiny's career as far as taking L's
said nobody ever
@@garywebb2432cope all you want but everyone is laughing at him . Watch the Dave Smith debate he almost came off like Hasan
@@jaygee5874
you're lying no they arent lmaoo
Why do you even watch him dummy
@@garywebb2432 Comment section in the debates, Twitter , Reddit . Outside his coping regarded fan base no one is taking the Adderall addict seriously
My boy sean dont miss
Dude destiny you were wrong here. He said you were wrong and then you agreed that you were wrong and twisted it around that somehow what you said was correct. It might have only been a definition of a word but it doesn't matter. This shit makes you look crazy as hell
I like Destiny and AJW. But I think Destiny isn’t being consistent here. He raged out at Finklehammer for “Men’s rea” vs “dolus special”, and then gets upset at Sean for forcing him to be accurate.
Lol that point is what separating Between genocide or not.both are totally different
Norm was the one (incorrectly) correcting Destiny on Dollus Specialius. Sean is ignoring a guy denying the election to argue semantics with Destiny.
@@daviddavidson6278 ya i can't even imagine how can they connect both the things
It's not about Sean trying to force him to be accurate, it's about the context in which it happens. If they were having 1 on 1 debate and there was some shared reality and Destiny made a small mistake in recounting how the legal system works in this area, I'm sure it would be fine. But when the other guy is going on about millions of illegal ballots, it has a completely different tone. It's kinda like talking about the things America did bad on 9/11, like can you not wait for a different time to talk about this.
Norm claims to be one of the world’s most studied people on the issue they were discussing. For him to not know a term that was central to his argument exposes his massive lack of knowledge. It wasn’t a semantics discussion or “being accurate”, it was a case where Norm’s lack of knowledge was on full display.
Didn’t this guy say he doesn’t call people grifters when speaking with Peter B?
Again people get really autistic online its quite fascinating. Destiny has said multiple times that he doesnt see most people as grifters but he does believe there are, his justification for sean is that he is smarter and should know better.
@@iankastern6513what is the grift?
@@yuriyfromamerica3558 caping for populist Republicans
@@spacetoast7783 I don’t think we define grifting the same way
@@yuriyfromamerica3558 What's grifting to you then? Most of us here think someone is grifting when they compromise their supposed standards to milk an audience.
It's always the same with Steven:
- Makes some undeserved criticism about someone;
- Receives resonable pushback through valid criticism of himself;
- Proceeds to make a reaction doubling down and rejecting any chance of being wrong.
This attitude Is precisely why he keeps making the same mistakes and trusting questionable people, he's just that arrogant, only Tim Pool can rival his ego.
And zero substantiation... Sean was clearly biased when he critiqued Destiny for "standing" while ignoring the other guy denying the election.
Its always the same criticism:
1. Vague point
2.vague point
3. People saying you are wrong is reasonable pushback with zero substanciation.
This is precisely why centrist fans will never convince anyone of anything and have completely unfounded beliefs like destiny.
@@daviddavidson6278 This is such an empty criticism because Destiny also won't throw debate partners under the bus if they say something wrong, he's done it plenty of times when he and Rob Noeer were arguing from the same side and Rob said something stupid, and he's also said he wouldn't want to make democrat politicians look bad if he was talking to them.
You can't cry about playing team sports in debates if you also do it, you especially can't call people grifters over it. Destiny is just mad that Sean discredited his argument while indirectly making the other guy look better.
@@angryman_ For one, this is a panel, Sean doesn't need to be tied to the election fraud position if he doesn't want to. but also didn't Destiny literally correct Morris on the Gaza deaths of starvation point during his Finkelstein point? Just to remind you what we're talking about. One guy denied the election, the other guy corrected him and Sean decided to correct the second guy... To compare that to Destiny not wanting to jump down a democratic politicians throat during an interview is crazy.
@@angryman_ I'd have more sympathy if destiny was actively doing something to obfuscate the substance of the discussion with his defense. Sure, it's a valid criticism to say you aren't correcting your partner in a debate when they say something dumb, that silence is in some sense signing off on the position. But that's fundamentally different from what's happening here. Destiny is saying that sean is going a step further and reaching for arguments that are unrelated, that he's smart enough to KNOW are unrelated, and that the only logical inference is that he's purposely making irrelevant and pedantic points that aren't even correct in an active attempt to cover for his partner.
