The Ornery American Forums

General Category => General Comments => Topic started by: Pete at Home on March 02, 2017, 12:57:05 PM

Title: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 02, 2017, 12:57:05 PM
Has anyone looked into the stats behind the claim that Right Wing White Extremists are responsible for more murders since 9/11 than Muslim terrorists?

Every time I hear that lie parrotted, I almost wish I'd voted for Trump.

They define the right wing right extremist so broadly that it includes most white males in the USA, and redefine Muslim terrorist so restrictively that it excludes most clear acts of terrorism carried out by Muslims in the name of Islam.  Basically it's apologetics for ISIS and blood libel against American Christians.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 02, 2017, 01:15:58 PM
The highly restrictive redefinition of Muslim terrorism for the survey excludes (among others) the Orlando nightclub shooter, the Tampa airport shooter, the Burlington Mall shooter (who sucks up to DAESH's cult leader Bagdadi on social media), the Boston Marthon bombing, the Beltway sniper murders, the 2006 Denver Safeway shooting in the name of Allah, a california college stabbing where the attacker actually carried an DAESH flag and carried a manifesto planning for DAESH-style beheadings, or Al-Zahrani's murders in retaliation for killing of Muslims around the world.

The broad definition of right wing for the study incorporates all killings by three entirely different groups of people--

 Christian fundamentalists, including abortion bombers,

 States Rights advocates including militias

 Racist groups, including the KKK.

Now if we went back to 1885, I would wholeheartedly agree that the KKK at that time posed a greater threat to the USA and to innocent people everywhere than Muslim terrorists ever have within the United States.  But to suggest that's the case today is a death-dealing lie. 

False and dubious statements by the Trump admin that everyone's been screaming about, i.e. the number of people at the Inauguration, and the number of undocumented citizens who voted in the election, look quite innocent in comparison.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on March 02, 2017, 01:57:50 PM
the whole debate sound to my ears:

"Do you think you'll be more likely to be struck by lightning, or eaten by a shark?"
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 02, 2017, 02:03:25 PM
the whole debate sound to my ears:

"Do you think you'll be more likely to be struck by lightning, or eaten by a shark?"

If someone lies about those stats, as part of an argument against requiring tall buildings to be grounded against lightning, it's still a death-dealing lie.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 02, 2017, 02:18:26 PM
I'm finding today's Fake News polooza about Session's contacts with Russia to be the most troubling of the day.  Could it be a more obvious ploy to try and give weight to the "Russian contacts" myth by forcing the appointment of an uncontrollable Special Prosecutor.  There's even articles written trying to draw a false equivalence that because he called for Lynch to recuse herself after a private meeting with her former boss and husband of someone she was actively investigating, that its the same thing as meetings he had in his role as a Senator with the Russian diplomat. 

I do find your point on this interesting, though I see it more as selling a false meme.  There's no legitimate reason to ascribe the KKK to right wing extremists when the vast majority of its members have been Democrats and there's no real statistical difference between white Democrats and white Republicans when it comes to being racists (there is a massive difference if you include forms of racism other than white racism against blacks). 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on March 02, 2017, 02:33:28 PM
The numbers included in these "comparisons" are psuedo-scientific in the first place. They occur with insufficient frequency to be meaningful in a statistical sense. The ability to correlate to any definition, no matter how you assign "muslim, hate group, right-wing", simply isn't there.

If you want to say who is a threat, you'd have to go deeper in the pipeline and look at things like "number of people recruited per year", "number living in the US", "number expressing the desire to kill" - not to mention including "number of people caught before carrying out threat".

Anybody using "kill" numbers alone to support ANY conclusion is dangerously wrong.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on March 02, 2017, 03:22:59 PM
Quote
The highly restrictive redefinition of Muslim terrorism for the survey excludes (among others) the Orlando nightclub shooter, the Tampa airport shooter, the Burlington Mall shooter (who sucks up to DAESH's cult leader Bagdadi on social media), the Boston Marthon bombing, the Beltway sniper murders, the 2006 Denver Safeway shooting in the name of Allah, a california college stabbing where the attacker actually carried an DAESH flag and carried a manifesto planning for DAESH-style beheadings, or Al-Zahrani's murders in retaliation for killing of Muslims around the world.

Pete, which survey are you referring to?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on March 02, 2017, 03:24:01 PM
I'm finding today's Fake News polooza about Session's contacts with Russia to be the most troubling of the day.  Could it be a more obvious ploy to try and give weight to the "Russian contacts" myth by forcing the appointment of an uncontrollable Special Prosecutor.  There's even articles written trying to draw a false equivalence that because he called for Lynch to recuse herself after a private meeting with her former boss and husband of someone she was actively investigating, that its the same thing as meetings he had in his role as a Senator with the Russian diplomat. 
They need to wash out the taste of the Fake News about Trump's "Presidential" speech.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 02, 2017, 04:45:48 PM
Quote
The highly restrictive redefinition of Muslim terrorism for the survey excludes (among others) the Orlando nightclub shooter, the Tampa airport shooter, the Burlington Mall shooter (who sucks up to DAESH's cult leader Bagdadi on social media), the Boston Marthon bombing, the Beltway sniper murders, the 2006 Denver Safeway shooting in the name of Allah, a california college stabbing where the attacker actually carried an DAESH flag and carried a manifesto planning for DAESH-style beheadings, or Al-Zahrani's murders in retaliation for killing of Muslims around the world.

Pete, which survey are you referring to?

I meant study, not survey.

I mean this crap:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/24/majority-of-fatal-attacks-on-us-soil-carried-out-b/

http://www.newsweek.com/2016/02/12/right-wing-extremists-militants-bigger-threat-america-isis-jihadists-422743.html

They define right wing extremist militant in a way that's so broad it fits 10-20% of the American public, and define "jihadis" in a way that's more restrictive than ISIS itself defines it.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on March 02, 2017, 06:15:52 PM
The news stories you linked to rely on information from this organization:

https://www.newamerica.org/in-depth/terrorism-in-america/what-threat-united-states-today/ (https://www.newamerica.org/in-depth/terrorism-in-america/what-threat-united-states-today/)

From what I can tell, they are first isolating events that meet a certain definition of terrorist attack, and then grouping them.

I don't see a big problem here. 

1) The stories you linked to came out before Orlando.  As you can see from my link above, Orlando is not excluded from the comparison.  (But note, NOTHING after Orlando is included.)

2) Tampa and Burlington might be included at some point.  There's no evidence that they have been deliberately excluded; they are more recent than the most recent events that were included.

3) Boston Marathon IS included

4) No idea why you think Safeway should be included as a jihadist killing, and I don't think Al-Zahrani fits either.

On the other hand, Faisal Mohammad (UC Mercer stabber) probably should have been included.  And I'm not sure DC sniper should have been excluded - although his motives seem muddled enough that I am not sure he should have been included either. 

But since Orlando and Boston are included and a couple of other exclusions might be missing only because they are the most recent events, I think you've overstated the case quite a bit.

Now, if someone said "We must mount an anti-right-wing terrorism task force to combat the rising dangers of right wing extremists!!!" your point about lumping various attacks under the label "right wing extremist attacks" might carry more weight.  But that's not happening.  This is a response to hysteria about Islamist terrorism, not an attempt to whip up fear about right wing terror.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on March 02, 2017, 06:20:51 PM
Oops, I missed something.  There is one attack after Orlando included.  It's the left wing extremist attack, the 2016 Dallas police shooting.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on March 02, 2017, 06:55:06 PM
It's actually interesting to juxtapose how the existence of Islamist terrorists affects how people feel about Muslims with how the existence of right wing terrorists affects how people feel about the American right.

Does anyone at all conflate "American Christian" with "terrorist"?  How about "Muslim" with "terrorist"?

I'm just not seeing the blood libel thing, Pete.  As a matter of fact, of all the many times you've used that term, I've never thought it made sense, but especially not here.  Not only is that not the effect of the comparison, it has nothing to do with the intent. 

The intent of the comparison is to put the danger of Islamist terror attacks into perspective, because of the hyperbolic focus of politicians, news media, and Americans in general on that specific danger. 

Drake, you're right that focusing on the number of deaths could be misleading.  If you, for instance, want to know how much we need to spend on anti-terrorism measures and where to allocate those resources, you need a much more detailed picture. 

But if the political question in the air is how much danger are you in from Islamist terrorism if things stay about the same relative to the past 10 years, then it's the right metric.  But the number by itself also needs context/perspective. 

We could also compare it to any number of much more likely causes of death.  But comparing it to other terrorist killings is pretty interesting and responsive to misleading rhetoric about the supposedly unique dangers of Islamic beliefs in relation to terrorism.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on March 02, 2017, 08:59:01 PM
It's actually interesting to juxtapose how the existence of Islamist terrorists affects how people feel about Muslims with how the existence of right wing terrorists affects how people feel about the American right.

Does anyone at all conflate "American Christian" with "terrorist"?  How about "Muslim" with "terrorist"?

I'm just not seeing the blood libel thing, Pete.  As a matter of fact, of all the many times you've used that term, I've never thought it made sense, but especially not here.  Not only is that not the effect of the comparison, it has nothing to do with the intent. 

The intent of the comparison is to put the danger of Islamist terror attacks into perspective, because of the hyperbolic focus of politicians, news media, and Americans in general on that specific danger.

However, as a matter of perspective. Part of the problem is "Define right wing extremist" in the American Population at large. Some definitions people "on the left" would like to use, would include upwords of a third of the US Population. Bearing in mind that that there over 330 Million people living in the United States, that makes for over 100 Million "rabid right wingers" compared to what? 8 million Muslims living in the United States.

The the 8 Million Muslim population is even close to being able to compete with the death toll that the "rabid right winger" population pool is producing tends to outsize "the threat" from the Islamic end of things.

It's one of those lies, damned lies, and statistics things. While Statistically speaking, I may be more likely to be attacked/killed by a left or right wing political nutjob with something closely resembling my national/religious identity. The odds of my(or somebody else) being attacked by any given "political nutjob" within that population is pretty low.

Meanwhile, the odds of any particular "Muslim/Islamic Nutjob" deciding to go after me, or somebody else, is much, much higher.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 02, 2017, 10:49:59 PM
Oops, I missed something.  There is one attack after Orlando included.  It's the left wing extremist attack, the 2016 Dallas police shooting.

And it's being counted as a right wing white extremist attack.  While Orlando isn't counted.   And you don't find that fishy?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 02, 2017, 10:54:07 PM
It's actually interesting to juxtapose how the existence of Islamist terrorists affects how people feel about Muslims with how the existence of right wing terrorists affects how people feel about the American right.

Does anyone at all conflate "American Christian" with "terrorist"?  How about "Muslim" with "terrorist"?

I'm just not seeing the blood libel thing, Pete.  As a matter of fact, of all the many times you've used that term, I've never thought it made sense, but especially not here.  Not only is that not the effect of the comparison, it has nothing to do with the intent. 

Blood libel = a lie defaming a broad group of people in a manner likely to inspire fear and murder.  For example, when Trump said that all Mexican illegal immigrants were rapists, that was blood libel.  It's a lie likely to get someone in the target group killed.

Quote
Does anyone at all conflate "American Christian" with "terrorist"?

That's how the study is being bandied around facebook, SciFi.  That White Christians are more dangerous than Jihadis.  Not than Muslims.  Than Jihadis.

Quote
The intent of the comparison is to put the danger of Islamist terror attacks into perspective

It's about putting it into a false perspective, and also about exacerbating the hatred of blue America for red America.  This sort of crap is why Trump got elected, and why he can get away with all of his little lies in the face of the huge hateful whoppers put out by the establishment.

"'But if the political question in the air is how much danger are you in from Islamist terrorism"

That's a ridiculous straw man, SciFi.  Come on.  Please point me to where on Fox News or even Breitbart News that anyone is saying that we need to be afraid to go out on the street because some jihadi will murder us?

The motive for blocking immigration from certain Muslim countries is the assumption that such immigrants are more likely than the average American to commit certain crimes.  Not that most murders in the USA are being committed by Muslims.  If you're going to respond to that honestly, then that's the question you need to address.  Anything else is dishonesty.  Sad to say, social science in the media seems increasingly a mere propaganda tool for duping the public.  There's no desire to inform here.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: cherrypoptart on March 03, 2017, 02:58:28 AM
The threat of Muslim terrorists like those in al-Qaeda and ISIS would seem to be much greater than that of right wing racists simply because al-Qaeda and ISIS would use weapons of mass destruction like a dirty bomb, an actual nuke if they could get it, and chemical and biological weapons. I doubt the right wing racists are looking to engage in terror on that scale. Not that he was necessarily a right wing racist, but even the terrorist anti-government attack of Timothy McVeigh doesn't compare in scale to what the Islamic terrorists want to carry out. Judging the threat based only on what they have been able to accomplish so far and using that as the basis to assign resources to stop future attacks could be a tremendously fatal mistake. A right wing terrorist group probably could have carried out an attack like 9-11 but that's just not what they want to do. The Islamic terrorists are an entirely different ballgame, so gauging the threat in the way this story tries to doesn't seem to be realistic not only because of the points Pete is bringing up, but even more so because the intent for thousands or perhaps even millions of casualties is not there for the white racists but it is for the Islamists.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 06, 2017, 03:14:42 PM
I think you're mistaken on white racists being above WMDs.  Most of them, certainly, and I agree that there's obviously more of a clear and present danger from ISIS and Al Qaeda.  But emphasis on *present*.  I'm quite sure the 1880s KKK would have used WMDs if they had them available, and suspect there are a few individuals today who still would.  And if Obama had risen to the bait in Oregon, we might have seen right wing groups that angry.  Remember OK city was a response to Ruby Ridge and Waco.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on March 09, 2017, 07:00:17 PM
Yeah, Timothy McVeigh used the biggest weapon he could.

Pete:
Quote
Blood libel = a lie defaming a broad group of people in a manner likely to inspire fear and murder.  For example, when Trump said that all Mexican illegal immigrants were rapists, that was blood libel.  It's a lie likely to get someone in the target group killed.

Yeah, I know how you mean it.  But it's not true.  The comparison you are referencing is not going to get anyone murdered.

Quote
That's how the study is being bandied around facebook, SciFi.  That White Christians are more dangerous than Jihadis.  Not than Muslims.  Than Jihadis.

You're ignoring the reason that this is going around Facebook, and you're outright denying that reason here:

Quote
"'But if the political question in the air is how much danger are you in from Islamist terrorism"

That's a ridiculous straw man, SciFi.  Come on.  Please point me to where on Fox News or even Breitbart News that anyone is saying that we need to be afraid to go out on the street because some jihadi will murder us?

Haven't you been listening to Donald Trump?  He literally claims that we have to stop admitting Syrian refugees right now because some of the ones that are currently getting through the vetting process are going to kill us.  He is scapegoating and fear mongering, and telling blatant lies about how things currently work and the level of danger involved. 

As I said, the comparison is in RESPONSE to fear mongering about Muslim immigrants and refugees and the danger they pose to Americans.  It is NOT intended to stir up fear and violence against right wing Americans.   I find your belief otherwise frankly paranoid.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 10, 2017, 05:35:30 AM
Yeah, Timothy McVeigh used the biggest weapon he could.

Pete:
Quote
Blood libel = a lie defaming a broad group of people in a manner likely to inspire fear and murder.  For example, when Trump said that all Mexican illegal immigrants were rapists, that was blood libel.  It's a lie likely to get someone in the target group killed.

Yeah, I know how you mean it.  But it's not true.  The comparison you are referencing is not going to get anyone murdered.

Quote
That's how the study is being bandied around facebook, SciFi.  That White Christians are more dangerous than Jihadis.  Not than Muslims.  Than Jihadis.

You're ignoring the reason that this is going around Facebook, and you're outright denying that reason here:

Quote
"'But if the political question in the air is how much danger are you in from Islamist terrorism"

That's a ridiculous straw man, SciFi.  Come on.  Please point me to where on Fox News or even Breitbart News that anyone is saying that we need to be afraid to go out on the street because some jihadi will murder us?

Haven't you been listening to Donald Trump?  He literally claims that we have to stop admitting Syrian refugees right now because some of the ones that are currently getting through the vetting process are going to kill us.

Why don't you provide a quote where you show that Trump's saying that the average joe in the street will face direct threat from Syrian refugees?

I think he's concerned that some will commit acts of terror, drive vans into crowds, etc.  More of the same.  I don't see anything to suggest that they are going to wipe out significant chunks of the population.  You may think that his position is unreasonable, but your protrayal is simply inacurate.


Quote
  He is scapegoating and fear mongering,


Scapegoating how?  You may be right; I'm not being rhetorical.  Maybe you've heard something I haven't.  Scapegoating means blaming one person or group for another group's actions.  Syrian refugees have murdered the Christian and Yazidi refugees right in the camps, so I don't think it's scapegoating to suggest that there are some bad seeds among them.  Particularly since Obama's idea of vetting brought in the Syrians folks least in danger and most likely to cause danger -- mostly single straight Muslims of military age.  Only 0.5% Christians and Yazidis.


Quote
and telling blatant lies about how things currently work and the level of danger involved. 

He's hardly alone there, as Merkel and the Swedes have been lying in the other direction.  People prefer folks that exaggerate a threat to those that sweep murders and mass rapes under the rug, and call jihadi mass murders mere "workplace incidents."  Trump's lies are no more inflammatory or toxic than those of say, Black Lives Matter.  You don't see anyone trying to put BLM into "perspective" and point out that the actual percentage of black people getting murdered by police officers is rather small compared to other causes of death. 

It seems a little insensitive and brain-dead to suppose that people should regard terrorism-related deaths dispassionately.

 
Quote
I find your belief otherwise frankly paranoid.

Which "belief" is that?  So far you haven't engaged any of my actual beliefs.

Any moron, if he's honest with himself, knows that the primary danger of terrorism isn't loss of life but demoralization.  Liberals understood this in the 1990s when we lobbied for hate crime legislation.  Why play stupid about it now and pretend that it's about statistical death when you cannot produce a single frakking quote, even from Trump, to that effect?  Trump says enough dumb stuff on his own; you don't have to go making stuff up.

Quote
You're ignoring the reason that this is going around Facebook, and you're outright denying that reason here:

I'm denying it because I haven't seen it.  And you give the impression that you haven't actually seen it either, when you resort to eye-rolling and emperor's New Clothes arguments rather than just frakking providing the quote that I asked for.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on March 10, 2017, 10:45:28 AM
Quote
Particularly since Obama's idea of vetting brought in the Syrians folks least in danger and most likely to cause danger -- mostly single straight Muslims of military age.

Could you provide a source for that statement, Pete.  Because it contradicts everything I have heard about refugees (that only about 2 percent are males of "military age," and a majority are women and children).

Either what you've heard, or what I've heard, is an outright lie.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 10, 2017, 02:42:23 PM
Quote
Particularly since Obama's idea of vetting brought in the Syrians folks least in danger and most likely to cause danger -- mostly single straight Muslims of military age.

Could you provide a source for that statement, Pete.  Because it contradicts everything I have heard about refugees (that only about 2 percent are males of "military age," and a majority are women and children).

Either what you've heard, or what I've heard, is an outright lie.

I'll look for it.  Never had that questioned in numerous conversations and fora and I think I cited the link... see if I can find it again.  Where on earth did you hear that only "2%" are males 16-35, who make up the supermajority of refugees in Europe?  Or that a "majority" are women and children?  That describes current Canadian immigration policy.  Not, to my knowledge, Obama's.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 10, 2017, 03:05:55 PM

The issue on the table is who had Obama committed the US to accepting this year, and AFAIK those were mostly male straight and Muslim of military age.  The refugees that Obama had promised to take from Australia, for example. 