I'm sure destiny has done this at some point, but sean does it a ton. I don't know if destiny is even required to because most of the panels where he has a "partner" are like 9 way panels where it's less reasonable to assume any one person has alliance with another. He also generally avoids having partners in debates in general because they hold him back.
Move over Kendrick and drake, this is real beef
I feel like the divorce clip does make it seem like Destiny is talking about Shaun and Tim as a whole. Especially as the initial twitter clip is clipped from shaun saying "she initiated the divorce" in which destiny then states his position. I don't think it was done in a malicious way, but I can see why AJW thought Destiny was responding to his comment, because he kinda was.
Destiny you annoyingly correct people all the time (regardless of whether you are right or wrong) over things that are trivial or have no baring over the main issue or you misconstrue. Now someone does it back to you and now they’re suddenly a grifter???? Like get real. Just say it’s annoying or what not. Because if that makes Sean a near grifter then that makes you a near grifter to.
Its one thing to correct during a conversation. Its another to skip over an argument for election denial to argue semantics. Destiny's claim is that hes selectively biased and it happens to be in the direction of his audience's political leanings. Its plausible Sean isn't grifting but I just don't see Sean's case that his actions don't resemble grifting.
the grift is the selective criticism.
argue the little nitpicky points while not saying much about the absolute bullshit that someone more aligned with you spews
@@daviddavidson6278 you got a deluded sense of reality if you think this constitutes grifting even if what you state about him purposely skipping over the argument to argue about semantics is true?
@@evanr5871 just like Destiny does a lot of times, he was trying to establish clarity. Maybe annoying or unnecessary to some. Doesn’t mean it’s a grift. That’s ridiculous especially when Destiny has done the same plenty of times before
@@jayro792 How is changing your argument to appeal to your audience not grifting? So just to be clear, if Destiny is arguing with a conservative and he thinks the conservative is actually right but he continues arguing so his audience continues supporting him that not grifting?
41:00 so you expect him to understand that you didn’t apply that to position to him even though you quoted him, but you ascribe position him to for everything else?😂
you can’t have it both ways Stephen…
I think Sean just understands were the conservation always goes, especially with Destiny, about this subject. It ends up being a argument about whether or not Trump really believed there was voter fruad. In Destiny's mind, he thinks there is clear cut evidence showing there's no way there's any type of reasonable doubt that Trump knew there was no voter fruad when in reality it's a matter of opinion. Much of that "evidence" rely's on hear say and even if Trump was trying to get others onboard like with that phone call to Georgia. He still could have believed there was legit voter fruad. Destiny will argue that most of Trump's lawyers told him there was no voter fruad therefore he knew when everyone understands that may or may not have been the case. in truth, we cannot read anyone's mind and have no real idea if Trump did or did not think there was legit voter fruad or not. Since we generally as a society believe in everyone being innocent until proven guilty that should be the end of Trump being doing anything crinimal, especially since he did not even come close to becoming president again. It seems like Destiny's TDS is talking much of the time about this topic. Sean's not perfect but he also doesn't care about helping the right or anything like that. Can we say the same about Destiny and the left? This video has not, at least for me, caused me to change my mind which I thought Destiny also lied and spoke negatively about Steven. Even the thing he is accussing Sean of, helping the far right, sounds like some kind of partisan, wing nut nonsense. Destiny is better and smarter than this.
I can understand why it might be frustrating for Destiny to get corrected on things he doesn't think are important, but he doesn't realize how stupid he sounds when he talks about law and procedure sometimes because he just doesn't know much about it. For the people who do though him saying "Part of that standing was evidentiary grounds" is just a nonsense statement, they're two different things and the distinction actually does matter. Just like it really matters whether you say Mens Rea or Dolus Specialis, the distinction between those two standards is important. The main difference being that standing and evidentiary grounds have nothing to do with each other, whereas at least Dolus Specialis is a type of Mens Rea.
He does this a lot when he talks about law, especially the 14th amendment case from the Supreme Court, he reads something and doesn't understand it, but then makes very strong statements about the thing he didn't understand. Though to be fair to Destiny I don't think he would have gotten that case so wrong if he didn't have Pisco in his ear explaining everything incorrectly because that's just what Pisco does when he doesn't like a ruling, lies about what it says (the other lawyer not challenging the fundamentally incorrect understanding much at all didn't help either). He even goes so far as to read the test for standing, misunderstand it, and then say "Oh so I was 100% right" because he lacks even a baseline set of knowledge on the subject. In determining whether someone has standing all accusations are assumed to be true regardless of evidence (much like the ICJ genocide accusations), it's only once they've decided that a party does have standing that they look at the evidence and make another determination about whether or not there is enough evidence to go forward, but again they have to assume that all of the evidence presented is 100% accurate at this stage. The only type of case I know of where that's different is when a party is alleging fraud (like a lot of Trump's cases), then they need to produce all evidence of who, what, when, where, and why up front. The reason so many of the cases were thrown out at this stage is because they refused to produce that evidence in their initial filings as required by law.
If you're curious, the reason they got that case totally wrong is because they took for granted that Trump 100% committed insurrection (despite not even being charged with it) and that it's undisputed. The case, therefor, is not about enforcement of Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, as they kept saying it was, but rather it was about whether or not a state (Colorado) could DETERMINE that he did on their own and without a trial. Insurrection is a federal crime, only the federal government can charge, try, and convict someone of a federal crime (aka determine whether they did it or not), a state cannot simply declare a person guilty of any crime without trial, let alone a federal crime they don't even have the jurisdiction to charge. Of course Congress is the body of government that has the authority to make that determination, I don't know why that surprised them, and Congress already decided exactly how they would do it by codifying it into federal criminal law. This would be rather like if your local government declared you a felon and took your right to vote and own firearms away without ever even arresting, charging, or trying you, AND that local government doesn't even have jurisdiction to charge you for it in the first place. That's so obviously not how any of this works, and it's the same in that case. Some experts were saying that SCOTUS has the power to determine whether it was insurrection or not, but nobody even attempted to bring that case in front of them. It's rare that we get a 9-0 decision, but we did because this was so obviously illegal, I don't make much of the fact that they originally started to write it as dissenting in part before changing it to just concurring in part. The difference really isn't that important and they were able to say that they thought the majority took it too far in deciding issues not before the court either way, but I don't blame them for wanting to head off the other retarded things that Colorado or other states were likely to try and would fail for the exact same reasons.
The difference I see in what you're saying is that when Destiny corrects or clarifies things its usually central to the disagreement or is based on an expectation of expertise. In this case Sean skipped over someone on his side doing election denial to argue semantics with Destiny. Why skip over the main point of disagreement? When people talk about Finkelstein they say expert, that's why Destiny harped on Norm being wrong about Mens Rea & Dollus Specialius for so long. When you think of Destiny do you think "expert on standing"? He doesn't claim to be so a correction is fine.
@@daviddavidson6278 Well admittedly I didn't watch the whole panel, but that guy is bringing up that the cases weren't thrown out on standing, Destiny comes in to say that it WAS standing because he thinks evidentiary grounds and standing are the same thing, then Sean basically clarified that they're not. Sure, it wasn't central to Destiny's point but he's still up on a stage saying nonsense in an authoritative way. It's worthy of correction because as I said, the distinction does matter and I'll explain why: The other guy seemed to be saying that they weren't thrown out on standing, but they were thrown out because of corruption in the court, them not wanting to undermine their own system or some such nonsense. A good response to that would be to point out that it was evidentiary grounds and in many cases it was because of a blatant refusal on Trump's part to produce the evidence required. A bad response to that is to just be contrarian, say it was standing, and be wrong.
As for the other one about ballot harvesting, the guy is basically saying ballot harvesting = fraud, Destiny seems like he starts to claim that it didn't happen, Sean points out that it did because it's legal in those states, it just doesn't mean there was fraud... Kinda the opposite, in fact. The bottom line is that sure, it can be annoying to be corrected when you don't think the details matter, but the details do matter in complex discussions and he's either misspeaking a lot or is out of his depth when it comes to those details. Being annoyed about getting corrected though turned into "He carries so much water for them", "He runs defense for them", etc. Destiny ends up doing the very thing that he hates when people do to him, a bad faith representation of something without the supporting clips. It's the beginning of the whole "Simulacrum" thing that he wrote about years ago, is it just okay when he does it though? Or is it okay because being corrected on details can be annoying?
The guy next to him mentioned standing and standing wasn't the point
@@Kat957 He didn't make the fact that its standing his main point. I don't get why Sean thought it was necessary to skip over the election denial to correct Destiny on semantics. What changes in Destiny's argument if he doesn't say standing? Nothing. So why did Sean decide to not correct the person his audience agrees with politically to disagree with the person they disagree with politically? Hmmm... We cannot know but its a mighty coincidence.