As for the religious numbers, the net is replete with that.
Quote
So Far: Syrian Refugees in U.S. Include 2,098 Muslims, 53 Christians
www.cnsnews.com/news/.../syrian-christians-are-greatest-peril-least-likely-be-admitted
Nov 17, 2015 - Fleeing persecution at the hands of Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and other jihadist groups, Syrian Christians generally avoid ... Of 2,184 Syrian refugees admitted into the U.S. since the Syrian civil war erupted in ... The remaining 33 include 1 Yazidi, 8 Jehovah Witnesses, 2 Baha'i, 6 Zoroastrians, ...
Record 499 Syrian Refugees Admitted to US So Far in May Includes ...
www.cnsnews.com/.../may-brings-biggest-monthly-number-syrian-refugee-arrivals-c...
May 23, 2016 - The Obama administration has admitted 499 Syrian refugees so far this ... Christians refugees who fled from ISIS fighters who overran Assyrian villages in Hassakeh in ... back against allowing Syrian refugees to settle in their states, citing ... by ISIS against Christians, Yazidis and other minorities in the areas ...
US State Department Denies Visas for Persecuted Assyrian Christians
https://shariaunveiled.wordpress.com/.../u-s-state-department-denies-visas-for-persecut...
Jul 11, 2015 - “Christians, Yazidis, Mandeans and others were targeted for destruction, ... Assyrian Christians persecuted by Radical Muslims ... has refused to resettle affected Assyrian Christians in the United States. ... inform Americans of the persecution directed by ISIS against Christians. ..... Enter your comment here.
No room in America for Christian refugees | TheHill
thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/.../228670-no-room-in-america-for-christian-refugee...
Jan 7, 2015 - America is about to accept 9000 Syrian Muslims, refugees of the brutal war ... Obama no more wants the Middle East's Christian refugees than Roosevelt wanted ... to the Middle East's Christians fleeing the brutality of ISIS and Al Qaeda. ... police are refusing to go public about crimes involving refugees and ...

NPR and a number of other sources are collaborating with this assisted genocide by pretending that Obama's just taking the refugees that are there.  Fact is that there are refugee camps full of Christians and Yazidis in Greece and in Kurdistan; Obama's taking them from other places where they are overwhelmingly muslim males 16-35 because the refugees themselves have murdered the Christians and Yazidis among them.  That I know I've cited here.

Where are you getting that most of Obama's current Syrian and Iraqi refugees are women and children?

I've argued that we do what Canada did in 2015: allow families women and young children, and among the males give highest priority to those who are at the highest risk and that pose the lowest risk of sympathy to ISIS: Yazidi, gay, elderly, Christian, Sabean, Alawite, Shia, Kurdish, and Sunni, in that order.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on March 10, 2017, 03:51:27 PM
Quote
Particularly since Obama's idea of vetting brought in the Syrians folks least in danger and most likely to cause danger -- mostly single straight Muslims of military age.

Could you provide a source for that statement, Pete.  Because it contradicts everything I have heard about refugees (that only about 2 percent are males of "military age," and a majority are women and children).

Either what you've heard, or what I've heard, is an outright lie.

I'll look for it.  Never had that questioned in numerous conversations and fora and I think I cited the link... see if I can find it again.  Where on earth did you hear that only "2%" are males 16-35, who make up the supermajority of refugees in Europe?  Or that a "majority" are women and children?  That describes current Canadian immigration policy.  Not, to my knowledge, Obama's.

To make it clear, we're talking about the majority of refugees let into this country (USA) under Obama, not refugees in Europe.  After all, you said, "Obama's idea of vetting brought in the Syrians folks least in danger and most likely to cause danger -- mostly single straight Muslims of military age."

I believe I heard the 2% figure on NPR, something about males that could be considered the type that could become terrorists.  I'm thinking it was from a spokesperson for the vetting process, IIRC.  Unfortunately, I don't recall the exact source.

The Boston Globe (https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/01/30/most-syrian-refugees-are-children-women/tpwCW4INuyOOkdOhjCJ77H/story.html) states:

Quote
Of the 15,479 Syrian refugees admitted to the United States during 2016, about 48 percent were boys and girls under the age of 14, while another 25 percent were girls over the age of 14 or women, according to data from the US Department of State’s Refugee Processing Center.

The remaining 27 percent of Syrian refugees were males 14 or older.

This would include old men over the age of 35, of course.

PRI (from August of last year) (https://www.pri.org/stories/2016-08-08/it-s-now-clear-most-syrian-refugees-coming-united-states-are-women-and-children) states:

Quote
Of the more than 8,000 Syrian refugees admitted to the country so far [in 2016?], 78 percent are women or children, according figures released by the State Department this month. Some 58 percent are children, with a roughly even split between girls and boys.

I have also heard repeatedly that our vetting process is quite extensive.  I've always wondered exactly what Trump wanted to do to make the process better, but Trump never has been one for minor details like telling how he's going to do something.  ::)

So it appears we are (or, should I say, were :( ) taking in mostly women and children.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on March 10, 2017, 05:16:04 PM
Pete:

Quote
Why don't you provide a quote where you show that Trump's saying that the average joe in the street will face direct threat from Syrian refugees?

Because that's a completely arbitrary challenge.

But if you doubt the scale of his fearmongering, here's an example where he explains that continuing the Obama administration's policies is "committing suicide" as a nation:

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-july-24-2016-n615706

Here's a tweet from DJT about the TRO on his immigration order:

Quote
Our legal system is broken! "77% of refugees allowed into U.S. since travel reprieve hail from seven suspect countries." (WT)  SO DANGEROUS!

He is obviously trying to scare people, and make them fear for their own safety.  He is not expecting people to use logic and math to understand this.  Logic would involve understanding the current vetting procedures and evaluating their success and whether there are any gaps.  Math and logic would confirm that a high proportion of refugees would be expected to come from bad and scary places. 

For my part, I don't think Trump understands these things.  I think he's being prodded and flattered by Bannon and others who are smarter than he is.  But that doesn't mean his tactics get a pass.  And it doesn't mean that his fear mongering should go without a response. 

Quote
Scapegoating how?  You may be right; I'm not being rhetorical.

He has used attacks that were NOT performed by classes of people who would be affected by his immigration order as examples of why his immigration order is urgent and correctly targeted.   He is blaming the wrong people for bad things that have been done in order to justify his actions again them. 

Quote
Syrian refugees have murdered the Christian and Yazidi refugees right in the camps, so I don't think it's scapegoating to suggest that there are some bad seeds among them. 

No one has suggested that there aren't bad seeds among them. 

There is an extremely thorough and prolonged vetting process before the refugees are allowed to come here.  Trump consistently pretends (or indulges the delusion) that there is no vetting, and that Obama ignored the danger.  That's a big chunk of the justification for one of his campaign planks, and his immigration orders.  He hasn't identified any specific failing of the existing system - in court his lawyers couldn't provide a shred of evidence for the urgency of his ban to get the TRO overturned - he is just putting on theater to convince the dumbest of his followers that he's going to fulfill his misguided campaign promises. 

That dangerous refugees exist in camps outside the US does not support Trump's claim that we aren't doing enough to make sure they don't come here.  He hasn't bothered to try to support that claim. 

Quote
You don't see anyone trying to put BLM into "perspective" and point out that the actual percentage of black people getting murdered by police officers is rather small compared to other causes of death. 

I sure do.  I see constant efforts to misrepresent and undermine BLM using just that kind of argument.  All in an effort to distract from the uncomfortable reality that racism across many institutions allows unjustified killings to go unpunished.

Quote
Why play stupid about it now and pretend that it's about statistical death when you cannot produce a single frakking quote, even from Trump, to that effect?  Trump says enough dumb stuff on his own; you don't have to go making stuff up.

You're getting ahead of yourself.  Me not jumping to meet your arbitrary demands doesn't demonstrate a thing, Pete. 

Oops, I missed something.  There is one attack after Orlando included.  It's the left wing extremist attack, the 2016 Dallas police shooting.

And it's being counted as a right wing white extremist attack.  While Orlando isn't counted.   And you don't find that fishy?

OMG, Pete.  ORLANDO IS COUNTED.  I already told you that. 

The news stories that don't mention Orlando came out WAY BEFORE ORLANDO.  The source they used has BEEN UPDATED.  WITH ORLANDO.

The irony that you would attack me and suggest I'm making stuff up when you're too lazy to read my posts in detail and follow links and reconsider your hasty conclusions...

You're the reason this site sucks now.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on March 10, 2017, 05:19:48 PM
Pete, your point about demoralization would hold a little water if Trump's immigration order was justified.  But it wasn't.  We are already vetting people, and he's not preventing demoralizing attacks with his order. 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 10, 2017, 06:05:05 PM
But if you doubt the scale of his fearmongering, here's an example where he explains that continuing the Obama administration's policies is "committing suicide" as a nation:

http://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meet-press-july-24-2016-n615706

What part of that strikes you as fear mongering?  Just the fact that he used the word "suicide"?  That's pathetic.  We have real examples of fear mongering everywhere, using descriptive language doesn't get there.  Particularly not in a quote where he references the Constitution at least four times.  It's called context.  Or do you think Rachel Maddow was "fear mongering" when she referred to "suicide" later in the same transcript?

Quote
Here's a tweet from DJT about the TRO on his immigration order:

Quote
Our legal system is broken! "77% of refugees allowed into U.S. since travel reprieve hail from seven suspect countries." (WT)  SO DANGEROUS!

He is obviously trying to scare people, and make them fear for their own safety.  He is not expecting people to use logic and math to understand this.  Logic would involve understanding the current vetting procedures and evaluating their success and whether there are any gaps.  Math and logic would confirm that a high proportion of refugees would be expected to come from bad and scary places.

You're not using logic or math either.  You seem to believe that there is some amount of terrorism we should agree to accept as a trade off for bringing in refugees.  The facts on the ground are that if you bring in enough refugees you will be brining in a future terrorist.  It's not a scare tactic to acknowledge that and address it.

So what is your acceptable incidence rate for Americans killed by refugees?  Is it one American dead per 1000 refugees admitted, or is it greater or lower?

Quote
For my part, I don't think Trump understands these things.  I think he's being prodded and flattered by Bannon and others who are smarter than he is.

I don't understand this fascination by the left to believe that prominent Republicans are dumb and its their advisers that control everything.  What do you get out of it?  Is it just the ability to make accusations against shadowy manipulators who you know don't have a platform to respond, or it something else?

Quote
But that doesn't mean his tactics get a pass.  And it doesn't mean that his fear mongering should go without a response.

Well then, acknowledge the problem with your position and make a case.  What number of American citizens being killed by terrorism is reasonable per 1000 refugees? 

Quote
There is an extremely thorough and prolonged vetting process before the refugees are allowed to come here.  Trump consistently pretends (or indulges the delusion) that there is no vetting, and that Obama ignored the danger.  That's a big chunk of the justification for one of his campaign planks, and his immigration orders.  He hasn't identified any specific failing of the existing system - in court his lawyers couldn't provide a shred of evidence for the urgency of his ban to get the TRO overturned - he is just putting on theater to convince the dumbest of his followers that he's going to fulfill his misguided campaign promises.

You should really do more research into the news, not just what's spoon fed to you.  He has specifically stated that the original 7 countries were selected and identified because they had been identified as having their records compromised.  Iraq was removed in the latest order specifically because the administration was assured their records could be trusted.

How "extremely thorough" can vetting be, if the records of the region from whence the refugees came are compromised?  Since you seem to have a strong opinion that this was "extremely through" vetting, how was it accomplished?  Will you represent, here and now, that it can't have been manipulated and that no one could easily have broken it?  Did it include say probing questions that might determine radicalized positions, and/or vetting of social media accounts or contacts?

I'm going to posit, that you have no idea what it entailed, and that most likely you wouldn't agree to use it to evaluate a person who you'd have to trust with your life.

Quote
Quote
You don't see anyone trying to put BLM into "perspective" and point out that the actual percentage of black people getting murdered by police officers is rather small compared to other causes of death. 

I sure do.  I see constant efforts to misrepresent and undermine BLM using just that kind of argument.  All in an effort to distract from the uncomfortable reality that racism across many institutions allows unjustified killings to go unpunished.

Out of curiosity, how does it "misrepresent" BLM to point out that death by cop is far less likely and far more avoidable than death by gang member?  And that increased police presence is one of the few things that can lead to real decreases in that second point?

I'm not aware that "racism" lets any unjustified killings go unpunished.  Please prove this point with a real example.

Quote
Quote
Why play stupid about it now and pretend that it's about statistical death when you cannot produce a single frakking quote, even from Trump, to that effect?  Trump says enough dumb stuff on his own; you don't have to go making stuff up.

You're getting ahead of yourself.  Me not jumping to meet your arbitrary demands doesn't demonstrate a thing, Pete.

It kind of demonstrates you're arguing with strawmen instead of real arguments.

Quote
You're the reason this site sucks now.

Pete's been grumpy lately, but that's a bit much.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 11, 2017, 02:27:45 PM
Quote
To make it clear, we're talking about the majority of refugees let into this country (USA) under Obama, not refugees in Europe.  After all, you said, "Obama's idea of vetting brought in the Syrians folks least in danger and most likely to cause danger -- mostly single straight Muslims of military age."


To be clear -- I am not speaking about the refugees who actually entered under Obama. I am talking about the sudden burst of Syian and Iraqi refugees that a Obama approved to have admitted this year when Obama would not have to deal with the consequences. Including the deal with Australia that Obama just torpedoed.

Obama if anything was excessively strict with immigration until 2016 when he ordered certain safeguards shut off.

Pray tell how could an entire camp in Australia was carefully vetted when Obama had agreed to take them all?

Everyy president since Reagan has started with a crackdown on immigrants and I see nothing in Trump's order that was crueler or less reasonable than what Obama did.  At least Trump isn't torturing folks to make them sign away their right to counsel in fighting deportation orders. 

[Deletes response to Sci Fi's personal attacks since someone needs to take the higher ground here]

I've been here longer than youhave, Sci Fi, and I'm a lot nicer now than when you arrived.  I have changed for the better while you have changed for the worse.

Whether or not Trump's actions were reasonable depends on facts not in evidence.  If Wayward is correct that most of the Iraqi and Syrian refugees are women and children, that would look bad for Trump. But if I'm right that most of the Syrian refugees that Obama vetted to enter 2017 are Muslim males 16-35 years old, then Trump is clearly right to order a halt and revision.

The post step down surge does give rise to reasonable suspicion.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 11, 2017, 02:33:03 PM
Quote
I sure do.  I see constant efforts to misrepresent and undermine BLM using just that kind of argument.  All in an effort to distract from the uncomfortable reality that racism across many institutions allows unjustified killings to go unpunished

Nicely distinguished by changing the point to "unpunished." good point.  The Minnesota case does show just that.  To be fair, though, it's not entirely misrepresentation when BLM doestnt consistently and clearly communicate that point.  It was BLM that talked Seattle from implementing body cams. 

But your distinction doesn't address the issue of terrorism hurting more than those physically harmed. And that's why we have particular laws against hate crimes.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 11, 2017, 03:06:48 PM

Quote
But comparing it to other terrorist killings is pretty interesting and responsive to misleading rhetoric about the supposedly unique dangers of Islamic beliefs in relation to terrorism.

Of course!  It certainly would be interesting and responsive if it was done honestly, accurately, and without intent to mislead.  I would love to see actual comparisons of Islamist violence with violence associated with any other coherent group.  Say "anti-abortion," or "pro-gun."  Or even just "Christian" if you are consistent with the rules about motivation. 

But this study is conflating black left-wing violence with what's being characterized as white right wing Christian violence.  While violence by muslims in the name of Islam is being chopped down by all sorts of conceivable argument. 

The fact that it's interesting and relevant is an aggravating factor when you pass off a propagandistic hatchet job as accurate science.

You guys take a mass murder by a black BLM sympathist, and then use those deaths to create stats to make left-wingers even more fearful of and more likely to murder white people.  That would be like if some right wing researcher took the KKK bombing of a mosque and counted it as "Muslim violence."  The fact that it's "interesting" and "relevant" does not change the fact that it's a dirty lie, SciFi.  A blood libel.  And when you respond to me with personal attacks, this doesn't improve your case.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 11, 2017, 04:07:25 PM
Here's an "interesting and relevant" fact: During Obama's second term, Pew research data shows that he steadily decreased the number of criminal deportations while increasing the number of non-criminal deportations.  See http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2016/08/31/u-s-immigrant-deportations-declined-in-2014-but-remain-near-record-high/

I know that a former employer of mine was deported in 2014.  He only became "illegal" because his former immigration attorney, Reza Athari, botched his work and didn't forward mail when my employer changed attorneys.  (Athari personally owns the building the immigration courthouse rents out, and there seems to be some difficulty in getting the court to recognize new attorneys when a client fires Athari ...)


Amid scifi's insults and emperors new clothes arguments, I missed Wayward's response:

Quote
Particularly since Obama's idea of vetting brought in the Syrians folks least in danger and most likely to cause danger -- mostly single straight Muslims of military age.

Could you provide a source for that statement, Pete.  Because it contradicts everything I have heard about refugees (that only about 2 percent are males of "military age," and a majority are women and children).

Either what you've heard, or what I've heard, is an outright lie.

I'll look for it.  Never had that questioned in numerous conversations and fora and I think I cited the link... see if I can find it again.  Where on earth did you hear that only "2%" are males 16-35, who make up the supermajority of refugees in Europe?  Or that a "majority" are women and children?  That describes current Canadian immigration policy.  Not, to my knowledge, Obama's.

To make it clear, we're talking about the majority of refugees let into this country (USA) under Obama, not refugees in Europe.  After all, you said, "Obama's idea of vetting brought in the Syrians folks least in danger and most likely to cause danger -- mostly single straight Muslims of military age."

I believe I heard the 2% figure on NPR, something about males that could be considered the type that could become terrorists.  I'm thinking it was from a spokesperson for the vetting process, IIRC.  Unfortunately, I don't recall the exact source.

The Boston Globe (https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2017/01/30/most-syrian-refugees-are-children-women/tpwCW4INuyOOkdOhjCJ77H/story.html) states:

Quote
Of the 15,479 Syrian refugees admitted to the United States during 2016, about 48 percent were boys and girls under the age of 14, while another 25 percent were girls over the age of 14 or women, according to data from the US Department of State’s Refugee Processing Center.

The remaining 27 percent of Syrian refugees were males 14 or older.

This would include old men over the age of 35, of course.

PRI (from August of last year) (https://www.pri.org/stories/2016-08-08/it-s-now-clear-most-syrian-refugees-coming-united-states-are-women-and-children) states:

Quote
Of the more than 8,000 Syrian refugees admitted to the country so far [in 2016?], 78 percent are women or children, according figures released by the State Department this month. Some 58 percent are children, with a roughly even split between girls and boys.

...
So it appears we are (or, should I say, were :( ) taking in mostly women and children.

Thanks!  I have unable to locate my source to the contrary.  It may have been removed.  My main sources are BBC, the Atlantic, and Quartz (which is owned by the Atlantic), so if they changed a story, there should have been edits.  I may simply have misunderstood something that was talking about the pool that Obama was taking applications from.

Quote
I have also heard repeatedly that our vetting process is quite extensive.

Yes, and I cited that in 2015-6 when I argued against Trump's position.  But in 2016 I read that something had just changed to expedite the process.  And the Australia refugee camp that was supposed to move wholesale ... how was that vetted extensively?

Thanks for the links.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 11, 2017, 08:49:45 PM
Wayward, do you notice the change in numbers? The earlier figure involves 22% men while the later figure (those Obama set to come in after he stepped down) rises to 27% according to your Boston Globe figures.  That's consistent with the allegations of reduced vetting at the end of the Obama regime.  "Apres moi, la deluge"
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 13, 2017, 09:41:30 AM
So Trump made an unsupported claim about Obama wire tapping Trump tower, and the left made an unsupported claim about Trump and Russia colluding.   Why is the first on the order in the MSM of a crime against humanity and the latter allowed to continually run as true without any evidence?

As an interesting thought puzzle, given what we know about the NSA's ability to record and listen to conversations, what do you think the odds are of this question being able to be answered in the negative?  "Are there any recordings of any conversations by a member of the Trump administration made while that person was in Trump Tower?"  Instead will get an answer to a question like this, "Is there proof that Obama signed a notarized letter directly ordering the emplacement of an illegal wire tap on Trump's person?"

I promise you, if the parties were reversed, even a hint that the Clinton campaign had been wiretapped would get front page coverage in the MSM as proven fact.

So what's the fake news here?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: LetterRip on March 13, 2017, 12:37:24 PM
Seriati,

the contact between his senior advisors (some of whom have resigned over it) and Russia and the fact that at least one of them lied under oath about it suggests it isn't 'unsupported'.

Pete,

it doesn't have to be reduced vetting - simply a change in demographics of those fleeing.  Men are more inclined to 'tough it out' and thus will comprise a larger percentage of those leaving towards the end of a refugee crisis.  The beginning will be heavily skewed to females with and without children, and standard families.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 13, 2017, 01:46:54 PM
Seriati,

the contact between his senior advisors (some of whom have resigned over it) and Russia and the fact that at least one of them lied under oath about it suggests it isn't 'unsupported'.

Nothing about Flynn's contact would have been problematic 3 weeks later.  So that's really not evidence of any collusion.  As far as I can tell, there has been absolutely nothing but unsourced claims that "conversations occurred" not even unsourced claims about what the conversations entailed or even a claim that anything illegal was discussed.

Please show me some actual evidence otherwise.

And out of curiosity who do you think lied under oath?  Sessions?  Cause that claim is weak sauce in my book.

Quote
it doesn't have to be reduced vetting - simply a change in demographics of those fleeing.  Men are more inclined to 'tough it out' and thus will comprise a larger percentage of those leaving towards the end of a refugee crisis.  The beginning will be heavily skewed to females with and without children, and standard families.

It does have to be reduced vetting.  There is literally no truth to the notion that there are not large groups of women and children still at risk.  Not to mention, there was an apparent change in policy by Obama on his way out the door.  Very similar to his change to the classification rules to try and maximize the amount of leakers that would be present in the new administration.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on March 13, 2017, 04:02:09 PM
I'm still not sure what the big deal is about having 'contact' with Russia during an election. Is Russia now considered to be equivalent to Dr. Doom, where talking with him probably means you're a supervillain? I also just came across this, which seems to indicate that both sides had contact with Russia at a similar time. So why the hysteria about Trump in particular doing so?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/13/hillary-clintons-team-met-russian-ambassador-says-kremlin-spokesman/


 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on March 13, 2017, 04:45:21 PM
Quote
The officials said that Mr. Flynn had never made explicit promises of sanctions relief, but that he had appeared to leave the impression it would be possible.

Mr. Flynn could not immediately be reached for comment about the conversations, details of which were first reported by The Washington Post. Despite Mr. Flynn’s earlier denials, his spokesman told the Post that “while he had no recollection of discussing sanctions, he couldn’t be certain that the topic never came up.”

During the Christmas week conversation, he urged Mr. Kislyak to keep the Russian government from retaliating over the coming sanctions — it was an open secret in Washington that they were in the works — by telling him that whatever the Obama administration did could be undone, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were discussing classified material.

So, hard to pin down, but the general uproar is over the last possibility, that he was saying that action taken by the current administration was nothing to worry about. And the Clintonesque response that he couldn't be certain the topic didn't come up. I think that probably unless he was blackout drunk he should probably be able to definitively say whether they discussed the most current and topical issue between the two countries. That kind of hedge suggests to me that he absolutely discussed sanctions, but doesn't want to admit it or face the consequences of being caught in a lie.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on March 13, 2017, 04:45:59 PM
The problem isn't that they were talking to Russia. The problem is that they lied about talking to Russia.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 13, 2017, 04:49:09 PM
There really isn't a problem.  The fact that you think there is, when you have no actual evidence of anything happening is a problem.

And who is this "they" who lied about it?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 13, 2017, 04:51:43 PM
How about the new fake news.  Headlines everywhere about how many people will "lose" health insurance under the new plan.  Really?  Is less insured (when no one is required to buy insurance) the same thing as losing insurance?  If I choose not to pay for insurance I didn't lose it.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on March 13, 2017, 05:03:56 PM
That's pretty simple. The old subsidy is larger than the new plan, therefore some amount of people will be less able to afford insurance. You can quibble about calling it "losing" healthcare, but I imagine most reasonable people would talk about losing things they couldn't afford. Like "I lost the RV because I couldn't make the payments."

They could be slightly more accurate and say many people will no longer be able to afford healthcare. And it is entirely equivalent to people "losing" their health plans because of their cost due to Affordable Care Act.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on March 13, 2017, 05:28:18 PM
The problem isn't that they were talking to Russia. The problem is that they lied about talking to Russia.

Assuming even something as severe as proof someone perjured themselves over it (which they didn't), this argument holds about as much water as the argument that Bill Clinton was being targeted over lying and that the problem wasn't marital indiscretion. Technically true, perhaps, but not the real source of public outcry.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on March 13, 2017, 05:34:32 PM
There really isn't a problem.  The fact that you think there is, when you have no actual evidence of anything happening is a problem.

And who is this "they" who lied about it?
Flynn lied to Pence. That why he was fired. Makes the other accusations a little more credible.
Assuming even something as severe as proof someone perjured themselves over it (which they didn't), this argument holds about as much water as the argument that Bill Clinton was being targeted over lying and that the problem wasn't marital indiscretion. Technically true, perhaps, but not the real source of public outcry.
Sure, the outcry is over the possibility of collusion with Russia but the lie lends more credence to it. If they'd said "sure we talked to Russia, we're laying the ground work for our foreign policy," it would at least give the impression they had nothing to hide. The deception implies or can be made to imply that they do. Therefore, scandal.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 13, 2017, 05:43:25 PM
Ahh... so you have one guy who lied to the VP and was fired for it?  That's the basis for "they" who lied that should cause us to continually question the Administration?  Glad you cleared up that we shouldn't trust the Administration because they were lied to and took action about it, what?  wait....

That's pretty simple. The old subsidy is larger than the new plan, therefore some amount of people will be less able to afford insurance. You can quibble about calling it "losing" healthcare, but I imagine most reasonable people would talk about losing things they couldn't afford. Like "I lost the RV because I couldn't make the payments."

If you were going to "quibble" about that, then I'd like to "quibble" about counting people as having insurance when they can't actually afford the deductible and are poorer than they were because they are forced to pay premiums.  Will that person really be worse off without insurance than with it?

The fact is Obamacare with it's mandates forced people to over insure at excessive premiums to the point where almost all those not receiving significant subsidies were worse off, and there's no reason we can't deal with those in such severe need directly.   

Quote
They could be slightly more accurate and say many people will no longer be able to afford healthcare. And it is entirely equivalent to people "losing" their health plans because of their cost due to Affordable Care Act.

Actually, they really wouldn't be much more accurate with that version either.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on March 13, 2017, 05:49:34 PM
Because he was the only one whose name stuck. Why don't you go and look up someone and show how they weren't lying?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DJQuag on March 13, 2017, 06:53:00 PM
Fenring

Some of my problems with Russia.

A) They have a presidente for life.

B) Pain in the ass journalists and ex intelligence officers end up dead in Russia. All if them gang related, of course.

C) Putin has wet dreams about the glory of the USSR and actively works to restore it.

D) Russia has no moral or legal collars when it comes to social media and propaganda. Indeed, they are the world champions of propaganda and electronic warfare. See RT and the electronic attack on Estonia in 2007.

Look, I know that the US isn't pristine. But they at least have a constitutional process and a system of checks and balances that is adhered to. Russia has a PTL who came k ut of the KGB. I know which one I trust.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: cherrypoptart on March 13, 2017, 10:08:38 PM
How is this Russia so different from the Russia that Hillary and Obama wanted to hit with a reset button and be all friendly with?

How is it different from China when Nixon went over there?

I thought we were supposed to be willing to talk with our adversaries and try to reach common ground. Now all of a sudden anyone found to be communicating with the Russians is assumed to be in their pocket. That doesn't make any sense. What it looks like is that the left is afraid that Trump will succeed where they have failed and they want to make sure to sabotage that success by creating a narrative where it is only happening because Trump is their Manchurian candidate. Compared to the Machiavellian twists and turns of even your simplest Russian plot, this liberal plan is far too crude and transparent and will be ineffective except in the minds of the left who have either finally managed to convince themselves or refuse to give up the ghost and admit the truth of their own spiteful pettiness.

Russia obviously preferred Trump because Hillary just might have been crazy enough to make good on her promises of escalating in Syria with a no-fly zone that would inevitably lead to either Russia backing down in disgrace or all out war, neither of which was an acceptable option by their calculations. Sometimes there need not be any deeper motive than the obvious.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 13, 2017, 10:09:18 PM

Pete,

it doesn't have to be reduced vetting - simply a change in demographics of those fleeing.  Men are more inclined to 'tough it out' and thus will comprise a larger percentage of those leaving towards the end of a refugee crisis.  The beginning will be heavily skewed to females with and without children, and standard families.

All that makes sense, except that it didn't happen with Syrian Iraqi refugees in Europe.  And that's where Obama's mostly taking them from, isn't it?  Otherwise why is he taking so few Yazidis and Christians?  0.5% Yazidis and Christians compared to their 20% of the population, and getting murdered in the refugee camps.

It's possible that you're right.  But the numbers are enough to justify the suspicion of a new administration.  Particularly in light of the leaked recordings of Obama acknowledging that he knew that Saudi Arabia and Qatar were funding ISIS, and the grotesquely small 0.5% Christian and Yazidi immigration numbers.  While Trump's talk of a blanket 'muslim ban' was toxic, the idea of questioning his predecessors immigration decisions, calling for a massive slowdown, then rewriting the veting system -- that's something Obama, Bush, and Clinton all did.  When they had less reason than Trump to do so.  Even if SciFi is right and Trump is dead wrong about the Syrians approved for 2017 posing any threat of terrorist activity, that doesn't change the fact that it's a disgraceful lie to pretend that the issue is number of deaths from terrorism.  SciFi seems to offer Trump's presumed wrongness about the Syrian immigrants to justify the big lie that's being told about "right wing racist extremists" being more dangerous to the country than "Jihadists."  Or SciFi's own false claim that Trump's been telling us that the average person on the street is in significant danger of being personally murdered by jihadists.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 13, 2017, 10:19:09 PM
Fenring

Some of my problems with Russia.

A) They have a presidente for life.

B) Pain in the ass journalists and ex intelligence officers end up dead in Russia. All if them gang related, of course.

C) Putin has wet dreams about the glory of the USSR and actively works to restore it.

D) Russia has no moral or legal collars when it comes to social media and propaganda. Indeed, they are the world champions of propaganda and electronic warfare. See RT and the electronic attack on Estonia in 2007.

Look, I know that the US isn't pristine. But they at least have a constitutional process and a system of checks and balances that is adhered to. Russia has a PTL who came k ut of the KGB. I know which one I trust.

DJQ is mostly right.  You can't really argue with his A, B, C, or the first part of his D ("Russia has no moral or legal collars when it comes to social media and propaganda")

The rest of his point D is arguable.  Here's the basics on the cyberattack on Estonia: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2007/may/17/topstories3.russia
Bear in mind that Estonia was at that time better wired for Internet than the USA

However, an exceptionally informed person might question Russia's status as "Champion" of propaganda and electronic warfare.  That is, if you looked at what was being done to cell phones and internet services of protesters at Standing Rock, you might say that someone in the USA has taken electronic warfare to a point that makes Estonia 2007 look like the battle of Marthon.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on March 13, 2017, 11:08:32 PM
DJQuag's comments may be accurate, but are also irrelevant to my question. Whether we trust Russia is besides the point. In this instance cherry is the one who nailed it: how does the desire to open a dialogue with an adversary make you their Manchurian candidate? That's a particular spun narrative that I saw emerge out of the clear blue sky during the election, and it was not only baseless, I viewed that type of lie as dangerous to national security as well. Some here called mindless saber rattling to be no real threat, but I think it can lay the groundwork for actual violence. The narrative was repeated about Trump so many times that it has become fact in the eyes of the media (and some people on the left, I suppose); it began with the idea that they were "supporting" his campaign covertly, which was never even vaguely demonstrated, and has now come to the point of accusing his administration of colluding with the enemy for talking with them, when Hillary's people also apparently talked to them. I'm really startled when people actually believe this kind of malarky.

It can be both true that Putin has high hopes for Russia and also true that Russia is a non-factor in the race to the top for world powers. He can want whatever he wants; Russia will never be an actual competitor for American wealth in the foreseeable future like China is. Even portraying Russia as this great adversary strikes me as being laughable, and although it's true that they have the potential to be a nuisance and interfere with various actions at times, overall they seem to restrict their sphere of interest to their immediate border area, which is hardly much of a surprise. I'm not even defending Trump here; I don't have to be on his side to assert that certain accusations against him are likely baseless. I think the culture of fake news and propaganda hurts everyone in the country on both sides, and that when one side uses such tactics to beat their opposition they do not functionally comprehend that they're pulling the carpet out from underneath themselves as citizens as well. There are no winners when truth is a casualty. But right now power interests have completely inculcated the premise into politics that the ends justify the means, and that as long as the opposition is defeated the good work can be done. But there is no good work to be done under such conditions.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 13, 2017, 11:42:18 PM
Quote
DJQuag's comments may be accurate, but are also irrelevant

Bit much asking DJQ to be relevant *and* accurate at the same time.  You might as well ask him to be reasonable or to respect fundamental decencies, all while standing on his own two feet.

Quote
how does the desire to open a dialogue with an adversary make you their Manchurian candidate?

Oh, it doesn't.  But then when the great dialoguer turns around and hands juicy trade deals that he'd promised to American steelworkers, in an "America First" campaign, to Russian-owned steelmakers to transport Canadian oil to the Chinese, putting American water at risk, that "dialogue" with the "adversary" does smell whorish.  Albeit an extremely expensive whore.

Quote
Some here called mindless saber rattling to be no real threat, but I think it can lay the groundwork for actual violence. The narrative was repeated about Trump so many times that it has become fact in the eyes of the media (and some people on the left, I suppose); it began with the idea that they were "supporting" his campaign covertly, which was never even vaguely demonstrated, and has now come to the point of accusing his administration of colluding with the enemy for talking with them, when Hillary's people also apparently talked to them.

They had to grasp at something juicy after it came out that Obama and Hillary knew about the Sauds and Qataris funding ISIS, while they were pissing in our ear about Islamist attacks being just "workplace violence."  What better way to distract the people than to call the President a Russian spy?

Quote
true that Russia is a non-factor in the race to the top for world powers. He can want whatever he wants; Russia will never be an actual competitor for American wealth in the foreseeable future like China is.

Only your last sentence is true.  While China may have finally realized the falseness of Mao's dictum that all power flows from the barrel of the gun, you cannot deny (1) that some power flows from the barrel of a gun; and (2) Russia has the biggest gun.

Quote
Even portraying Russia as this great adversary strikes me as being laughable, and although it's true that they have the potential to be a nuisance and interfere with various actions at times

Dude, Putin just obliterated the world's greatest economic superpower, the EU.  That's more than "nuisance and interference."  True that Russians don't have power to become king of the world, but they certainly have the powers of kingmaker and kingslayer.

Pete: Please see your email. -OrneryMod
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on March 14, 2017, 03:41:18 AM
Dude, Putin just obliterated the world's greatest economic superpower, the EU.  That's more than "nuisance and interference."  True that Russians don't have power to become king of the world, but they certainly have the powers of kingmaker and kingslayer.

Best I can tell Putin wanted healthy oil trade with Europe to compete with the Saudis, and was making headway when his efforts were busted up by the Ukrainian regime change, followed by the anti-Syria movement to get Saudi oil to go through to Europe to defeat Putin in the oil wars. And lo-and-behold, the ISIS forces attacking Assad, backed by the Saudis (and whose oil was proven to have been bought repeatedly by Turkey) were the ones attacking Assad by proxy. So yes, all of this was to prevent Putin conducting free trade of resources with Europe. You can blame the Saudis (and others who I won't name) for the EU getting shafted out of getting oil deals there. Was Putin involved? Yes, as a main competitor for trade, which is what nations are supposed to do.

So how do you figure that Russia has obliterated the EU? Do you mean Brexit?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 14, 2017, 10:31:45 AM
As an interesting thought puzzle, given what we know about the NSA's ability to record and listen to conversations, what do you think the odds are of this question being able to be answered in the negative?  "Are there any recordings of any conversations by a member of the Trump administration made while that person was in Trump Tower?"  Instead will get an answer to a question like this, "Is there proof that Obama signed a notarized letter directly ordering the emplacement of an illegal wire tap on Trump's person?"

As an interesting follow on, I'll report another rumor, which itself could be fake news, but that would make it entirely plausible that Trump is correct and no one in the Obama administration is directly lying.  Judge Napolitano is claiming that multiple sources (of course apparently off the record) are claiming that the President didn't illegally order any US department or spies to access the NSA database to get Trump communications, but instead asked a UK agency that has access to the NSA database to do so.

http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/03/14/judge-napolitano-why-there-may-never-be-proof-even-if-obama-spied-trump (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/03/14/judge-napolitano-why-there-may-never-be-proof-even-if-obama-spied-trump)

I grant Judge Napolitano has claimed on multiple occasions to have better than average insight into deep government issues, but I haven't seen anything that directly contradicts any of the claims he's made on that front, so I'm still giving him the benefit of the doubt. 

I admit my own biases make me more inclined to believe something like this could occur, primarily because I don't believe President Obama has any principals other than the ends justifies the means, but that doesn't make it true just plausible.  I think we need to settle, once and for all, if the NSA really has a database and if that database really includes recordings from calls inside Trump tower.   Then we can decide if they were illegally accessed.

On another interesting side note, if you want to think of Trump as playing the deep game at a higher level, then the original tweet is actually brilliant.  In an environment of leaks by holdovers by the prior administration causing damage, he's just effectively taking all calls from Trump tower out of the leak game.  Any leak now from a Trump Tower conversation will prove that the Obama administration tapped his phones.  Not sure if I really believe he's operating at that level, but it's kind of brilliant in its simplicity.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on March 14, 2017, 10:56:28 AM
If you were going to "quibble" about that, then I'd like to "quibble" about counting people as having insurance when they can't actually afford the deductible and are poorer than they were because they are forced to pay premiums.  Will that person really be worse off without insurance than with it?

There were a lot of people who considered their options in that way, and they generally accepted penalties rather than signing up for insurance they couldn't afford or use. Some gambled and won, some gambled and lost.

As to whether they are worse off, yes - if they needed major medical intervention. No if they needed an antibiotic for strep throat.

I paid in about $4000 for insurance under Obamacare for a year due to spotty employment. During that time, I never used the insurance. I don't regret it. I know that it would have been more expensive prior to the program for the scenarios that were important to me, and I didn't even get subsidies. Individual health insurance was pretty brutal, and I didn't have pre-existing disqualifying medical conditions. Now this is anecdotal, and moot since I now have employer health insurance.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 14, 2017, 11:36:02 AM
And I grew up in family with no employer health insurance.  To fit our budget we had effectively low cost catastrophe insurance, but handled our own medical needs largely out of pocket.  With after hours clinics and cash discounts this was a highly affordable and reasonable compromise.  Obamacare killed that low cost policy and the ability of a family to make a rational health choice.  Unwinding the mandates brings that back as an option.  Not to mention, that for a family of four the plan includes a refundable tax credit of at least $8000 (and possibly more depending on ages), which would have been more than enough for a catastrophic coverage plan and even some care during the year.  Make it legal and plans to fit any budget could arise again.

End of day though, there is no way to guarantee health coverage (which is far far different than health insurance) without requiring people to pay the full price.  If you consume $500,000 in health insurance over your life you need to pay a significant chunk of $500,000 in premiums.  If your insurance costs $12,000 a year it takes over 41 years to get there.  Are these reasonable numbers?  I found a study done in 2000 in Michigan (before 17 years of run away cost inflation) that set the per capita at $316,000.  When you consider that most people will spend a substantial chunk of time on a family plan the amount they pay in will be less than that (the average per capita including massive government contributions isn't even $11,000).  It looks like the average out-of-pocket per household is just over $4000. 