@@daviddavidson6278 Do you not think it's possible that he thought it was worth correcting the part of Destiny's arguments that are wrong (seriously, if you're familiar with procedure what he said was absolute nonsense) rather than reiterating everything Destiny said but with that small correction? He's not on the other guy's side with this, he made that pretty clear. Correcting your own side's flaws is not defending or carrying water for the other side, we should ALWAYS be more critical of our own side than the other side. If you and I are arguing with someone, you're doing a fine job dismantling their arguments on your own but you say something that's not true, me correcting you doesn't flip me to the other side and it's idiotic to think it would.
AJW does seem to be treated unfairly. Just have a discussion with the dude, he seems pretty reasonable.
Destiny is mad that Sean gave him a description of what standing was and then Destiny is mad that he did but then proceeds to Google it. Internet brain right there
@@Darnell_369nah he is just mad at the selective autism of ajw. In essence destiny was right about standing just not the right definition.
@@iankastern6513 Well then why would destiny be so mad if the meat of his argument is still right. He just gets corrected on a minor mistake, his point still stands. So why is he so mad about it... As if the listeners are unable to differentiate between that on their own (proving Destiny wrong vs correcting minor mistake) and needed everything spoon fed to them. And if we wanna talk about selective autism, that is literally the entirety of destinys and ajws disagreement. Cant throw it on just one of those two...
@@iankastern6513 destiny is the king of selective autism
@@Darnell_369It's worse. Destiny is mad that Sean injected an INCORRECT definition of standing as a response to Destiny's point that Sean now claims to agree with.
Destiny needs some conserative friends. His "every conserative is evil and dumb" takes are getting annoying and i love watching his streams (and still will) but he makes up this world that every conservative is like his parents or the weirdos he debates and he runs off any middle ground voter that would have voted democrat
Problem being that Destiny probably has some kind of subconscious pushback to all of them. He's a right -> left convert, and he obviously made that decision because he thought it was the best one to make. So subconsciously he may be putting that on conservatives as well, as though they should have come to the same conclusions he did, otherwise they are either dumb or evil. On average though, there's actually more of a left -> right shift as people grow up, and you'll tend to see the opposite paradigm shift in folks as they age.
I’m starting to feel like all of his politics are born from parental resentment lol
I kind of feel that you both are talking past each other on a few points. Instead of making reply videos of each other, maybe have a live discussion?
This is why Destiny has no real friends, replacing friends with his clout chasing orbiter weirdos. The guy is always online, and one of the only opponents who’s genuinely good natured and jovial to him (with some harmless ribbing), Shaun, gets his character impugned as a “grifter” via gossip after an honest debate where he competed well. Cringe stuff.
go outside
Fax. People like this are insufferable irl
AJW wins this round I think. Not very fair to call him a grifter or not use clips when talking about him, like Destiny claims others do to him. AJW is always more level headed and doesn't seem to pop off the same way that Destiny does
I think Destiny's claim is that hes selectively biased and it happens to be in the direction of his audience's political leanings. Its plausible Sean isn't grifting but I just don't see Sean's case that his actions don't resemble grifting.
@@daviddavidson6278 I think people use the word "grift" too often that it has lost its meaning. Grifting means you're taking on a position you don't believe in because it's more advantageous to you. Sean's a conservative. If he's stating conservative talking points, doesn't that imply he's just saying what he believes to be true? Because that's the opposite of a grift.
@@kyuubimadara You may be right grifting has lost its meaning for many so its not ideal to use but we can still argue based on what Destiny means by "grifter". There is 1) conservative as an ideology and there is 2) facts and not facts. You can be a conservative like Sean and arguing against lies by your side to not be a grifter. But if you're skipping over things like election denial to argue semantics it heavily implies grifting in my mind.
@@daviddavidson6278 Can you show me a clip where Sean denied the election results? Because I've never heard him do that
@@kyuubimadara When did I say he did?
wait this dude agrees with destiny? I thought that debate was a 1v3 lmaooo
The comment section is tearing Destiny apart
I like Destiny and AJW, Destiny is like 95% in the wrong on this video 😂
How will he survive
@@badbadleroybrown613 xd
Everyone has the receits for someone. Hasan might not be able to debate destiny. But destiny cant debate sean.