"Healthcare" is a massive unfunded pyramid scheme and pretending that Obamacare actually "solved" it when it didn't do anything about the gross underfunding is inherently deceptive.  Anything, including the Republican plan, that incentivizes lower cost providers to offer products is going to help this situation, but to fix it we need to get the government out of the darn price fixing racket with the whole concept that medicare/Medicaid will only pay part of the "rate" and that rates need to be artificially inflated to get to the right number.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on March 14, 2017, 12:49:54 PM
I'm not going to argue for Obamacare as an excellent solution, it did have many flaws. The problems with letting insurers do whatever they want, is they are incentivized to find creative ways to disallow care. It also had various winners and losers - as you point out some people were very happy to have types of plans that couldn't be offered under ACA. On the other hand, some people who had an impossible time prior to ACA wound up getting access to care. I remember a colleague of mine being incensed at the loss of the old-style indemnity plan in favor of HMO/PPO.

Maybe it is best to acknowledge that some people will "lose" health care while others will "gain" it.

Possibly the best solution is to go the single payer way and essentially regulate healthcare as a necessary public infrastructure like utilities, because you do point out many of the essential problems. Another essential part of the solution would be to recognize that maybe not everyone can get access to care for the healthcare issues most likely to result in high cost.

Which is, of course, why HDHP catastrophic insurance is potentially more expensive overall. The more people who avoid treatment because of high pocket cost, the more expensive it generally gets. Insulin is cheaper than amputation, to use an extreme example.

Fundamentally, health access really doesn't fit the insurance economic model, primarily because of the consequences of not being covered. If you don't buy homeowner's insurance and your house burns down, the government doesn't step in and build you a new house. Incidentally, this was a big problem in auto liability. Which is why there is now a mandate that if you drive a car, you must carry liability insurance - to avoid people just shrugging off the $200,000 hospital bills by declaring bankruptcy.

But to the original point, yes I think in all cases of health policy we should be talking about how many lose care and how many gain. Even giving a net figure doesn't well communicate what is really going to happen, because people will think of it as just that many more or less people covered from the baseline, and not visualize people moving from one group to the other in both directions.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 14, 2017, 03:39:16 PM
Maybe it is best to acknowledge that some people will "lose" health care while others will "gain" it.

No.  I will acknowledge that most people will be free to choose the healthcare they want.  If there are those who will "lose" it, other than by choice, lets look at the circumstances that they are facing.

Quote
Possibly the best solution is to go the single payer way and essentially regulate healthcare as a necessary public infrastructure like utilities, because you do point out many of the essential problems. Another essential part of the solution would be to recognize that maybe not everyone can get access to care for the healthcare issues most likely to result in high cost.

This has been discussed endlessly.  There are plenty of problems with single payer.  Not least of which is that high end care ends up being the province of the super wealthy and politically connected to an even greater degree than in our system.  Waiting lists and health rationing become common place.  Innovation decreases radically.   

Quote
Which is, of course, why HDHP catastrophic insurance is potentially more expensive overall. The more people who avoid treatment because of high pocket cost, the more expensive it generally gets. Insulin is cheaper than amputation, to use an extreme example.

You know who's great at predicting the cost/benefit of whether an early treatment is cheaper than an bad result?  Insurance companies.  They are able to do it with great precision and accuracy.  In fact they used to just that and were the early innovators in providing things like annual check ups to lower their costs, when they had incentives to do so.  So what happened?  You know already, the government has been mucking with the rules for decades, constantly forcing the companies to add expenses after the fact that they didn't account for when they set the premiums. 

Pre-existing conditions?  Love that every one thinks this is a good idea, but why exactly is it reasonable to force an insurance company to pay for a million dollar treatment for someone who didn't pay them a dime until after they got sick?

I don't know what you do, but would it be reasonable for the government to assign you to provide your services to a client for the next 10 months, but only let you charge them the same fee other clients pay for a day's work?

Quote
Incidentally, this was a big problem in auto liability. Which is why there is now a mandate that if you drive a car, you must carry liability insurance - to avoid people just shrugging off the $200,000 hospital bills by declaring bankruptcy.

The problem in the auto insurance industry was not that you didn't carry insurance for your own damages (your health insurance is supposed to cover that), it's that people didn't carry insurance for the harms they caused to the other driver in the accident you cause.  Many states still only require that you carry insurance on the other guy.

Quote
But to the original point, yes I think in all cases of health policy we should be talking about how many lose care and how many gain.

Until you pay for the heath care the current policies mandate, which you never have, I don't think we should be talking about how many "lose" their fake coverage at all.  We should be talking about how we cause the costs to actually come down (and not just the stupid government manipulated price - ie the "premiums").

Quote
Even giving a net figure doesn't well communicate what is really going to happen, because people will think of it as just that many more or less people covered from the baseline, and not visualize people moving from one group to the other in both directions.

All focusing the discussion as you prefer does is lie to people.  You tell them someone's taking away their free lunch, when they don't have a free lunch in the first place.  Sounds scary though that all those "free lunches" are being "stolen."
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 14, 2017, 03:52:33 PM
Dude, Putin just obliterated the world's greatest economic superpower, the EU.  That's more than "nuisance and interference."  True that Russians don't have power to become king of the world, but they certainly have the powers of kingmaker and kingslayer.

Best I can tell Putin wanted healthy oil trade with Europe to compete with the Saudis, and was making headway when his efforts were busted up by the Ukrainian regime change, followed by the anti-Syria movement to get Saudi oil to go through to Europe to defeat Putin in the oil wars. And lo-and-behold, the ISIS forces attacking Assad, backed by the Saudis (and whose oil was proven to have been bought repeatedly by Turkey) were the ones attacking Assad by proxy. So yes, all of this was to prevent Putin conducting free trade of resources with Europe. You can blame the Saudis (and others who I won't name) for the EU getting shafted out of getting oil deals there. Was Putin involved? Yes, as a main competitor for trade, which is what nations are supposed to do.

So how do you figure that Russia has obliterated the EU? Do you mean Brexit?

You think Brexit's the last exit?  Look more carefully at what's brewing in France, the Netherlands, and Germany.  Putin's intentionally driven refugees into Europe as part of his promised revenge for Kosovo.  That's what caused Brexit, what caused the ascendancy of Marine Le Pen who will torpedo NATO as well as the EU.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on March 14, 2017, 04:04:10 PM
You think Brexit's the last exit?  Look more carefully at what's brewing in France, the Netherlands, and Germany.  Putin's intentionally driven refugees into Europe as part of his promised revenge for Kosovo.  That's what caused Brexit, what caused the ascendancy of Marine Le Pen who will torpedo NATO as well as the EU.

I don't merely think this is off the mark, that would give it too much credit. What you're suggesting is about as realistic as the kinds of plans Destro and Cobra Commander used to come up with.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 14, 2017, 04:18:39 PM
I have no idea who "Cobra Commander" is supposed to be.

I don't think you can with a straight face deny either that (1) Russia's actions in Syria caused most of the immigration of single male military age Syrians to Europe or 
(2) that the disintegration of the EU benefits Putin's ambitions. 

With those two established, your argument is sort of like saying yes, Putin made a hole in one, but it was an accident; you can't possibly give him credit for meaning to do exactly what he wanted to do and happened to do.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DJQuag on March 14, 2017, 04:43:32 PM
It's easy to say that Russian imperialism isn't a big deal when you're living in the US. A bit less so when you're in eastern Europe or southern Asia.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DJQuag on March 14, 2017, 04:55:16 PM
How dare a military aged male want to escape a war zone hell hole where they're a target for conscription or murder. *censored*ed terrorists overrunning Europe, I tell ya.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on March 14, 2017, 05:01:12 PM
I have no idea who "Cobra Commander" is supposed to be.

You should Google him, he's an important literary figure.

Quote
I don't think you can with a straight face deny either that (1) Russia's actions in Syria caused most of the immigration of single male military age Syrians to Europe or 
(2) that the disintegration of the EU benefits Putin's ambitions. 

(1) Russia had little to nothing to do with the Syrian exodus, which began far before Russia even got involved. You might want to look towards policies such as "Assad has to go" when inspecting what conditions led to ISIS and other forces capturing Aleppo and other Syrian territory, turning the country into a warzone. "Assad has to go" wasn't Putin's policy, let's just put it that way. I'm sure there was collateral damage as Russia fight along with Assad to retake places like Aleppo, but I'd like to see you with a straight face tell me that driving out ISIS was a nefarious goal. Everyone forgets that a year or two before the "Russia caused the Syria problem" meme was invented, ISIS was being called the biggest threat in the world and both parties were issuing rhetoric about how something had to be done about it. 'Putin created the refugee crisis', my eye.

(2) What would benefit Putin the most would be for sanctions to be lifted from Russia and for the EU to guzzle up their delicious oil so that Russia can take in the $$. They gain zero by their EU market having economic problems, and even less by their trading partner being broken up into individual, weak countries. I know you still buy into the propaganda that Putin literally wants to militarily invade Europe and occupy the world with the Russian flag, so on this front I'm certain we simply won't agree, as all I think he wants is for Russian economic clout to grow so that it can be a competitor along with the U.S. and China.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DJQuag on March 14, 2017, 05:04:40 PM
I don't think Putin wants to invade Europe. Just the former USSR.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 14, 2017, 05:50:35 PM
Pete: I don't think you can with a straight face deny [] that (1) Russia's actions in Syria caused most of the immigration of single male military age Syrians to Europe

Fenring: (1) Russia had little to nothing to do with the Syrian exodus,

Let's try this again:

I don't think you can with a straight face deny [] that (1) Russia's actions in Syria caused most of the immigration of single male military age Syrians to Europe.

The exodus was ongoing, but the later sudden wave of toxic males resulted from Russia's backing of Assad.  And it's the latter that is ripping the EU apart.

Russia was the key to turning Syria into what DJQ correctly calls "a war zone hell hole where [single military age males] were a target for conscription or murder."  They had no choice but to leave, thanks to Russia, and anyone who has studied history of immigration knows that a wave of military age males traveling through foreign lands without their families is going to wreak havoc wherever they go.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 14, 2017, 05:56:16 PM
I don't think Putin wants to invade Europe. Just the former USSR.

Mostly agreed (I think he'll eventually want former client states such as Bulgaria), but like Hitler and the Kaiser before him, he understood that disabling western Europe is key to being able to march over Eastern Europe.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DJQuag on March 14, 2017, 06:50:02 PM
Why should miltary aged male refugees automatically be considered toxic? I personally know some living in my town; a town up north where the Conservatives send the refugees. They're fine. They're *people. * I'm not about to hold a dumbass racist view of them.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 14, 2017, 07:39:38 PM
Quote from: Pete
They had no choice but to leave, thanks to Russia, and anyone who has studied history of immigration knows that a wave of military age males traveling through foreign lands without their families is going to wreak havoc wherever they go.
Why should miltary aged male refugees automatically be considered toxic?

They shouldn't.  I said that a WAVE of military age males in foreign lands wreaks havoc.  And I said specifically that the group has proven toxic in Germany.  I've already agreed with you that Syrians haven't created harm in the UK.  I agreed with your statement above that the Pakistanis are the ones that behave in the way that UK fears the Syrians will behave, and that the EU isn't to blame for the Pakistanis. 

That makes you as politically incorrect as I am, and most on the left would call you a racist for what you said about the UK Pakistanis.  As far as leftwashers go, the fact that you're actually correct is an aggravation for the charge of racism, not an justification.  Don't take out your issues on me.

 I don't think you're being intentionally obtuse, but your anger glasses makes you respond very stupidly to everything I say.  You screw up quotes, saying the opposite of what you meant, and you are completely unable to grasp that I'm actually agreeing with what you said here.  Save yourself the embarrassment and calm down before you respond to me further.

Quote
They're *people.

Well duh.  Nazis were people.  The KKK are people.  DAESH is people.  All monsters I have ever heard of were people.  All saints as well.  Not to mention all the people in between.  What I said is that very large groups of single military age males, traveling without their families, have a history of wreaking havoc.  And that many of the ones in Germany have proven toxic.  Proven is the opposite of "assumed."  Proven means established by facts and actions.  For frak's sake think harder.  Don't assume that someone that triggers your daddy issues is saying everything that you despise.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 14, 2017, 07:48:38 PM
Quote from: fenring
I know you still buy into the propaganda that Putin literally wants to militarily invade Europe and occupy the world with the Russian flag,

You know wrong.  I believe that Putin wants to militarily invade many but not all of the former USSR states, plus to dominate some of the former USSR client states like Bulgaria.  Putin has also signaled fairly clearly that he's got his eye on Sweden and Finland, and if he gets Sweden, I'd worry for Norway as well.  But that's not all of Europe, and not even necessarily a military invasion outside the former USSR.

I don't think Putin wants to invade Europe. Just the former USSR.

Mostly agreed (I think he'll eventually want former client states such as Bulgaria), but like Hitler and the Kaiser before him, he understood that disabling western Europe is key to being able to march over Eastern Europe.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DJQuag on March 14, 2017, 07:50:32 PM
See, I might be willing to have a conversation with you on this, but you've got a hard on for me now, and everything has to have something to do with something that you imagined I once said about you and my father. (Which you still can't back up, pussy.)

I respect a lot of people who hold conservative opinions here. Sometimes, I even hold conservative opinions. When it comes to *censored* like this, you're really not worthy of a true response.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 14, 2017, 10:17:48 PM
See, I might be willing to have a conversation with you on this, but you've got a hard on for me now, and [personal attack and cowardly excuse]

I don't have a "hard on" for you and just in the last few hours during this conversation, I have agreed with and even "liked" a number of your more intelligible posts.  I only brought up your daddy issues when you made personal attacks on me out of nowhere and pretended you were "with ScoFi"s remarks on another thread.

Quote
I respect a lot of people who hold conservative opinions here. Sometimes, I even hold conservative opinions

I know that. I give credit where credit is due. Hitler created the Autobahn, and as far as politics goes, you are generally an open minded guy.  Your beef with me (unlike sci fi) has nothing to do with politics.  Your issues with me are daddy issues.

If you ever regain the balls to talk politics with me without making personal attacks or distorting what I said, I will reply in kind.  I have never been as hateful to you as you have been to me.

It's only your personal criticisms of me that I find inseparable from your mommy and daddy issues.

Quote
When it comes to *censored* like this, you're really not worthy of a true response.

Thanks for conceding that your responses to me have been phoney.  I think you may find that true responses take less effort.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on March 15, 2017, 04:34:53 AM
Seriati

Quote
What part of that strikes you as fear mongering?  Just the fact that he used the word "suicide"?  That's pathetic.  We have real examples of fear mongering everywhere, using descriptive language doesn't get there.  Particularly not in a quote where he references the Constitution at least four times.  It's called context.  Or do you think Rachel Maddow was "fear mongering" when she referred to "suicide" later in the same transcript?

He said the word "Constitution" a lot, sure, but I don't think he referenced any of its content. 

Rachel Maddow was talking about something else unrelated.  I think you're trying to distract.

Quote
You're not using logic or math either.  You seem to believe that there is some amount of terrorism we should agree to accept as a trade off for bringing in refugees.  The facts on the ground are that if you bring in enough refugees you will be brining in a future terrorist.  It's not a scare tactic to acknowledge that and address it.

So what is your acceptable incidence rate for Americans killed by refugees?  Is it one American dead per 1000 refugees admitted, or is it greater or lower?

Talk about arbitrary challenges...

It would be stupid to say that there isn't some amount of tradeoff between national security and other priorities in ANY policy that involves other nations.  I'm a bit surprised to see you implying that we should not accept any risk of terrorism as a result of allowing refugees to come into this country. 

Quote
I don't understand this fascination by the left to believe that prominent Republicans are dumb and its their advisers that control everything.  What do you get out of it?  Is it just the ability to make accusations against shadowy manipulators who you know don't have a platform to respond, or it something else?

As I have pointed out to you many times, Trump has a reality problem.  He frequently and stubbornly refuses to accept facts that are unflattering or otherwise bother him.  He also talks in absolutes and makes promises he can't keep.  These things reflect deficits in his intelligence.

I'm not talking about any other republicans here.  Just Trump.  Some of his advisers are obviously smarter than him.  Remember, Trump recently said that nobody could have known how complicated health care is.  Well, some of his team did know.  Trump didn't know.  He's not that smart. 

Quote
Well then, acknowledge the problem with your position and make a case.  What number of American citizens being killed by terrorism is reasonable per 1000 refugees? 

Why are you using the stupidest arguments possible?  Why don't you show a deficit in Obama administration vetting of refugees instead?

Quote
You should really do more research into the news, not just what's spoon fed to you.  He has specifically stated that the original 7 countries were selected and identified because they had been identified as having their records compromised.  Iraq was removed in the latest order specifically because the administration was assured their records could be trusted.

You're telling me to do more research than to rely on the news, then referring to the administration's press oriented spin.  In the meantime, the administration has offered no evidence about deficits in current vetting.  Neither have you. 

Quote
I'm going to posit, that you have no idea what it entailed, and that most likely you wouldn't agree to use it to evaluate a person who you'd have to trust with your life.

I'm basing my argument on accounts from people intimately involved with the vetting - which takes about 2 years and involves extensive interviewing and cross referencing, and who would dearly love to enhance the effectiveness of what they are doing but are not aware of any gaps that the Trump administration is trying to fill. 

What are the gaps the Trump administration is trying to fill?

Quote
Out of curiosity, how does it "misrepresent" BLM to point out that death by cop is far less likely and far more avoidable than death by gang member?  And that increased police presence is one of the few things that can lead to real decreases in that second point?

It misrepresents BLM by suggesting that BLM is about the leading cause of death, instead of about a particular kind of pattern of injustice.  And your point about "increased police presence" COULD be relevant, but you just introduced that.  And by doing so, you suggest that BLM is against "increased police presence", which they are not. 

Quote
It kind of demonstrates you're arguing with strawmen instead of real arguments.

No, it doesn't.  Pete doesn't seem to have read or understood my posts. 

Pete:

Quote
I've been here longer than youhave, Sci Fi, and I'm a lot nicer now than when you arrived.  I have changed for the better while you have changed for the worse.

You have not improved in your ability to read what I write and respond in good faith.  You haven't acknowledged the factual errors in your posts in this thread, and YOU attacked my integrity because I challenged your hasty and wrong conclusions. 

If you're going to pat yourself on the back for getting me to respond with incivility, enjoy that.  But if you ever want to convince me that I've misjudged you, it's going to take a whole lot less ignoring, distorting, and misrepresenting me.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 15, 2017, 10:52:41 AM
Seriati

Quote
What part of that strikes you as fear mongering?  Just the fact that he used the word "suicide"?  That's pathetic.  We have real examples of fear mongering everywhere, using descriptive language doesn't get there.  Particularly not in a quote where he references the Constitution at least four times.  It's called context.  Or do you think Rachel Maddow was "fear mongering" when she referred to "suicide" later in the same transcript?

He said the word "Constitution" a lot, sure, but I don't think he referenced any of its content. 

Rachel Maddow was talking about something else unrelated.  I think you're trying to distract.

Lol, your reference to that exchange as "fearmongering" was the distraction.  Trump was making a valid argument, that we need a travel ban in place to change how we are vetting refugees.  He said that against an express background of refugees in Europe causing any number of legal issues both because of lack of cultural similarity and because of express interest in doing so.  He said that against a background of refugees themselves killing other refugees over religious differences and raping women and children refugees in camps. 

That's just factual information.  Rather than address it, you tried to distract by calling it fear mongering because he used a trigger word that has been used enumerable times and is easily understandable in context.

Quote
Quote
You're not using logic or math either.  You seem to believe that there is some amount of terrorism we should agree to accept as a trade off for bringing in refugees.  The facts on the ground are that if you bring in enough refugees you will be brining in a future terrorist.  It's not a scare tactic to acknowledge that and address it.

So what is your acceptable incidence rate for Americans killed by refugees?  Is it one American dead per 1000 refugees admitted, or is it greater or lower?

Talk about arbitrary challenges...

It would be stupid to say that there isn't some amount of tradeoff between national security and other priorities in ANY policy that involves other nations.  I'm a bit surprised to see you implying that we should not accept any risk of terrorism as a result of allowing refugees to come into this country.

There is nothing arbitrary about my challenge.  We are not obligated to import any refugees.  International law requires refugees to apply for refugee status in the first safe country in which they arrive.  No part of it says there is any obligation by any nation to export those refugees thousands of miles for permanent relocation and incorporation into their citizenship.   I've repeatedly said we could help far more people for the same cost, with none of the same risks, if we supported efforts in countries closer to the country of origination. 

If you want an extraordinary solution to be implemented its on you to justify why would should be spending money inefficiently for no real gain to deliberately import refugees to intergrate into our country when we would not accept them as immigrants if they applied directly.
 
I'm not implying it.  I am flat out saying there is no obligation for us to accept any terrorism risk to allow refugees to come here.  You have to explain what level of risk is acceptable for the trade off of taking on this moral burden you bear, and why the death of your fellow citizens - since we all know you won't be the one killed - is just.  Own the moral implications of your decision and quit punting it.

Quote
Quote
I don't understand this fascination by the left to believe that prominent Republicans are dumb and its their advisers that control everything.  What do you get out of it?  Is it just the ability to make accusations against shadowy manipulators who you know don't have a platform to respond, or it something else?

As I have pointed out to you many times, Trump has a reality problem.  He frequently and stubbornly refuses to accept facts that are unflattering or otherwise bother him.  He also talks in absolutes and makes promises he can't keep.  These things reflect deficits in his intelligence.

It's funny, cause in my book what you said is true about every single politician.  Certainly, Obama, Pelosi, H. Clinton, Reid, all refuse to accept unflattering facts about policies they favor, they all talk in absolutes and make promised they can't keep.  Do these things reflect deficits in their intelligence?

Once again, I find it amusing that every Republican president is labeled as deficient in intelligence, and it's only their advisers who are smart people. 

Trump did not get where he is by being dumb, not at business, not in politics.  Is it 538 that's running a long string of campaign post mortems?  You should check it out, cause a lot of what Trump did that was uniformly labeled as dumb and naïve in the last election turned out to have been the right answer (and with 20/20 hindsight from 538 - almost obviously the right answer).  Does he do these things by accident or by artifice?  If the latter, your theory on his intelligence is just flat wrong.

Quote
I'm not talking about any other republicans here.  Just Trump.  Some of his advisers are obviously smarter than him.  Remember, Trump recently said that nobody could have known how complicated health care is.  Well, some of his team did know.  Trump didn't know.  He's not that smart.

Or he's doing what a President does and is talking to his voters and the American people.  You seem to be acting like the comments he makes for consumption are personal comments and only evaluating them like you were talking to him personally.   You should consider the impact he's looking to obtain instead.  You should also consider that to my knowledge there are absolutely no reports of him being stupid from those who've met with him or worked with him and who've had the best opportunity to evaluate them.  It's arm chair analysts who are pushing that meme.

One more example, his much lamented tweet about wire taps.  If you think of it from a certain point of view, it's brilliant.  If he's not concerned that there's any fire at the heart of this smoke (like for example if he knows he did nothing wrong), that tweet totally hamstrung the deep state leakers.  They can't use implication leaks (ie leaks with no details that imply something nefarious) for any conversations related to Trump tower - real or imagined - without proving and confirming that they tapped Trump tower.  We all know if they had the fire they would have already leaked it. 

Quote
Quote
Well then, acknowledge the problem with your position and make a case.  What number of American citizens being killed by terrorism is reasonable per 1000 refugees? 

Why are you using the stupidest arguments possible?  Why don't you show a deficit in Obama administration vetting of refugees instead?

Find a copy of them and I would be happy to review them.  What's that, not publically available you say? 

Did you miss, where both I (and the administration) identified 7 countries originally where their records were compromised by ISIS and subject to being forged or manipulated?  Did you discover someway to "vet" someone for whom there are no reliable governmental records, no internet history, no phone records, no records of associations other than what they tell you? 

I get why you want to burden flip, you have an impossible challenge to meet to show that virtually any of these refugees have been vetted to the extent that others would find reasonable.  But just because your burden is impossible doesn't make it mine.

I also want to remind you, that as of yet, not a one of you has explained why even if we disregard any threat of terrorism, we would want to bring in a large block of immigrants that come from a cultural background that is sexist, anti-gay, insular and absolutely inconsistent with American beliefs, freedoms and rights, particularly when we all know that any efforts to force them to adopt the common culture are also going to be opposed by the same people who want them to come as cultural imperialism.  Do you really think this country will be better with more sexist and homophobic voters?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on March 15, 2017, 11:24:31 AM
What if rejecting refugees actually increases our risk of terrorism by alienating and radicalizing those already in the country?

"Extreme vetting" is really just a term that means none of them can ever be 100% safe, so nobody gets in. It would be like an "extreme road test" that keeps everyone from getting a license to drive an automobile.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: cherrypoptart on March 15, 2017, 02:57:52 PM
" I've repeatedly said we could help far more people for the same cost, with none of the same risks, if we supported efforts in countries closer to the country of origination."

I just heard a Saudi official on the news supporting Trump's plan for the Saudis to shoulder some measure of the financial burden to establish and resettle refugees in safe areas in their home countries. I can only guess that Obama didn't want to do that because it was his goal to "fundamentally transform America". The left is using the refugee crisis the same way that ISIS intended to use it, in order to bring massive numbers of Muslims into the West. I like the idea of establishing safe zones in their own countries for refugees and treating them like any other immigrant and deciding whether or not to let them into America based on their qualifications and ability to avoid becoming a public charge.

"What if rejecting refugees actually increases our risk of terrorism by alienating and radicalizing those already in the country?"

That would prove beyond any doubt that it was huge mistake to let them into the country in the first place if that's all it takes to set them off. Better to set them off now than allow even more potential traitors into our country who will always be able to find one excuse or another to do what deep in their hearts they want to do anyway.

I would say bring them in based on their ability to do well economically in their jobs. We always hear that poverty is a breeding ground for violent discontent so we need to make sure we don't bring more of it here. Though that's no guarantee of safety as we can see from many recent cases of relatively well to do Muslims suddenly just going off, at least they won't be getting welfare and sucking the taxpayers dry until they set about killing them, adding insult to injury.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on March 16, 2017, 10:35:19 AM
Quote
That would prove beyond any doubt that it was huge mistake to let them into the country in the first place if that's all it takes to set them off. Better to set them off now than allow even more potential traitors into our country who will always be able to find one excuse or another to do what deep in their hearts they want to do anyway.

You do realize that native born Americans have been involved in attacks too? I guess we should have kept their parents from moving here.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 16, 2017, 11:03:43 AM
You do realize that native born Americans have been involved in attacks too? I guess we should have kept their parents from moving here.

So what?  Seriously so what?  We can't have an immigration policy (which this is since there are non-immigration ways it could be handled) that disfavors people with radically un-American views because we haven't solved crime?  Is that really your position, that we must zero crime or else we can not exclude potential immigrants on a rational basis?

As a follow up to my comment the other day, here's a link to Judge Napolitano's right up on how those calls from Trump tower are almost certainly recorded and in possession of the government (common man's understanding of what "wiretap" means by the way), and could have easily been accessed without leaving much, if anything, in the way of discoverable finger prints.  Certainly, unless he's wrong, is proof of concept that this could have occurred.

https://www.creators.com/read/judge-napolitano/03/17/did-obama-spy-on-trump (https://www.creators.com/read/judge-napolitano/03/17/did-obama-spy-on-trump)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on March 16, 2017, 12:12:09 PM
No, my point is what we have right now is an equation. If blocking entry today causes a percentage of existing residents to become radical through improved recruiting, and that total is larger than the number of immigrants who would become radical under current conditions, we now have more total radicals in the country as a result of the policy.

Is your position that we have to zero crime committed by immigrants before we can allow any immigrants to enter the country?

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 16, 2017, 01:44:34 PM
Is your position that we have to zero crime committed by immigrants before we can allow any immigrants to enter the country?

No, that's kind of a silly simple reversal.  I fully expect immigrants to commit crimes, generally within a standard deviation of the norm.  That's no argument for why we should accept immigrants that carry known extraordinary risks.  It's not a good reason for a different immigration standard than should apply if such persons were not refugees (we should help people remotely if they would not otherwise be welcome as an immigrant, rather than resettle them).

And again, unless you choose to keep ignoring it, it's absolutely no reason to bring in people who are culturally incompatible with our society, who don't believe in the equality of women or the rights of homosexuals.  I really can not think of one single legitimate reason to bring in people who don't meet that test.

Quote
No, my point is what we have right now is an equation. If blocking entry today causes a percentage of existing residents to become radical through improved recruiting, and that total is larger than the number of immigrants who would become radical under current conditions, we now have more total radicals in the country as a result of the policy.

If you have an equation it has thousands of variables not one.  I see no real evidence that changing our refugee policy to help ten times more people locally than we help by importing them would cause an increase in radicalization here.  If there is that high a risk of "radicalization" of people born and raised in our culture because of their pre-existing attitudes it completely undermines your rationale for increasing the number in our country, as you're effectively multiplying the radicalization ready group of people in the country.

Honestly, I don't see one bit of legitimate thought through logic there.  Can you actually explain how you weighed out all the factors in that analysis?

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 17, 2017, 10:03:11 AM
On the wiretapping claim, which I agree so far is unsupported - though like I said, if Judge Napolitano is correct there are recordings of calls from Trump tower that can be accessed (which meets a layman's definition of wiretapping), how is it that if Justice won't respond until the 20th, two different Congressional committees have already stated there is no evidence of it happening (between 5 and 7 days earlier)?  Am I misunderstanding how an investigation would work?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on March 17, 2017, 11:32:35 AM
Quote
...though like I said, if Judge Napolitano is correct there are recordings of calls from Trump tower that can be accessed (which meets a layman's definition of wiretapping)...

Of course, there is a very simple explanation for that.

Trump Tower may not have been wiretapped, but someone from there may have called someone who was being wiretapped. :)

It will be interesting to see what the actual facts are.  (Not to mention what the contents of the calls were.)

One known fact is that Trump is talking out of his @ss.  Because even though he knows Obama had him wiretapped, he cannot (or will not) produce the evidence that convinced him of that, even to Congress.

And how is an investigation supposed to start when the accuser cannot provide the initial evidence that lead him to his accusation? ;)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 17, 2017, 11:53:14 AM
No Wayward, if Napolitano is correct, the NSA has recordings of all the calls, cause they take them centrally and store them and then access them as needed after the fact.  That would mean that there are recordings or transcripts of every call, whether or not it's with someone who is being monitored.  If they exist then in my book there is a "wiretap."   Whether it's been accessed may or may not be determinable.  If they don't exist, then we'd need some evidence that there was a "wiretap" as that term used to be described.

Too many of the answers being provided are statements that could be literally true and yet mean nothing. 

Of course the preservation of the recording of all calls in the US is a direct violation of the Bill of Rights, but much of what the FISA court seems to be and do is violation to me.

EDITTED TO ADD:  Please take care here, cause whatever you think of Trump, if this kind of blanket recording exists and can be accessed without any real cause, it's going to be Trump that has the keys to it for the next four years.  We should be pursuing limits here that stop both Obama and Trump, not playing partisan games.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 17, 2017, 12:05:08 PM
So anyone noticing the wrinkles in the Flynn controversy today?  Flynn got paid speakers fees, including from that Russian station that everyone believes is a propaganda arm of the Russian government.  This is being headline as he received payments from Russian companies before his nomination (ie implying he was bribed or nefariously bought).  Anyone remember Clinton being disqualified from being President for receiving speaking fees ten times larger from Wall Street Investment Banks?  Me neither, were those bribes or nefarious implications of agency?  Is every politician, ex-politician or spouse of a politician that receives a speaking fee, now a bought and paid for agent of the payer of that fee (I could see a reasonable argument there, but the one sided pursuit of it is not okay). 

Also thought it was fascinating that the Rep who made the claims is asserting these are emolument clause violations, he may want to talk to the large number of people in both parties who would be surprised to hear that and have similar problems, if we recharaterize being paid for a speech as a gift (see above with respect to Clinton's half million dollar "gifts" if that's the case).

Lol, would it kill people to just be honest in reporting and let people draw their own conclusions, rather than attempting to "spin" everything and forcing people like me to react to the gross mischaracterizations?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: cherrypoptart on March 17, 2017, 03:22:11 PM
Seriati

"No Wayward, if Napolitano is correct, the NSA has recordings of all the calls, cause they take them centrally and store them and then access them as needed after the fact."

That was my understanding from several years ago too but since nobody brought it up I wondered if I was mistaken. I heard that the NSA has server farms dedicated just to storing all of the information they are collecting and that includes recordings of every call made in several countries including the U.S. Of course they can't listen to but a tiny fraction of it but it's all there waiting to be accessed. If they can save all that data it will offer a treasure trove of insight into our society to anthropologists studying us tens of thousands of years from now, if there is a way to protect the data for that long. Perhaps advancements in data compression and storage technology will advance to the point that it can all be stored on a flash drive instead of in several buildings that show up on satellite photos as massive heat sources. Basically we are all tapped, all the time, everywhere.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on March 17, 2017, 06:45:55 PM
I'd forgotten about that. In that respect, Trump would be technically correct on him personally/his office in general being "wire tapped" because of the NSA/CIA monitoring of phone traffic going to or coming from a certain list of "nations of interest" even if it only consisted of archiving the recordings for the time being.

If Trump has business dealings in those nations, it would stand to reason those calls were "tapped" into and thus recorded. And because of security constraints, while Trump can fume about it having been done, he cannot go into detail on the how/why he knows about them, or the methods used, because "National Security" well, trumps it all.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on March 19, 2017, 07:47:02 AM
Quote
In that respect, Trump would be technically correct on him personally/his office in general being "wire tapped" because of the NSA/CIA monitoring of phone traffic going to or coming from a certain list of "nations of interest" even if it only consisted of archiving the recordings for the time being.
That might be supportable only if you take what the president tweeted completely out of context and ignore half of what he wrote.

How exactly is it "sick" of then-president Obama, for the security services at the time to surveil adversaries of the USA?  Was Mr. Trump proposing a radical new foreign policy where it will, in the future, be considered unethical and verboten for any branch of government to spy on Russia, China, North Korea or ISIS, and that the administration should immediately be responsible for reigning in those activities?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on March 19, 2017, 11:44:30 AM
This IS Donald Trump we're talking about.

His objection isn't about other people being monitored. It was about his being monitored that he found to be sick.

In the vein of thought that the most important thing to Donald Trump is Donald Trump, that particular context(and tweet) makes perfect sense.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on March 20, 2017, 03:46:02 PM
Quote
Trump was making a valid argument, that we need a travel ban in place to change how we are vetting refugees.  He said that against an express background of refugees in Europe causing any number of legal issues both because of lack of cultural similarity and because of express interest in doing so.  He said that against a background of refugees themselves killing other refugees over religious differences and raping women and children refugees in camps. 

That's just factual information.  Rather than address it, you tried to distract by calling it fear mongering because he used a trigger word that has been used enumerable times and is easily understandable in context.

That's irrelevant factual information.  None of the bad things you listed are helped by the travel ban.  None of them are things that are ignored by the civil servants who are vetting refugees according to the current (carryover) policies.

I'm not investing more time in this, since you are engaging in apologetics.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on March 20, 2017, 05:00:13 PM
A few more quotes:
Quote
we have to stop people from pouring into our country.

Quote
...this is a problem that, if we don't solve it, it's going to eat our country alive. OK? It's going to eat our country alive."

Quote
"We have to stop the tremendous flow of Syrian refugees into the United States," Trump said this week. "We don't know who they are. They have no documentation and we don't know what they're planning."

Quote
“Altogether, under the Clinton plan, you’d be admitting hundreds of thousands of refugees from the Middle East with no system to vet them, or to prevent the radicalization of their children,”

Trump was lying that we are letting refugees in when they have no documentation.  He's also lying by using the words "pouring" and "tremendous flow".  He lied that Clinton proposed a system with no vetting, and even lied about the number.

Do you know what it's called when you use falsehoods and exaggerations to try to stir up public fear?  Hint for Seriati: it starts with f
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on March 20, 2017, 05:24:55 PM
Quote
I get why you want to burden flip, you have an impossible challenge to meet to show that virtually any of these refugees have been vetted to the extent that others would find reasonable.  But just because your burden is impossible doesn't make it mine.

What's ironic about this is that the Trump administration had an opportunity in court to demonstrate the urgency of the executive order, and had nothing.  Because he has nothing. 


Your point about documentation is off target.  Your position appears to be based on the assumption that those administering refugee admissions were previously not aware of the potential problems with documents and were doing nothing about it.  This is not true. 

There are plenty of sources out there that provide some of the high level details of the existing vetting process.  One key point: when the vetting is inconclusive, people don't get in. 

And this "burden" is still of your own imagination.  I have no idea why you think I need to show this.  I'm not trying to dictate the finer details of refugee vetting.  My point is that DJT, during his campaign and after, was misrepresenting and exaggerating the danger of Muslim immigrants and refugees, and that was the context for comparing Islamist jihad attacks against other terrorist attacks.  The motive was to help keep such dangers in perspective, not to malign and endanger the American right.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 20, 2017, 06:18:26 PM
My point is not off target, the prior administration identified those countries as having compromised documentation, there's admission in the last weeks that vetting can't be assured of success when they are vetting refugees that don't have paper work, as they have been.

The only real difference here is one of ideology, the prior administration thought the risk was worth taking so they down played, the new administration doesn't so they don't down play it, maybe they even over play it. 

But all you can do with a legitimate objection that says we shouldn't be bringing in new immigrants, whether they are refugees or not, who are ideologically incompatible is to ignore it?  The travel ban does help, it has stickier component for refugees in particular, and I have no doubt that the newer vetting will be much tougher than the existing vetting if agree to take refugees at all.  Since you won't address why we should bring in culturally incompatible refugees its really you who are engaging in apologetics, you're trying to explain away an irrational policy of the left.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 22, 2017, 03:00:56 PM
On the wiretapping claim, which I agree so far is unsupported....

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/intel-chair-says-trumps-personal-communications-may-have-been-picked-up-through-incidental-collection/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/intel-chair-says-trumps-personal-communications-may-have-been-picked-up-through-incidental-collection/)

Hmmm...  sounds like wire tapping has been proved (though he didn't give us the evidence either).  I don't accept the assertions that it was all "legally done" when the FISA court is involved, since it approves just about everything and it's very existence is a direct violation of the Bill of Rights. 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on March 22, 2017, 05:17:31 PM
Well, no, that doesn't actually prove what Trump was claiming.

If somebody else has their communication surveilled, and Trump is then in contact with that somebody else via the surveilled communication method, then that particular piece of communication would have been picked up.  That's what "incidental" means in this case. This is, in fact, exactly what people have been saying likely happened with the others in Trump's camp whose communications were collected while communicating with Russian state agents.

You have to seriously move the goal posts, not just across the field, but into a completely different sport, to even pretend that's relevant.

Remind us how Obama is a "sick guy" for being president while the US federal government security organizations collect the communications of foreign competitors, some of which Trump was in contact with while they were being surveilled.

To be really, really clear - Trump's "sick guy" remark made it very plain that he was claiming that Obama ordered surveillance of him, the Donald, not just that the USA surveilled foreign state agents. You know this, Seriati.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: cherrypoptart on March 22, 2017, 10:42:33 PM
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/house-intelligence-chief-just-tossed-235601417.html

Nunes, the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, called for a sudden 1 p.m. press gathering Wednesday, with its subject unclear. But once it began, he fired off what sounded like a bombshell revelation: The intelligence community, he said, had "incidentally collected" information on the Trump transition team during the transition period.