He's debated Sean multiple times recently?
And you can’t spell
Take that yam off your face
Destiny has debated sean many times and he does well every time. Though I do think sean is probably one of the only even semi competent right wing debaters.
Smartest AJW fan right here folks. Can't make this shit up lol
Rekeita has already explained standing to destiny, how does he still not understand?
Dude you are being extremely unfair in this. I gotta say destiny seemed wrong in this even though i largely agree with his largescale view.
Destiny is a MAN's name.
I mean I like destiny alot more than ajw but I’m not really getting what he means here. In one part of this video He is basically saying “ajw is a grifter becasue he doesn’t attack his side” but I am sure destiny wouldn’t call people like jessiah and iri grifters when they are just as partisan (probably more) than ajw. As soon as destiny said that grifter comment I thought it was taking it a bit too far but I don’t foresee him walking it back anytime soon. **edit** and then he clearly misunderstood what Sean was saying about “well we have a lot more people now so of course Biden would bet more votes”. Sean was clearly disagreeing with that crazy dudes point about how “it’s impossible Biden could get more votes”.
I think Destiny's claim is that hes selectively biased and it happens to be in the direction of his audience's political leanings. Its plausible Sean isn't grifting but I just don't see Sean's case that his actions don't resemble grifting. For Jessiah and IRI I think Destiny would say it for them too under one condition, they're lying or ignoring lies. Its fine to not attack your side, its just very strange especially when the position is so extreme, wrong, and occurring on the same panel you're in.
That’s a fair point
Grifter is too strong of a diagnosis I think, but the behavior is accurate. In a debate AJW doesn't appear to be working towards truth but just has a rhetorical strategy to correct and perceived factual inaccuracies that am opponent says which produces this behavior. I think you are right that this is a broader phenomenon, on the liberal side this would be giving undue credence to anti-Americanism probably. On the Glenn Show (black conservative economist Glenn Loury and liberal linguist and culture critic John McWhorter) you'll notice Glenn Loury gives space for idiotic Trump views that he doesn't believe, and John McWhorter will lambast them. I think it's a byproduct of accepting a political movement as part of your identity so if you believe you are a conservative you will give more grace to your crazies and if you believe you're liberal the same.
Yeah guys the behavior is 100% accurate I agree sean is being overly particular in the interest of accuracy and picking at little points but ignoring the main point of what the nut job is saying. The grifter claim is wayy too far imo tho.
Yeah say what you want about Sean but he’s a true believer, not a grifter. Same with Shapiro (who I went to law school with). You can dislike these guys but they’re not faking their views for money.
Sean is a good egg. He is the only conservative guy really sticking his neck out to debunk redpill claims and I know he's (like me), a conservative who dislikes Trump and sees through him but knows he has to tread lightly by dodging the subject mostly and giving lukewarm technical defenses of Trump when he has to. Is that grifting? Maybe a little, but he makes up for it in many other ways. He also tries hard to defuse the maniacal hatred and dehumanization the right has for their idea of "leftists" and tries to remind his audience that these are people and our countrymen, not our enemies, which is very important to me.
Finally found the reasonable AJW. Fan I agree with your assessment actually which why prior to Sean making this video I disagreed with his use of the term "sorta almost a grifter" even though it was promted by the chatter.
What we are describing is more schmoozing & has a bias. Both are to be expected to some degree & I think AJW usually keeps it in check which is why the video he made shakes my confidence in him a bit.
This video is not what I expect to see from someone who has those feelings & desires in check.
I hope he talks to Destiny when he calms down.
I especially agree on that last part you mention that is so rare on the right online. Which why I would like him to address why he is okay with some of the things people say in his name & his spaces. He wants me to believe Destiny critiquing him will ruin his career, but then says rightiods like Alex Stein smearing people & harassing them is fine. He has to pick lane. He either cares about dehumanization or he doesn't. I believe he does he's just letting his fee fees override him right now.
Have you ever heard the term "pick me?"
Sticking his neck out to criticize the internet's biggest punching bag? Wow, so brave!
It's so much braver than criticizing mainstream Republican thought! He shouldn't even bother with the latter!
This is sounding like another poor Adam and Stitch defense for goofsters on the right that bathe in nonsense but then require meticulous annotations for everything lefties say.
But sure, such figures can be good if any of the crazy cultists watch and don't immediately sneer in disgust and get so angry they stop listening.
@spacetoast7783 It isn't a punching bage for males on the right, genius
22:48 destiny is being extremely disingenuous when he says Sean is hand waving. he never said that, he posed it as an aspect, not as the aspect.
Why is Sean bringing this up if it's not necessary for the conclusion?
@@spacetoast7783 he saying that that’s his least favorite talking point from the conservative side. he’s saying there’s aspects to why Joe Biden got more votes than anyone in history, One of those being that there’s more population. I didn’t hear him say this is the ONLY factor, unless you’re hearing things that I didn’t.
Destiny did say “there are several layers to how dumb this comment was” referring to AJW’s clip on Tim Pool. That’s probably why he assumed Destiny was talking about him, even if it was more of a general critique.
And I don’t think AJW is a grifter, that has a lot of implications that don’t really match his content. But Destiny made some good points on AJW responding to facts that weren’t a part of the general point being made.
So because he's focused on specifics that makes him a grifter, yet when you're being specific your not a grifter and not actually saying Jim Crow was good like your past opponent thought? Can't have your cake and eat it too. You shouldn't assume the worst when you can easily assume mistakes.
Just to remind people what we're talking about. One guy denied the election, another guy corrected him and Sean decided to correct the second guy on semantics...
@@daviddavidson6278 and destiny thinks Jim Crow is good because he argues it wasn't apartheid, right?
@@smiley4995 Nope, just because it isn't the worst thing possible doesn't make it not bad. Words have meanings. Just because we really dislike something doesn't make definitions fly out the window.
This little back and fourth is a great echo of the issue between Destiny and Sean. The pro Sean guy states Sean’s point about focusing on details and that being good.
Destiny guy explains how it is a waste of time focusing on details that have no relevance to some topics…like the won Destiny called Sean out for.
Sean guy immediately changes to an irrelevant question that changes what is being discussed.
Can you seriously not see how you did what Sean did…and how it is not even close to an honest tactic.
Sean did the same thing in his video which is why all his fanboys are saying he won.
@@daviddavidson6278 I'm glad you agree with me, wish you'd also apply that to see how Destiny is behaving in a hypocritical and extreme manner.
I've watched multiple debates with this guy and I've never realized he's supposed to be unbiased. I thought he was just a republican
Cuz he is lol
You definitely proved Sean's point about making reading bad intent and then making bad assumptions.
It isn't apparent to me at all that Sean was downplaying Biden's record vote by informing the dude next to you that that claim is consistent with a greater fact (population growth). I don't think undercutting the dude next to you's premises really works for "carrying water."
Destiny comes off as extremely petty and unconvincing here. I’m not a particular fan of AJW, but none of this convinces me that he is a “grifter” at all. Maybe a partisan that attacks the left more than the right, but is Destiny not the same on his own side?
Sean can be nitpicky but he’s not bad faith & destiny’s ultra tds just leads him to be sooooo bad faith to anyone who isn’t exactly the same sometimes.
How do you explain Sean avoiding the argument for election denial in favor of arguing over semantics? Also TDS has nothing to do with this lol
@@daviddavidson6278 he can't he already cried civility boohoos crying asking for evidence means I'm on the spectrum. I can guess for him that his beliefs are so fridge temp he can't give them
Show some examples
@@ogolthorp op cried civility and told me that asking for evidence was spectrum mental issues on my part 😂😂😂
@@Spencerwalker21 no dude you fundamentally don’t get the point and yes it’s pure spectrum. But keep the debate bro bs up it’s real endearing.
i do not even understand why this is a debate, Actual Justice Warrior is just a right winger. It's not like anyone ever pretended anything else
“There’s several layers to how dumb THIS COMMENT IS” …You’re specifically talking about Sean, not Tim. Take the L like a man. Say you were wrong. Don’t blame twitter. You wouldn’t blame twitter if the roles were reversed - you’d blame Sean. Playing clips afterwards where you’re criticizing Tim doesn’t negate your initial comment about Sean. So cringe you can never admit when you’re wrong.
Even if the percentage of voters declined it doesn’t mean the increase in population doesn’t affect the amount of votes. now you’re being disingenuous. it doesn’t have to be the same percentage or more to have an effect
legal terms are one of the major issues i have with the legal system.. Destiny spends like 2 minutes trying to find out what "standing" is and i feel like if he asked a lawyer the lawyer would spend 30 minutes making a vague response about what standing "is" and that alone just makes me wanna alt+f4
Also the right does not claim ballot harvesting is falsifying votes.