The California Republican went on to say the collection occurred on "numerous occasions" and was not related to the FBI's investigation into Russian meddling in last year's presidential election.

"Details about US persons associated with the incoming administration, details with little or no apparent foreign intelligence value, were widely disseminated in intelligence community reporting," Nunes said.

The information he spoke of was collected legally, in his view, under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, and he did not know if the surveillance consisted of phone calls, but that the intelligence reports he had seen "clearly show" Trump and his team were "monitored."

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even if President Obama didn't personally wiretap Trump by either ordering it or going over to Trump Tower himself, toolbox in hand, dressed as a maintenance worker while listening on his media player to the Mission Impossible theme song and soldering in a connection, Obama as the Commander in Chief is still ultimately responsible. We all know about how plausible deniability works.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on March 22, 2017, 11:24:10 PM
Even if President Obama didn't personally wiretap Trump by either ordering it or going over to Trump Tower himself, toolbox in hand, dressed as a maintenance worker while listening on his media player to the Mission Impossible theme song and soldering in a connection, Obama as the Commander in Chief is still ultimately responsible. We all know about how plausible deniability works.

I sort of agree with the spirit of this comment, but in reality I suspect the Potus has little real control over the CIA or its various activities. Also, when it comes to the NSA surveillance net, once the apparatus is in place it's probably easy for third parties to dip in and make use of it even if no one directly in the NSA hierarchy was directly responsible for such a tap. We could say that the responsibility of all of these trickle-down problems boils down to the President, but structurally the bureaucracy has made that an unreality since way back; even Truman said it was out of control shortly after his Presidency ended.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on March 23, 2017, 07:16:50 AM
I'm just going to highlight the relevant portion of the quote Cherry dropped above, that shows his whole characterization to be misplaced:
Quote
The information he spoke of was collected legally, in his view, under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act
Gosh, the president is responsible for legal information collection of foreign, probably state, actors.  Since Nunes didn't actually describe the types of information collected, it's impossible to know under which part of FISA the activities were authorized, but still... Wow. A bomb shell for sure.

Ignoring the Drama! Drama! Drama! of Nunes' moment in the sun, what is being missed is what Nunes left unstated, but is necessarily implied: people in Trump's transition team were in contact with foreign nationals who were under surveillance by the USA security services.  Basically, it's a confirmation of some of the evidence that led to the need to investigate whether there was collusion between foreign state actors intervening in the electoral process and Trump's team - if these contacts were ongoing and preceded the election itself, of course.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: cherrypoptart on March 23, 2017, 08:41:21 AM
Yes, but he also said that it looked like there were a lot of conversations listened in on and recorded that didn't seem to have anything to do with any of the concerns expressed about as justification for the wiretaps. I can't help but wonder why keep all of this extra information around, all of these recordings that apparently don't pertain to the Russians? Did it relate to campaign strategy that would have been of value in helping to keep Trump from winning the election? Was President Obama informed about any of it? How much of this President Obama kept in the loop on? Is Trump's voice on any of the recordings of the conversations?

I think it's obvious that Trump must have heard something that really freaked him out right before he reflexively tweeted out his accusation against Obama. My guess is that a recording of what he thought was a private conversation between himself and someone else could do that.

You do bring up a good point though Donald. If Trump was colluding with the Russians to rig the election, then the feds, or in other words Obama, SHOULD be wiretapping him. So why the surprise? Why the insistence from the media all this time that the whole idea is just absurd if not downright paranoid?  I would think that even if they didn't need Obama's approval they would at least need to keep him informed. We understand that he supposedly doesn't have the power to order a wiretap like this but would he have the power to cancel one once he found out about it? Would not canceling it out indicate tacit approval (admittedly that's quite a stretch to make just to blame Obama though)? Especially if he found out it was picking up campaign talk, perhaps even strategy, that had nothing to do with the Russians? We see how our government leaks information like a sieve leaks liquids, or like little girls who just learn a secret. We also see many elements and people in our government who hate Trump. Who always have, and always will. How much information got passed along to Hillary even if it ended up not doing her any good?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 23, 2017, 10:09:28 AM
DonaldD, I want to start by saying I understand your objections.  From a certain point of view they are even reasonable, but honestly, I think you have to make a few giant leaps to believe this doesn't stink.  I can't even imagine the outrage you'd be expressing, if there were evidence that a Republican administration had recorded the other side.  There is no amount of blame shifting that would ever let you let a Republican President slide.

The first big issue is the FISA court.  I don't know of any thoughtful analysis of its mandate that doesn't flat out say that it's a direct violation of the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on general warrants.  Certainly the NSA's program that Snowden unveiled is.  Relying on the backing of the FISA court is the ultimate in using abuse by government to excuse abuse by government.  It's no different than declaring an act legal because it is the king's will it be legal.

That aside, and that's a major aside, the charge here includes an unexplained violation of even those rules, whereby the identity of the US persons was widely unmasked illegally.  Do you really have no qualms about one administration using a secret court to obtain communications without probable cause, and then to violate even those government friendly rules to identify its US citizen opposition?  What reasonable purpose do you think such a policy serves?  This makes Watergate look like a kiddy operation, and you're defending it?

Well, no, that doesn't actually prove what Trump was claiming.

Trump made a tweet that the Obama administration had his offices wire tapped.  Records and transcripts from his offices of communications are direct evidence that this may be the case.  I get the legitimate dispute that these calls could have been recorded on the other end, but then they should have received the highest level of security because of the potential for abuse, and instead were widely unmasked and distributed.

When one does something "legal" for the purpose of revealing something it would be illegal to get directly, and that that person has a great interest in, it's fair to input that the "legal" action was a mere pretense for the illegal.

Never see a cop show, where one cop says to the other, "hear that crying baby" before they illegally enter a home without a warrant?

Quote
If somebody else has their communication surveilled, and Trump is then in contact with that somebody else via the surveilled communication method, then that particular piece of communication would have been picked up.  That's what "incidental" means in this case. This is, in fact, exactly what people have been saying likely happened with the others in Trump's camp whose communications were collected while communicating with Russian state agents.

True, yet the authorizations involved make it highly illegal to unveil those US persons on the call, which was not respected here, and it appears that calls that had nothing to do with Russia were also unveiled. 

Pretty much, the "explanation" you're running with looks like a flimsy story told to provide cover for what should properly be seen as an abuse of executive authority turned on the administration's political opponents.

Really, step back and ask yourself if this is really conduct that you think is okay, and that you want say the Trump administration to be empowered to use.

Quote
You have to seriously move the goal posts, not just across the field, but into a completely different sport, to even pretend that's relevant.

I've been reading posts about how Trumps tweet was rebutted.  The fact that it's not only not been rebutted, but looks as if is legitimately supportable - the mere existence of the transcripts make it supportable - is not a moving goal post.

I even happily concede that the recordings could have been made at the "other end" (which is a meaningless term given that there are no physical taps on the other side either), because what was done with the recordings from that point forward was most likely illegal.

Quote
Remind us how Obama is a "sick guy" for being president while the US federal government security organizations collect the communications of foreign competitors, some of which Trump was in contact with while they were being surveilled.

My personal view is that Obama is an autocrat.  I have no doubt he abused the power of the executive to try to punish his enemies.  Whether he did it through direct order, just through proxies or just by creating a culture that encouraged it and never punished it, I can't say.  But we have time and again seen that his administration had no problem with executive excess.   

Quote
To be really, really clear - Trump's "sick guy" remark made it very plain that he was claiming that Obama ordered surveillance of him, the Donald, not just that the USA surveilled foreign state agents. You know this, Seriati.

Given the illegal unmasking and the conversations that had no reason being recorded, not sure why you think there is a difference.

I've said it for a while, but I find it depressing that you guys seem to be trained to believe that a (Democrat) President is not accountable unless you have a direct order they signed admitting guilt.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on March 23, 2017, 10:48:00 AM
If Trump really wants to do something, he should give a directive to eliminate FISA wiretapping and National Security Letter extraction of mass databases. I don't imagine that happening, though.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on March 23, 2017, 11:12:31 AM
Quote
If Trump was colluding with the Russians to rig the election, then the feds, or in other words Obama, SHOULD be wiretapping him.
Uhh, no, whether Trump's team was colluding would have needed to have been an interpretation of facts gleaned from other surveillance - to get to the point where Trump or his team should have been directly surveilled (as opposed to getting swept up in incidental communication of foreign nationals) would have required that other evidence would have needed to exist, evidence sufficient to have shown probable cause that they were breaking the law.

That you think simple suspicion on the part of the president SHOULD be sufficient to allow him to break the law is more than a little Nixonesque, no?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on March 23, 2017, 11:39:10 AM
Quote
If Trump was colluding with the Russians to rig the election, then the feds, or in other words Obama, SHOULD be wiretapping him.
Uhh, no, whether Trump's team was colluding would have needed to have been an interpretation of facts gleaned from other surveillance - to get to the point where Trump or his team should have been directly surveilled (as opposed to getting swept up in incidental communication of foreign nationals) would have required that other evidence would have needed to exist, evidence sufficient to have shown probable cause that they were breaking the law.

That you think simple suspicion on the part of the president SHOULD be sufficient to allow him to break the law is more than a little Nixonesque, no?

It would be, if it happened that way. If the FISA court or NSL was used, it wouldn't be breaking the law. Simple suspicion seems all that is needed when its a mosque or someone who happened to go to Pakistan to visit family. We're already living in a Hoover world which spanned many presidencies. The Nixon part, getting and using information on political opponents, is a far stretch based on what we now know.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 24, 2017, 11:59:54 AM
It would be, if it happened that way. If the FISA court or NSL was used, it wouldn't be breaking the law. Simple suspicion seems all that is needed when its a mosque or someone who happened to go to Pakistan to visit family. We're already living in a Hoover world which spanned many presidencies. The Nixon part, getting and using information on political opponents, is a far stretch based on what we now know.

Even for FISA simple suspicion is not the standard that applies, and its certainly not the standard for unmasking.  I don't know where you get a "far stretch" at this point it looks like the most likely reason for unmasking of certain people and lowering of intelligence standards was political.

Watched Shiff's press conference, missed Nunes.  Shiff looked to me like someone on the verge of panic.  He really is trying to refocus this on the Russia angle, and I'm thinking he's really concerned that it's about to get blown off the hooks with the prior administration spying on its opponents angle.  Can't know for sure of course until there's more detail, but we have zero facts released supporting collusion and definite proof of  unmasking and oversharing.  I know CNN is hard selling the leftist view, but I'm not sure if they can save the case if this goes where its looking.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on March 24, 2017, 08:42:26 PM
Except not even the republican you are taking about is making a claim that bold.

Quote
On Friday, Nunes walked further away from Trump's position.

"There was no wiretapping of Trump Tower," he said. "That didn't happen. ... It looks like this was all legal surveillance, from what I can tell," the chairman said, alluding to the mysterious evidence. That's not a different stance than he took on Wednesday, but it is a blunter one.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/24/521367161/paul-manafort-to-testify-on-russia-as-house-intel-committee-drama-continues (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/24/521367161/paul-manafort-to-testify-on-russia-as-house-intel-committee-drama-continues)

So it seems likely Trump appointees were recorded while speaking with Russian officials (or other foreign nationals) that the CIA/NSA were monitoring.  Unless there is something shocking in those transcripts there is really no news here.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on March 25, 2017, 12:51:12 AM
It should be pointed out that while the surveillance itself may have been legal. The sharing of certain data gathered from such activities probably shouldn't have (legally) been shared in the manner it was. Sadly, some of this likely post-9/11/01  and Patriot Act proceedings and processes being hijacked for political aims. Wouldn't be the first time in U.S. history, or the first time the Obama Administration had staffers get fingered for doing something like that.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 25, 2017, 12:15:39 PM
Except not even the republican you are taking about is making a claim that bold.

I didn't say he was, I said the Democrat looked nervous and that's my speculation about why.  His entire "case" of implication from anonymous sources could fall completely apart if its demonstrable that the prior administration were the ones spying.

Quote
Quote
On Friday, Nunes walked further away from Trump's position.

"There was no wiretapping of Trump Tower," he said. "That didn't happen. ... It looks like this was all legal surveillance, from what I can tell," the chairman said, alluding to the mysterious evidence. That's not a different stance than he took on Wednesday, but it is a blunter one.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/24/521367161/paul-manafort-to-testify-on-russia-as-house-intel-committee-drama-continues (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/24/521367161/paul-manafort-to-testify-on-russia-as-house-intel-committee-drama-continues)

Tell you what, if you say you're not wiretapping my house, and have transcripts of my calls none-the-less, it's a distinction without a difference.  Particularly if the reason you recorded someone else "legally" was to get at me "incidentally."  Step out from partisanship for a minute and think about what you're endorsing by implication.

Quote
So it seems likely Trump appointees were recorded while speaking with Russian officials (or other foreign nationals) that the CIA/NSA were monitoring.  Unless there is something shocking in those transcripts there is really no news here.

Not sure why you threw "Russian" in there (other than to make yet another unfounded implication).  Nunes specifically said there were unmasked people in transcripts that had nothing to do with the Russian angle. 

If there is nothing "shocking" in those transcripts then you have a felony case for the unmasking, or as you put it "no news", meanwhile you are prosecuting a "Russian angle" without any evidence in play.  Shocking, is not even enough of a word from what you're doing.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on March 25, 2017, 10:38:41 PM
Tell you what, if you say you're not wiretapping my house, and have transcripts of my calls none-the-less, it's a distinction without a difference.  Particularly if the reason you recorded someone else "legally" was to get at me "incidentally."  Step out from partisanship for a minute and think about what you're endorsing by implication.

If I have conversations of you talking with your mother who never committed a crime in her life and isn't under surveillance then that would be true.  However if the only transcripts I have are when you ordered food from a restaurant used to launder money for the mafia then it is tantamount to a lie to claim I wire tapped you. 

If it is true that Obama wiretapped everyone on Trump's staff then I would be outraged but if the only recordings are the conversations with foreign nationals then IMO it would have taken unprecedented micro-managing by Obama to avoid the transcripts being made.  I am firmly working under the assumption that the CIA and NSA have basically every non secure/encrypted phone belonging to any foreign national associated with any embassy "tapped."  If you doubt that look back at the Snowden leaks pertaining to foreign spying where we had tapped several foreign heads of states phones.  Spying on foreign governments is kind of their job, so it would be surprising if any unencrypted communication with the Russian ambassador (or any other staff member of any embassy) was not collected through some NSA e-surveillance.

There could be a smaller scandal that the recordings/transcripts were not properly handled, but IMO there is no scandal in the fact they were made.  And yes, it is a smaller scandal for classified material that should potentially have not been circulated to have been circulated among people with the proper security clearance than for the former president to have ordered Trump Towers to be wiretapped leading up to and following the election.  I view these as orders of magnitude different.  If I'm comparing to earthquakes improper circulation is a 5.0 (bad but not that uncommon with expected minimal damage) and deliberate wiretapping for political purposes a 9.0, in the words of Joe Biden a BFD.
Quote
Quote
So it seems likely Trump appointees were recorded while speaking with Russian officials (or other foreign nationals) that the CIA/NSA were monitoring.  Unless there is something shocking in those transcripts there is really no news here.

Not sure why you threw "Russian" in there (other than to make yet another unfounded implication).  Nunes specifically said there were unmasked people in transcripts that had nothing to do with the Russian angle. 

If there is nothing "shocking" in those transcripts then you have a felony case for the unmasking, or as you put it "no news", meanwhile you are prosecuting a "Russian angle" without any evidence in play.  Shocking, is not even enough of a word from what you're doing.

The Flynn transcripts are evidence of the Russian angle.  Since it was those transcripts that led to his resignation.  Also I'm not surprised by Nune's ascertain that some of the transcripts had nothing to do with Russia, as I said above I expect all of their conversations with foreign governments/embassies would have been collected as part of what the NSA considers routine surveillance.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on March 26, 2017, 12:45:17 AM
I expect all of their conversations with foreign governments/embassies would have been collected as part of what the NSA considers routine surveillance.

I'll just barge in on this conversation to mention that I am not comforted at all by considering what the NSA might, at this point, consider routine behavior. There has been a lot of behavior in American history that was considered 'routine' that is now viewed as a horror-show.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on March 26, 2017, 10:39:32 PM
I expect all of their conversations with foreign governments/embassies would have been collected as part of what the NSA considers routine surveillance.

I'll just barge in on this conversation to mention that I am not comforted at all by considering what the NSA might, at this point, consider routine behavior. There has been a lot of behavior in American history that was considered 'routine' that is now viewed as a horror-show.

This actually is the job the NSA/CIA/FBI are officially tasked with.  Some of the employees of most embassies are members of foreign intelligence services.  If we aren't spying on them, then we shouldn't be spying on anyone, which is why I said it would take extra-ordinary micromanaging by the Obama admin to make sure that none of the conversations the incoming Trump admin had with those people were not recorded. 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on March 27, 2017, 08:09:45 AM
Quote
if you say you're not wiretapping my house, and have transcripts of my calls none-the-less, it's a distinction without a difference.
Yossarian explained this point pretty well above, but if you really can't see the difference... let's go back to what wiretapping literally means (or meant).  It was the physical process of adding wires and circuitry to one person's phone line - basically wires connecting the phone to the network, either at the very end point, or at the last switch connecting the particular phone line to the network - putting an electronic "tap" (faucet, valve, whatever) onto a person's phone line.

"Wire tapping" is now more of an analogy - but still one with relevance; as it is now far more likely that packets of digital data are intercepted across networks rather that physical phone lines are being tapped, the difference is that only those communications involving a particular party are targeted, in an equivalent fashion to the old physical wires attached to only one party's communication device.  And from what Nunes had unilaterally published/broadcast, all the evidence he saw was of the nature of the third party being surveilled, not Trump, his tower, or his domestic associates. You can bet that if the domestic side of things was targeted, Nunes would have been screaming that at the top of his lungs, and he would NOT have characterized the actions as "legal".

If bugs had somehow been planted directly into foreign agents mobile phones, or onto their physical land lines coming out of the embassy, and had those bugs picked up communications involving Trump and his associates, would you still say there was a distinction without a difference?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on March 27, 2017, 10:48:32 AM
If I have conversations of you talking with your mother who never committed a crime in her life and isn't under surveillance then that would be true.  However if the only transcripts I have are when you ordered food from a restaurant used to launder money for the mafia then it is tantamount to a lie to claim I wire tapped you.

I like how you jump to the mafia.  Is it your assertion that every foreigner is equivalent to a member of the mafia?  The FISA authority does not legally extend to wiretapping any foreigner, not even any foreigner associated with an embassy.  Your standard implies its legal to take diplomatic communications.  That's been understood to be spying forever.

Its whack that no refugee can be a terrorist, but every foreigner is a spy in your world.

Quote
I am firmly working under the assumption that the CIA and NSA have basically every non secure/encrypted phone belonging to any foreign national associated with any embassy "tapped."

Which is criminal even under FISA.  If that is the case then your case fails as these recordings were not legally made. 

Quote
There could be a smaller scandal that the recordings/transcripts were not properly handled, but IMO there is no scandal in the fact they were made.

There may or may not be a scandal over how they were made.  If what you believe occurred, did in fact occur, then the recordings were the result of illegal wiretaps, and that is compounded by the unmasking, which is also illegal.

Quote
And yes, it is a smaller scandal for classified material that should potentially have not been circulated to have been circulated among people with the proper security clearance than for the former president to have ordered Trump Towers to be wiretapped leading up to and following the election.

First, I haven't seen convincing evidence that all communications (regardless of whether they are with foreign nationals) are not recorded.  The Snowden leaks, the reports on the FISA courts activities, certainly imply that the NSA has real time access to the communications backbone and that they pre-emptively collect all calls and then seek FISA warrants to go back on the data they have already collected.  If that is true, then the idea of a need for a separate physical wire tap is friggin red herring.  The president will never order one cause there is NO FRIGGIN NEED when the calls have already been recorded and stored.  All they have to do is access them.

We have evidence that some calls (if not all) were in fact recorded, accessed and illegally unmasked.  I can't imagine the world in which a Republican does this to Hillary's campaign and you make the arguments you made above.

Quote
Quote
Quote
So it seems likely Trump appointees were recorded while speaking with Russian officials (or other foreign nationals) that the CIA/NSA were monitoring.  Unless there is something shocking in those transcripts there is really no news here.

Not sure why you threw "Russian" in there (other than to make yet another unfounded implication).  Nunes specifically said there were unmasked people in transcripts that had nothing to do with the Russian angle. 

If there is nothing "shocking" in those transcripts then you have a felony case for the unmasking, or as you put it "no news", meanwhile you are prosecuting a "Russian angle" without any evidence in play.  Shocking, is not even enough of a word from what you're doing.

The Flynn transcripts are evidence of the Russian angle.  Since it was those transcripts that led to his resignation.  Also I'm not surprised by Nune's ascertain that some of the transcripts had nothing to do with Russia, as I said above I expect all of their conversations with foreign governments/embassies would have been collected as part of what the NSA considers routine surveillance.

We were talking about Nunes, and he specifically said some of the unmasked transcripts had nothing to do with Russia.  That makes their collection and unmasking almost certainly the result of political operations.

If you want to talk about Flynn, then you might want to note he was fired by the Administration for lying about his contacts.  I guess you've jumped so far down the rabbit hole you believe that's because he got caught, rather than because he lied to the administration.  You turning a victim into a secret colluder?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on March 27, 2017, 08:28:30 PM
If I have conversations of you talking with your mother who never committed a crime in her life and isn't under surveillance then that would be true.  However if the only transcripts I have are when you ordered food from a restaurant used to launder money for the mafia then it is tantamount to a lie to claim I wire tapped you.

I like how you jump to the mafia.  Is it your assertion that every foreigner is equivalent to a member of the mafia?  The FISA authority does not legally extend to wiretapping any foreigner, not even any foreigner associated with an embassy.  Your standard implies its legal to take diplomatic communications.  That's been understood to be spying forever.

Its whack that no refugee can be a terrorist, but every foreigner is a spy in your world.

Yes it is spying, that is what the NSA/CIA/FBI counter-espionage do.  I don't know what fairy tail world you live in where you think that just because a country calls something a diplomatic communication that every other country doesn't also try to read it.  Spying on foreign diplomats has been standard practice for at least the last 500 years (see Giovanni Soro) and probably long before that.  If you are interested in American spying read up on the black chamber and how it effected the arms control treaty with Japan post WWII.  America and every other country with the ability has a long history of reading diplomatic communications other countries.

I've never claimed no refugee can be a terrorist nor that every foreigner is a spy.  I stated that is my assumption that the NSA/CIA/FBI will treat every foreign national working for an embassy as a spy.

I may (I don't remember if I posted on that topic) have argued Trump's ban was stupid and ineffective (b/c it was/is) but it doesn't mean the risk is zero.  But our risk among refugee's is very low, especially compared to the European countries who just got the people who showed up at their door, we to a certain extent have picked who we wanted from among the people in refugee camps.

Quote
Its whack that no refugee can be a terrorist, but every foreigner is a spy in your world.

I get that it is easier?/fun? to argue against some liberal straw man in your head but it is much more interesting and educating (for both of us) if we actually try to respond to the arguments made instead of some "typical" liberal/conservative stereotype we have in our heads.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on March 27, 2017, 08:32:57 PM
I am firmly working under the assumption that the CIA and NSA have basically every non secure/encrypted phone belonging to any foreign national associated with any embassy "tapped."

Which is criminal even under FISA.  If that is the case then your case fails as these recordings were not legally made. 

Umm, no. From Wikipedia:
Quote
Alternatively, the government may seek a court order permitting the surveillance using the FISA court.[17] Approval of a FISA application requires the court find probable cause that the target of the surveillance be a "foreign power" or an "agent of a foreign power", and that the places at which surveillance is requested is used or will be used by that foreign power or its agent.

Since foreign nationals employed by their embassies are the definition of an agent of a foreign power I have no doubt that the FISA court rubber stamps surveillance for every single foreign employee of an embassy.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on March 27, 2017, 08:56:36 PM
And yes, it is a smaller scandal for classified material that should potentially have not been circulated to have been circulated among people with the proper security clearance than for the former president to have ordered Trump Towers to be wiretapped leading up to and following the election.

First, I haven't seen convincing evidence that all communications (regardless of whether they are with foreign nationals) are not recorded.  The Snowden leaks, the reports on the FISA courts activities, certainly imply that the NSA has real time access to the communications backbone and that they pre-emptively collect all calls and then seek FISA warrants to go back on the data they have already collected.  If that is true, then the idea of a need for a separate physical wire tap is friggin red herring.  The president will never order one cause there is NO FRIGGIN NEED when the calls have already been recorded and stored.  All they have to do is access them.

And again here is a very different claim from "Trump Tower" was wire tapped and Obama is a sick guy.  Trump as president could order an end to such a program and ask congress to pass a law to prevent that kind of collection in the future, but again we are going really far away from a specific targeted wire tapping of Trump to a general violation of the 4th amendment.  We could discuss what the legal boundaries should be, but the argument that the government is collecting everything justifies Trump's specific claim is a joke.

Quote
We have evidence that some calls (if not all) were in fact recorded, accessed and illegally unmasked.  I can't imagine the world in which a Republican does this to Hillary's campaign and you make the arguments you made above.

We have evidence that some calls were recorded (legally according to Nunes).  We have no evidence other that Nunes assertion that he felt that some of the recordings were improperly unmasked to conclude that a crime was committed.  I am almost certain that there exist recordings of people from Hillary's campaign speaking with people from foreign embassies and that some junior analyst somewhere read them all because its their job to read everything staffer X at embassy Y does because someone at CIA believes staffer X is a member of a foreign intelligence service.

In my opinion here the only possible crime is potentially that some of the (legally made) recordings were improperly accessed/unmasked.  And yes that is orders of magnitude less scandalous than illegally recording everything from the Trump campaign in an effort to find information to sway the election.  And yes I would make the same argument if Bush had done this to Obama (the answer is the recording almost certainly happened, unlawful unmasking or access probably not, but without an investigation you would never know).
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on March 27, 2017, 09:07:37 PM
The Flynn transcripts are evidence of the Russian angle.  Since it was those transcripts that led to his resignation.  Also I'm not surprised by Nune's ascertain that some of the transcripts had nothing to do with Russia, as I said above I expect all of their conversations with foreign governments/embassies would have been collected as part of what the NSA considers routine surveillance.
We were talking about Nunes, and he specifically said some of the unmasked transcripts had nothing to do with Russia.  That makes their collection and unmasking almost certainly the result of political operations.

Collection as a result of a political operation almost certainly not.  Unmasking maybe, and if you listen to Nunes he said most of the recordings where properly masked but the context was clear enough to give it away in some cases.  So that leaves a pretty weak case for systematic unmasking for political purposes.

Quote
If you want to talk about Flynn, then you might want to note he was fired by the Administration for lying about his contacts.  I guess you've jumped so far down the rabbit hole you believe that's because he got caught, rather than because he lied to the administration.  You turning a victim into a secret colluder?

No I'm using the fact that the Flynn/Russian ambassador transcripts existed for Flynn to get caught as evidence that some of the recordings that are being referenced are between the incoming Trump admin and the Russians.  You claimed I had no evidence that some of the recordings were between the Trump admin and Russian officials, I provided you with the highest profile example of a recording between a member of the Trump admin and a Russian official.  The Flynn transcripts are evidence for the claim I made, I didn't make a statement one way or the other as to why I think Flynn was fired.  I'm not sure why you think that is relevant at all to the claim I made.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 28, 2017, 02:06:00 PM

But if you ever want to convince me that I've misjudged you

You're beyond convincing and beyond judgement.  I wrote you privately as I did djq to try to resolve our differences, and in response you posture with a public assault that you knew I could not respond to.


Quote
If you're going to pat yourself on the back for getting me to respond with incivility, enjoy that. 

Quote
I've been here longer than youhave, Sci Fi, and I'm a lot nicer now than when you arrived.  I have changed for the better while you have changed for the worse.

You have not improved in your ability to read what I write and respond in good faith.

It's hard to read your writing in "good faith," when you do stuff like this:
(1) come out and without any examples or specifics, accuse me of destroying Ornery.
(2) sit silent for a few days, failing to respond to any material points by anyone.
(3) hardly an hour AFTER I send you an olive branch personal message letting you know that I'm banned from the forum and that you can now enjoy it without me, you pop back on here and make more personal attacks on me, knowing that I cannot respond.
(4) You completely fail to enter any other discussions during the 2 weeks I'm banned.


Quote
You haven't acknowledged the factual errors in your posts in this thread

I don't know what you're talking about, and you haven't given specifics in any of your personal attacks on me.

Quote
YOU attacked my integrity because I challenged your hasty and wrong conclusions.
   

Is it an attack on your integrity to say that what you've done in this post speaks poorly of your integrity?

Quote
If you're going to pat yourself on the back for getting me to respond with incivility, enjoy that.

You are engaging in classic abusive behavior.  Blame me for abusing me, and then claim that I'm enjoying it.  It's really not like you.  Pray tell, how do you manage to blame your incivility to Seriati on me?

Quote
[scifi to Seriati]... That's pathetic.  ... It's called context.
patronize much? 

Quote
[scifi to Seriati] I think you're trying to distract.

Motive reading on top of incivility.  Right in a thread where you accuse me of patting myself on the back for making you be incivil. 
Quote
[scifi to Seriati]Why are you using the stupidest arguments possible?
Really classy, scifi. In your paranoid construction, am I laughing maniacally and patting myself on the back as you behave incivilly to others on Ornery?  Don't blame SciFi, Pete made him this way?

 Don't get me wrong; I do this crap too when my head gets hot, and I've said things just as rude to Seriati less than a month ago.  But it speaks poorly of your integrity when you not only blame me for your incivility, but accuse me of engineering your misbehavior and laughing demonically when you misbehave.  Like I'm the devil on your shoulder.  Put on your big boy pants and take responsibility for yourself.

It misrepresents BLM by suggesting that BLM is about the leading cause of death, instead of about a particular kind of pattern of injustice.  And your point about "increased police presence" COULD be relevant, but you just introduced that.  And by doing so, you suggest that BLM is against "increased police presence", which they are not. 

Quote
Quote
It kind of demonstrates you're arguing with strawmen instead of real arguments.

No, it doesn't.  Pete doesn't seem to have read or understood my posts. 

I've read and responded to your posts. If I've missed some factual arguments, please bring them up rather than continuing this temper tantrum. 

The argument in question was a straw man.  You went into an Emperor's New Clothes frenzy, ridiculing me when I asked where Trump had suggested that refugees were going to massively increase the danger to all of us on the street.  In response to your ridicule, I asked you rather politely for a source, and you responded rather rudely that you didn't have to give me a source.

I was suspended for my argument with djquag, who I'm trying to work things out with.  It had nothing to do with you. 


As for not acknowledging facts, I acknowledged my error above on this thread when Wayward proved me wrong about the population breakdown of those that entered. 

Quote
It misrepresents BLM by suggesting that BLM is about the leading cause of death, instead of about a particular kind of pattern of injustice.  And your point about "increased police presence" COULD be relevant, but you just introduced that.  And by doing so, you suggest that BLM is against "increased police presence", which they are not. 

Many BLM leaders such as Marrissa Johnson ARE explicitly against increased police presence, while others call for changes that would make even maintaining the current police presence completely impracticable.  Seriati showed that nicely on a pro-blm thread that I started; you might check that out if you become interested in a good faith argument.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 28, 2017, 07:55:03 PM
Well, no, that doesn't actually prove what Trump was claiming.

If somebody else has their communication surveilled, and Trump is then in contact with that somebody else via the surveilled communication method, then that particular piece of communication would have been picked up.  That's what "incidental" means in this case. This is, in fact, exactly what people have been saying likely happened with the others in Trump's camp whose communications were collected while communicating with Russian state agents.

You have to seriously move the goal posts, not just across the field, but into a completely different sport, to even pretend that's relevant.

Remind us how Obama is a "sick guy" for being president while the US federal government security organizations collect the communications of foreign competitors, some of which Trump was in contact with while they were being surveilled.

To be really, really clear - Trump's "sick guy" remark made it very plain that he was claiming that Obama ordered surveillance of him, the Donald, not just that the USA surveilled foreign state agents. You know this, Seriati.

Not necessarily that Obama ordered it, but that he knew about it and did nothing to stop it. Which is tacitly what Obama's nondenial denial suggests.   If it happened on Obama's watch, and Obama tacitly approved, by not "interfering." then the buck stops at Obama.  Just as it would stop at Nixon if he allowed and did not prevent the Watergate burglary.

Now if it was justifoed, then out with it.  Why the obfuscation and denials?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on March 28, 2017, 09:27:31 PM
Which obfuscation, Pete?  You're not seriously suggesting that a former president has a responsibility to get into a public pissing match with the current office holder with the likely result of weakening the country's stature, are you?

Also, not interfering with what, exactly?  The surveillance of foreign agents?  Trump's claim was that Obama wire tapped him and/or Trump tower, and that Obama was a bad (or sick) guy because he ordered those "tapps".  What is the "it" that you keep mentioning in your post, if not the non-existent "tapps"?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: linuxfreakus on March 28, 2017, 11:17:34 PM
I think the problem here is that the CIA/NSA pretty much record every single phone call and email in the whole country at all times.  Ostensibly they use it "only for metadata" but the systems they've built allow them to pull up pretty much anyone's data with absolutely, no warrant, no special orders,  no accountability at all.  They're even allowed to just randomly hack people's computers if they feel like it and go on fishing expeditions... they just have to see you using encryption or tor or various other things that they don't like and then they can use that as justification to hack you if they want.

So it would be really easy for anyone with access (such as a president) to just ask someone to try to pull up some dirt on someone on a whim.  Whether or not it actually happened is somewhat debatable, difficult to prove, and easily denied, but the fact that they went from flat denials early on to now saying there was no "physical wiretapping" is telling.  Because anyone who knows how this stuff works these days knows that they almost never use "physical wiretapping" anymore.  There is no reason to when they already have all the data they could ever use and so many "smart" devices with microphones all over the place that can be listening devices.

The surveillance state is dangerously out of control.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 28, 2017, 11:52:49 PM
Which obfuscation, Pete? 

You didn't quote, so I'm not sure what you're asking about.  The greatest bit of obfuscation in this whole Trump Russia story is that the hullaballoo is designed to distract us from the contents of the emails that wikileaked out.  Demonstrating that Clinton took millions of dollars from ISIS contributors, and that Clinton and Obama knew this.  But since Trump hasn't picked up on that either, I can only assume that he's as bought off as the Bushes and Clintons and Obama before him.

Quote
You're not seriously suggesting that a former president has a responsibility to get into a public pissing match with the current office holder with the likely result of weakening the country's stature, are you?

Not at all.  Silence was an option.  He also could have said that to his knowledge that Trump was never targeted for wiretaps, and that if this was done, it was without his authorization.  Instead, he said that he made it a point to not "interfere" with federal investigations.  I do find that statement somewhat obfuscatory, and it does more towards engaging in a "pissing contest" than the other options I just suggested.

Quote
Also, not interfering with what, exactly?

So now you ask ME to elucidate the very question that Obama obfuscated?

Quote
" Trump's claim was that Obama wire tapped him and/or Trump tower, and that Obama was a bad (or sick) guy because he ordered those "tapps". "

Indeed, I cringed and assumed that Trump was off his nut, until Obama's queer and evasive response made me rethink that.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on March 30, 2017, 07:29:05 PM
Pete, I didn't respond to your Facebook message because I have no desire to let anything that happens on this site intrude into any other venue.  Your message DID remind me to come check this thread which is why I responded to your posts shortly afterward. 

Calling that message an "olive branch" is not a fair characterization.  Feel free to post your message here in full if you want to dispute my disputing of that characterization. 

Quote
It's hard to read your writing in "good faith," when you do stuff like this:
(1) come out and without any examples or specifics, accuse me of destroying Ornery.
(2) sit silent for a few days, failing to respond to any material points by anyone.
(3) hardly an hour AFTER I send you an olive branch personal message letting you know that I'm banned from the forum and that you can now enjoy it without me, you pop back on here and make more personal attacks on me, knowing that I cannot respond.
(4) You completely fail to enter any other discussions during the 2 weeks I'm banned.

So does this list explain your behavior, considering that all of it happened after the behavior I was complaining about? 

You didn't destroy Ornery, and it was dumb and hyperbolic to say that you are the reason it sucks now.  But the way you ignore details in my posts, don't follow links, and don't seem to make an effort to understand me?  That does suck.  And it's been going on a long time, and hasn't improved. 

Whether you're banned or not, I have a right to respond to you here, however prompt or tardy that response is. 

Quote
I don't know what [factual errors] you're talking about, and you haven't given specifics in any of your personal attacks on me.

That's funny - because I did tell you what factual errors I'm talking about.  Page 1.   

Quote
You are engaging in classic abusive behavior.  Blame me for abusing me, and then claim that I'm enjoying it.

Um, no.  I'm not blaming you for my bad behavior, I'm blaming you for yours.  You accused me of "making stuff up" and "playing stupid" before I got mad.  Page 1.

And, at the same time, were demonstrating that you hadn't really paid attention to the content of my previous posts, by not acknowledging that the Orlando attack HAD been counted in the comparison you were criticizing for not including Orlando, and that stories that didn't include Orlando were published well before Orlando happened.  That was stuff I pointed out, and also stuff that was supported in links I provided, by the time you were accusing me of dishonesty. 

Quote
[scifi to Seriati]... That's pathetic.  ... It's called context.

You're quoting Seriati, here.  Do you see the pattern yet?

Quote
But it speaks poorly of your integrity when you not only blame me for your incivility, but accuse me of engineering your misbehavior and laughing demonically when you misbehave.

I wasn't blaming you for anything I said to Seriati.  Where did you get that? 

My comment was this:
Quote
If you're going to pat yourself on the back for getting me to respond with incivility, enjoy that.

Because you had just said:
Quote
....someone needs to take the higher ground here.

I wasn't attempting to present any justification for anything that happened after you made the post I was responding to.  I hadn't even responded to Seriati at the point you made the post I was responding to.  How could I claim you were patting yourself on the back for events that hadn't yet occurred when the patting occurred? 

Your interpretation is bizarre and unjustified.

Quote
The argument in question was a straw man.  You went into an Emperor's New Clothes frenzy, ridiculing me when I asked where Trump had suggested that refugees were going to massively increase the danger to all of us on the street.  In response to your ridicule, I asked you rather politely for a source, and you responded rather rudely that you didn't have to give me a source.

None of this is correct!  I claimed that Trump was fear mongering and trying to scare people and make them feel unsafe without his intervention.  You then required evidence that Trump claimed the average Joe was going to face direct threat in the street.  I told you that this was an arbitrary challenge, which is true (you were asking for something more specific than I had claimed existed). 

If you have read my posts, you'll already understand that I later provided specific examples of the fear mongering I was talking about.  If you had said "can you provide examples of fear mongering", I would not have called that an arbitrary challenge. 

But there was no "frenzy" about that. 

When I got mad is when you demonstrated that at the same time you were asking me to provide sources and back up my argument with specifics, you had not paid attention to specifics that I had already mentioned, and were accusing me of making things up.


Even in this most recent post where you are trying, again, to take me to task for incivility, you have quoted Seriati and chided me for his words.  You have bizarrely misconstrued my remark about patting yourself on the back, and said that your construction speaks poorly of my integrity. 


And you haven't shown that you understand your errors I pointed out on page 1, in my first post in this thread.  Those errors appeared to form a large part of the basis for your outrage expressed in the opening post. 


That sucks.  And asking me to repeat the specifics over and over doesn't wash.  I'm disgusted because of a long term pattern of misconstruing and misrepresenting my words, and making conclusory remarks if I don't dance to the tune you play when I object.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on March 31, 2017, 01:07:20 AM


Calling that message an "olive branch" is not a fair characterization. 