@@z28yeti that had nothing to do with my comment, but okay.
Anyone who disagrees with Destiny: *Grifter Spotted*
not what he said. Can you not see his point. Like if you were debating whether or not the nazis were the good guys or the bad guys, and some guy seems to be poking at random factoid that you got wrong while not addressing the dude who is saying the nazis were good, it doesn't come off as disagreement. It comes off as you trying to run defense for them.
Use your ears buddy. I believe in you.
@@SeveNStarSeveN Funnily enough, this is exactly what Destiny does in his Israel debates. Every time someone makes a good point, he has to bring up some totally irrelevant sht to justify the overall actions of Israel and the miserable living conditions of Palestinians.
So yes: given the right social and historic circumstances, Destiny would also be extremely comfortable defending the Nazis, colonialism, slavery, etc.
@@feelthebern3783 Given the right circumstances everyone would have defended nazis or whatever, this is a dumb point. Also Destiny is openly pro-Israel, really I see him as a centrist in the conflict and pro-sanity in my opinion, but for the sake of the conversation; He isn't hiding the fact that he supports it, Sean does. The living conditions in Palestine are Hamas' fault, if they stopped trying to attack Israel they would literally have a state by now, but they want all of the land so they are gonna keep losing and getting their butts handed to them.
Destiny LIED ! People died.
Wow this has to wake up some people to Destiny’s bad faith. If you out here defending D on this you are lost. These arguments are laughable. Destiny can only argue for things he doesn’t really care about, if he is personally invested then it’s just dishonesty all the way down.
Wdym? Sean heard two people arguing and decided to argue against a trivial point while ignoring the fantastic idiocy on the other side. He was selective in his criticism and Sean just so happened to be selective in the manner that his audience agrees with. If this isn't grifting it just so happens to be a massive coincidence.
I really want to see how this guy replies. He seemed to completely overlook destiny’s points while feeding on all the emotional insults Sean accuses Destiny of.
A tactic that gets people to focus on the irrelevant parts? Hmmm
Could this be a go to move for Sean?
@@anthonyshoop575 he responded to me in basically fridge temp IQ and denied his own words playing he doesn't talk to smooth brains.
Funny how people accusing Destiny of bad faith end up saying the wackiest nonsense and basically calling him a contrarian but with more convoluted steps.
AJW has criticized the right far more than you have criticized Biden, that’s for sure. When destiny knows he is wrong, I love the way he knee jerk reacts the way he claims everyone else does
Talk about carrying water, you were doing double time on Sitch and Adam for pure dedication to “muh republicans reee”
Does AJW criticize Trump?
@@UnseenOct - Yes, literally criticized him in this debate…
@RubenO.-ts5yx - 😂😂😂 they’re both awful and anyone who says otherwise is completely not aligned with reality.
@@HostileTakeover555 how is biden as awful as trump? Btw maybe your autistic cause most people that are in the youtube comments are, when you say they are both awful it implies equal amount of bad to most people.
@@HostileTakeover555 and then defended him in the same criricism, that is like whenever hasan "criticizes" china or hamas i get ajw isnt a leftist so the rules are different of course.
You were not correct about standing in your own source that you pulled up 20 of the cases were dismissed before a hearing on the merits. 20 different court cases just thrown out before they could even be heard or evidence can be shown or anything like that. Yes some of them had hearings on the merits or were cancel by the Trump campaign. Use red standing included a hearing on the merits when it obviously can be thrown out without a hearing on the merits according to your own source.
Only Tim Pool could be so unlikable and dumb that in a video about drama with AJW that I walk away being reminded how much i dislike Tim Pool.
Bring AJW on stream/bridges!
The disagreers channel on Discord is almost always open.
This might be the first time I've really heard Destiny argue in truly "bad faith". As someone on the right that appreciates his points to see if there is a middle ground that we can come to this is disappointing
What was bad faith about this video?
You haven’t watched him enough then, lol. No one seems to care about/talk about this, but he’s been suuuuper bad-faith towards people on the LEFT in the past too.
AJW the type of guy to be a CZcams content creator
AJW is the type of guy to buy two bagels, touch each to figure out which one is better, then give you the smaller one
@@CaptainSkaj That's a perfect description of him
@@CaptainSkaj Sounds like a smart guy
His audience hates destiny so much lmao.
And they are everywhere
It was sad that all the top comments I saw in AJW's comment section where people ranting & screaming about how he is filthy homosexual, evil, or not human.
Which is disgusting considering Sean pushing against dehumanizing the left is supposedly something he strides for.
I don't even hate Vaush, David Pakman, or Kavernacle. They are all significantly more delusional then Destiny.
Destiny is telling the truth. Trust all women.
10-8 AJW
17:14 i think what people take issue with is the 1000+ ballot bundles coming from places like old age homes.
To me this is the worst arguement American Democrats make, its really disingenuous. If dad is the only one in the house who feels enough importance on boting to actually get to the polls, only his vote should count. Im still shocked this is a partisan issue in the states; even in Canada, which has been a liberal stronghold since 2015, does NOT allow ballot harvesting, and we only use paper.
It should go without saying that ballot harvesting is unhinged, to provide credence of opinions to people who dont care enough to get out and vote, sure way to wind up with wild policies, like your illegal immigration problem. We're a country of immigration and even we think that ish is crazy.
Then again, you guys want to get rid of the electoral college and essentially destitute small states like Wyoming because their ability to have their states interests represented would disappear overnight 😅
19:54 AJW heard what he wanted to hear here, that pasta dude was going full conspiracy theory on this for sure
20:17 noooo Mr Burelli, it was a moment of dissonance, not disingenuousness, calm down, stop strawmaning
21:48 you are now acting unhinged, ajw is merely commenting it isn't out of the realm of possibility biden got more given the population is obviously higher, not to dismiss the wins numbers, just to evidence to his audience that it makes perfect sense
Voting should be made easier. Many states have had vote by mail for many years. Even deep red states like UT have had vote by mail long before 2020 and COVID. Voting should be compulsory like in Australia or Brasil, and it should be much easier than waiting in fucking line for hours on a Tuesday. People don't have time for that shit.
Many Republicans want voting to be as difficult as possible because it benefits them.
And nobody lives in Wyoming. They have their state sovereignty but they should have much less influence nationally. There's only about 10 states that actually matter because thats where the people live.
nothing wrong with ballot harvesting. There's zero reason to make voting harder than it has to be
The meaning of standing is such a specific question, I mean we could go and dig up the archives if that’s what you want? I have a whole shelf of books on standing so picking out a specific page and sentence for this question is going to take time it’s just general knowledge you can find it in textbooks everywhere
I hate AJW.. even when I agree with him, his face, personality, and tone drive me up the wall.
Destiney skimmed over every fact that was in seans favor or just completely ignored it . huge Griftstiney.
Maybe because he has 0 points.
Example?
Destiny, I actually think you're right that Sean runs defense for bad pro-Trump arguments, but your argument that he is "too smart" to do this is actually uncharitable! How smart Sean is has almost no bearing on whether or not he can fool himself into thinking he is right and unbiased. BEING biased means you're often unaware of the level of bias you hold. And being intelligent means you can fool yourself more easily and logic yourself into believing anything.
Calling someone a grifter is shorthand for calling them dishonest and a bad person. I don't think he is that. I just think he's biased.
Which is funny because destiny is so blinded by stanning Biden it’s unreal.
@@famalam943weird because when I ask for evidence all I get is what you did waaaah Biden. But I guess it there's no evidence then meme
@@Spencerwalker21 it’s a general conversation i haven’t been taking notes. Stop letting debate bro content rot your brain and just accept this so how ppl operate. Most ppl get an idea of things, I watch quite a lot of destiny and I’ve noticed this a lot with him. Not everyone takes notes so they can list them in a comment section.
@@famalam943 Whats wrong with stanning a great president? What don't you like Biden for?
@@Spencerwalker21 I dunno I just watched his piers talk where he attacked Trump for the withdrawal, peirs pointed out it was done under Biden regardless and he had more than ample opportunity to amend what a disaster it was.
It’s very clearly a Biden admin fault and just because Trump made the deal doesn’t factor into it at this point.
Destiny’s reply was ‘so?’ Or something. But I know you’ll start attacking Trump over this now. I’ve seen you’re replies you don’t talk you ‘debate evidence bro’
Oh look, a water-carrying grifter criticizing another water-carrying grifter.