It's as fair a characterization as my calling this last post of yours an "olive branch."  Since even though 99% of it is questionably justifiable complaints about me, it refrains from pure personal attack, and you also step back on your earlier more vicious attacks, for example:
Quote
You didn't destroy Ornery, and it was dumb and hyperbolic to say that you are the reason it sucks now.

Olive branch accepted, even though you may not characterize it as such.



Feel free to post your message here in full if you want to dispute my disputing of that characterization.

No.  I don't dispute that you dispute it.  It's a legitimate difference of view.  I view any deescalation as a sort of olive branch, whether it's taking a public fight to private correspondence, or admitting that the nastiest thing you said wasn't really true.

 
Quote
So does this list explain your behavior, considering that all of it happened after the behavior I was complaining about? 

You didn't complain about any behavior that I know of.  If you haven't said anything specific, you haven't said anything at all.

Quote
But the way you ignore details in my posts, don't follow links, and don't seem to make an effort to understand me?  That does suck.
 

Well that would suck, if I did it.  But I followed Wayward's like quickly and admitted he was right when I couldn't find stuff to show it.  Did I miss some link or argument you made?  Beats me.  If you hadn't made a public attack without specifics, I might be inclined to try to figure out what you're talking about.  But here we are.

Quote
Whether you're banned or not, I have a right to respond to you here, however prompt or tardy that response is. 

Absolutely.  And I have a right to say what I said about your timing and to question your vague and dubious explanations, as I did.  But I won't rehash that because we seem to be de-escalating.


Quote
  I'm not blaming you for my bad behavior, I'm blaming you for yours.


You aren't now, but you did earlier blame me for your bad behavior when you speculated that I was gloating over your losing your temper.

Quote
And, at the same time, were demonstrating that you hadn't really paid attention to the content of my previous posts, by not acknowledging that the Orlando attack HAD been counted in the comparison you were criticizing for not including Orlando, and that stories that didn't include Orlando were published well before Orlando happened.

I do remember your bringing up Orlando, and your link bore out that I was wrong about that not being counted.  I am sure I wrote a post acknowledging that.  Some of the stuff I post somehow snags when my ISP hiccups.  I'll check it out later, and if you're right that I didn't successfully publish my acknowledgment of my mistake on Orlando, I'll apologize. 


Quote
That's funny - because I did tell you what factual errors I'm talking about.  Page 1.   

Yes, but that was before the insults.  I'll look at it tomorrow if I'm in a better mood.

 
Quote
You accused me of "making stuff up" and "playing stupid" before I got mad.  Page 1.

  That was stuff I pointed out, and also stuff that was supported in links I provided, by the time you were accusing me of dishonesty. 

I'll check that out. 

Quote
You're quoting Seriati, here.  Do you see the pattern yet?

Mistake pattern.  Apologies to you and Seriati for the misattribution. 

Quote

I wasn't blaming you for anything I said to Seriati.  Where did you get that? 

Here:
Quote
If you're going to pat yourself on the back for getting me to respond with incivility, enjoy that.

Quote
Because you had just said:
Quote
....someone needs to take the higher ground here.

By that I meant that I'd restrained myself from trying to say something as mean as what you just today withdrew as hyperbolic.  Which I did.  OTOH, if I did, as you say, call you "dishonest" earlier, then it would not be reasonable for me to claim to take "the higher ground."

Quote
I wasn't attempting to present any justification for anything that happened after you made the post I was responding to.  I hadn't even responded to Seriati at the point you made the post I was responding to.  How could I claim you were patting yourself on the back for events that hadn't yet occurred when the patting occurred? 

The question hurts my head, and I can't promise to get back to it.
Quote
Your interpretation is bizarre and unjustified.

I'm doing my best, SciFi. 

Quote
If you have read my posts, you'll already understand that I later provided specific examples of the fear mongering I was talking about.  If you had said "can you provide examples of fear mongering", I would not have called that an arbitrary challenge. 

LoL!  That's an absurd question that I could answer myself.  Every news source fearmongers.  You do it yourself, as do I.  My question was when Trump had made any suggestion that Muslim immigrants posed a dramatic threat on the street.  I think I could show Trump arguing that Mexican immigrants dramatically increase our average day to day violence.  With Islamist terrorism, the threat isn't the sheer number of dead or wounded, but the efficacy of demoralizing terrorism.  Your argument that the Syrian immigrants aren't terrorists, even if true (and it mostly is true), THEREFORE the demoralization argument fails, in no way excuses the dishonest straw man (not your straw man; the one discussed in the OP which was not about you, SciFi) that the whole fear-the-white=Christian propaganda pretends to address.



Quote
When I got mad is when you demonstrated that at the same time you were asking me to provide sources and back up my argument with specifics, you had not paid attention to specifics that I had already mentioned, and were accusing me of making things up.

None of your specifics provide any justification that Trump or any other listened-to conservative source has been arguing that all Americans are in imminent threat of physical harm from Muslim immigrants.  That's something they slander Mexican immigrants with, not Muslims.  Muslims are unfairly tarred as terrorist sleepers, not as a general physical threat to individuals at large.


Pete, I didn't respond to your Facebook message because I have no desire to let anything that happens on this site intrude into any other venue. 

That would not be a ridiculous excuse if I'd posted it to your public facebook "venue" rather than trying to take it up privately via messenger.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on April 11, 2017, 09:41:56 PM
So after Nunes sabotaged the perceived independence of the committee he was leading by reporting to the very people being investigated (or at least, to their boss) before sharing the information with the rest of the committee, we find out, unsurprisingly, this:  http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/politics/intelligence-contradicts-nunes-unmasking-claims/index.html  (http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/11/politics/intelligence-contradicts-nunes-unmasking-claims/index.html)

Quote
After a review of the same intelligence reports brought to light by House Intelligence Chairman Devin Nunes, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers and aides have so far found no evidence that Obama administration officials did anything unusual or illegal, multiple sources in both parties tell CNN.
So even the Republicans reviewing the same information that triggered Nunes' tryst at the White House have found nothing unusual in those documents, that there was no "there" there in the first place.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on April 12, 2017, 12:24:10 AM
Interesting.  But did you post this to the right thread?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on April 12, 2017, 05:54:45 AM
Yup.  There are only 20 other references to/mentions of Nunes on this page, but that should be enough to make it relevant.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on April 13, 2017, 11:50:35 AM
It's a lot less interesting when you realize that CNN doesn't actually know if they viewed the same reports as Nunes.  You can find it buried in their other articles on the topic.

It's literally just spin.   
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on April 13, 2017, 12:08:59 PM
I'm sure there are a number of pertinent items included in other articles.  Do you have any specifics that jumped out at you?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on April 13, 2017, 06:02:20 PM
Can you point out in which other articles on the topic CNN has buried this information, Seriati?  I haven't found such an article yet.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on April 14, 2017, 12:07:29 PM
Sorry, they had five or six articles on the day I read it, and now they only have the one still up.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on April 15, 2017, 11:35:42 PM
Well, the articles that I saw on the date of your claim made no such suggestion, which is why I asked for a link. Since CNN doesn't delete articles, you should really make the effort to dig up the support for your strong claim; because at this point, it's even odds that such a reference actually was made or that you simply imagined such a reference being made.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on April 17, 2017, 10:34:26 AM
Well I was on vaca last week.  I'll see if I can dig it up this week.  It was in the body of the article, not the headlines or the lead paragraphs and it was just an acknowledgement that they don't know if they reviewed the same materials as Nunes.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 16, 2017, 09:33:13 AM
Some more fake news making the rounds, this time about Trump having committed "treason" by giving "classified" information over to Russia. Sounds pretty bad, right? Here's a typical headline on the subject, and one of the tamer versions at that:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/05/15/politics/trump-russia-classified-information/

Quote
President Donald Trump shared highly classified information with the Russian foreign minister and Russian ambassador to the US in a White House meeting last week, The Washington Post first reported Monday.

Interesting that they should phrase it as "highly classified information." Really, is that a specific technical term, or just a way of making the story sound damning to Trump? Here's another article on the subject, this time by the BBC, who we should trust a heck of a lot more than CNN (one of the epicenters of fake news):

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39937258

Quote
Mr Trump tweeted that he had shared "facts pertaining to terrorism and airline safety" and wanted Russia to do more against so-called Islamic State.

He met Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in the Oval Office last week.

US media said Mr Trump had shared material that was passed on by a partner which had not given permission.

In his tweet early on Tuesday, Mr Trump said: "As President I wanted to share with Russia (at an openly scheduled W.H. meeting) which I have the absolute right to do, facts pertaining to terrorism and airline flight safety.

"Humanitarian reasons, plus I want Russia to greatly step up their fight against [IS] & terrorism."

So the big hubbub isn't that Trump gave over 'classified' info to Russia, which makes it sound like he's a traitor just like everyone has been claiming. Rather, it seems to be a fact that the President has the right to declassify info at will, which actually means it is literally impossible for the POTUS to give away classified information to anyone. If he chooses to give it away, then it's ipso facto ok for him to do so. BUT the issue here is that he didn't consult with the foreign intelligence service which supposedly gave the U.S. that information, and so this story might speak to a breach in the protocols with that country. The real headline should be that Trump may have screwed over a foreign intelligence service, which is still bad, but has nothing to do with him being a Russia spy. Notice how most of the headlines you'll find on this subject very deliberately allow their headline to feed into the 'Trump and Russia' narrative? And also notice how all the same parties claiming Hillary did nothing wrong want Trump impeached over this, which he had every right to do legally? The double standard is staggering. And even what the BBC article says requires us to accept that the specific information Trump gave comes from a non-U.S. intelligence service, which is interesting, because unless that "totally secret" source was revealed how can the media (or even most white house staffers) know where the info came from? Whoever does know would surely never tell the press, because that would, indeed, be criminal.

The funniest thing about the story is that the information Trump admitted to giving over (despite the way the articles make it sound like they caught him red handed) via Twitter was info about ISIS and how to fight them. Trump says he wants to help Russia deal with ISIS more effectively. Some years ago any talk of finding ways to deal with ISIS would have met with applause. Obama (deceitfully) claimed he was fully intent on dealing with them, and the public would have supported it. But when Trump is involved and wants to help a foreign country deal with terrorists he's a traitor! So much for the public zeal to deal with what was supposed to be the worst danger in the mid-East, which all the papers previously made their headlines about without end and now appear to think is not nearly as important as focusing on how to turn Trump into a villain.

I was never a Trump fan, and am not happy he was elected, but my god, with all the vitriol I see on social media and in the press, I'm starting to feel bad for the guy. I'm not at all pleased that all the zealotry about him is pushing me towards having to defend him on occasion, because it's not particularly my favorite thing to do. And actually I think that's part of the trick: attack Trump, and dare anyone to claim they're actually defending that monster. Trump is absolutely not wrong when he talks about how much fake news is out there in the MSM, and how deceptively these organizations operate.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on May 16, 2017, 09:53:06 AM
The claim is that he provided sufficient information to identify a source belonging to another country. This was information that had been withheld from US allies in order to maintain security regarding the source's identity. Giving Russia this information allows them to ID the source and potentially disrupt or disable it. Given that our friends on the ground are opposed to their friends on the ground in Syria, this is a bad thing. ISIS may be "the worst danger" in the Middle East but they're hardly the only one.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 16, 2017, 10:33:30 AM
The claim is that he provided sufficient information to identify a source belonging to another country. This was information that had been withheld from US allies in order to maintain security regarding the source's identity. Giving Russia this information allows them to ID the source and potentially disrupt or disable it. Given that our friends on the ground are opposed to their friends on the ground in Syria, this is a bad thing. ISIS may be "the worst danger" in the Middle East but they're hardly the only one.

You are right that there may be a story here worth reporting. The problem is that it isn't the one generally being reported. They're zeroing in on "classified information" and letting the reader draw the obvious conclusion from that (criminal). A story about having caused consternation in a foreign intelligence service - well, I don't think that would be nearly as successful as clickbait, right? Part of the issue with 'fake news' isn't even necessarily the intent to maliciously deceive; the appeal of making headlines maximally clickbaity is enough to explain most of what we see in the media. Basically most news stories of this sort of what we elsewhere call s**tposts.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on May 16, 2017, 11:09:00 AM
I was never a Trump fan, and am not happy he was elected, but my god, with all the vitriol I see on social media and in the press, I'm starting to feel bad for the guy. I'm not at all pleased that all the zealotry about him is pushing me towards having to defend him on occasion, because it's not particularly my favorite thing to do. And actually I think that's part of the trick: attack Trump, and dare anyone to claim they're actually defending that monster. Trump is absolutely not wrong when he talks about how much fake news is out there in the MSM, and how deceptively these organizations operate.

Glenn Beck has been hilarious to "check in" with periodically since the election, as he was part of the "never Trump" crowd in the first place.

In November he was warning the press about exactly this. Commenting that if they're not careful, they're going to end up "in much the same place" that HE was in circa 2009 with Obama. Which is not a "good thing" in his book, because that means the "Mainstream Media" will have a credibility rating MUCH lower than the already low levels it enjoyed going into Trump's Presidency. But like lemmings running off a cliff, they're full speed ahead, and he's sitting there going "They have become the me of 8 years ago."

I guess they're hoping for an outcome somewhat like Beck had with 9/12 and the Tea Party and that they'll be able to "stop Trump" but the problem they have is that they're the not the first ones to get there(Tea Party still exists, as does its sentiment, and it's OPPOSED to where they("the media") "want to go"). Much of that ground has already been claimed, they're going to be a day late and a dollar short on that front.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on May 16, 2017, 11:34:47 AM
Regarding the highly classified language, it is alleged that the information Trump revealed was "code-word information." I'm pretty sure that means it's information for which an individual has to be specifically cleared rather than more generic Secret or Top Secret clearance. Highly classified seems like a reasonable description.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Mynnion on May 16, 2017, 02:24:09 PM
Are there conditions where the President can be held accountable for releasing classified information?  My knowledge is limited to what I read in the media (both sides).  If it can be shown that US interests were directly compromised by a release of information is that treason?  I keep wondering if the GOP will keep him around as long as it is convenient then get rid of him.  He certainly is giving them lots of fuel.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on May 16, 2017, 02:35:53 PM
Not sure why "anonymous sources" are given so much credibility.  The official word is that what Trump gave was not particularly sensitive.  Now, what the leaker gave the media and the media reported to the public appears to be more sensitive than what Trump gave to the Russians.  How do you square the outrage over this with the media widely disseminating what they apparently thought was too sensitive for Trump to even share?

At this point, we need criminal charges for some leakers.

For the record, whether or not its a good idea for a President to share something aside, it doesn't appear that its possible under law for him to violate the classification laws.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Mynnion on May 16, 2017, 02:45:13 PM
Not to get picky but if Trump or any president disclosed the nuclear codes to a foreign power is that illegal? 

In the case of the leak I have to wonder what you would charge a person with who disclosed that the president had done something but not the specifics.  At worst I could see them removed from their position.  Now if they released the actual information than that is a different matter.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on May 16, 2017, 03:51:05 PM
Not sure why "anonymous sources" are given so much credibility.  The official word is that what Trump gave was not particularly sensitive.  Now, what the leaker gave the media and the media reported to the public appears to be more sensitive than what Trump gave to the Russians.  How do you square the outrage over this with the media widely disseminating what they apparently thought was too sensitive for Trump to even share?

At this point, we need criminal charges for some leakers.

For the record, whether or not its a good idea for a President to share something aside, it doesn't appear that its possible under law for him to violate the classification laws.
The media has specifically not reproduced the information they claim was most sensitive to disclosure. Unless some one's published the location the information came from?

I'm not sure why official sources are granted so much credibility.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on May 16, 2017, 05:01:25 PM
The media has in fact published the supposed country that provided it, has reported that it relates to an undercover agent, that it could be used to discover the location and/or methods involved, that it was specifically barred from sharing (and the access level), among other items.  NONE OF WHICH apparently was disclosed by Trump.

Effectively, any long term consequence here is almost solely the result of the leaker and the media.

Official sources expressly stated that Trump wasn't even aware of some of those details (hence not able to disclose them), and the level of the information he discussed (which sounds like it was either generally known or generally known in the intelligence community, and not particularly proprietary).

I really don't get why you don't have a problem with this.  The leaks that are going on, such as this one, are 100% detrimental to our national interests, and not even plausibly related to a higher purpose (as one could argue with Manning or Snowden).  They are purely partisan exercises that do nothing but damage to our country.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 16, 2017, 06:27:49 PM
The media has in fact published the supposed country that provided it, has reported that it relates to an undercover agent, that it could be used to discover the location and/or methods involved, that it was specifically barred from sharing (and the access level), among other items.  NONE OF WHICH apparently was disclosed by Trump.

Effectively, any long term consequence here is almost solely the result of the leaker and the media.

Official sources expressly stated that Trump wasn't even aware of some of those details (hence not able to disclose them), and the level of the information he discussed (which sounds like it was either generally known or generally known in the intelligence community, and not particularly proprietary).

I really don't get why you don't have a problem with this.  The leaks that are going on, such as this one, are 100% detrimental to our national interests, and not even plausibly related to a higher purpose (as one could argue with Manning or Snowden).  They are purely partisan exercises that do nothing but damage to our country.

Aha.  I was wondering why the hell Obama pardoned Chelsea Manning after Trump's election.

Note the hypocrisy of those Americans who accuse Snowden and Wikileaks and their contacts of "espionage" and yet continue to broadcast this stuff.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 16, 2017, 06:30:10 PM
Not to get picky but if Trump or any president disclosed the nuclear codes to a foreign power is that illegal? 

It may or may not be illegal, depending on what Congress determines in the impeachment trial.  Surely you know that impeachment is the only remedy for any criminal action by a president, right?  I think that handing over the nuclear codes would be the clearest case of espionage against the president.  But only an illiterate or dissembling jackass would use the term "treason," as we are not at war with Russia.

Congress has the power to find that what Trump did constitutes an act of espionage.

Meanwhile, what US press agencies are doing right now is, by definition, espionage.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 16, 2017, 06:40:18 PM
If it can be shown that US interests were directly compromised by a release of information is that treason? 

If you rape someone really really really hard, is that arson? 

No, it's still rape.  And espionage is still espionage.

Espionage may also be treason under the circumstances which the Constitution defines as treason.  "US interests were directly compromised" does not meet that test.

What you're asking is like what the ultraconservatives tried to do when Obama made the nuclear deal with Iran and made peace with Cuba.  Both of which, from a certain point of view, arguably directly compromised US interests.  Being one of our more honest types, I think you will recognize on reflection that "against US interests" is not a reasonable measure for treason.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: LetterRip on May 16, 2017, 06:57:11 PM
Seriati,

Quote
Not sure why "anonymous sources" are given so much credibility.

Because the official source lies so frequently as to have lost all credibility, whereas anonymous sources have nearly a perfect record when they contradict the official source.

I can't imagine why anyone would trust something said by Trump, Spicer or any information source which they control unless they are so blinded by partisanship that they have lost the ability to differentiate reality from fantasy.  They have lied when there is video and audio evidence that directly contradicts them - frequently; why do you think they would be more honest when their aren't cameras and recordings to directly contradict them?

As to 'what is publicly known' - we know it is a laptop bomb; we know it is ISIS; we might also know it is from within Syria.  The minute a 'laptop' ban was done - ISIS knew that the plot had been discovered.  As to the country that might or might not have been known by ISIS already - it seems likely that they did.  So none of this stuff which has been reported by the media endangers the source - given that the action of the ban provided that information already.

Also the damage to the US was done by Trump betraying the country that the information originated from.  His betrayal of their trust is what the true damage is and will put American lives in danger because it decreases the probability of any ally sharing intelligence with the US, and it makes US intelligence operatives more likely to conceal their sources or withhold information out of fear of them being killed by Trump saying something stupid.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 17, 2017, 12:12:09 AM
Also the damage to the US was done by Trump betraying the country that the information originated from.  His betrayal of their trust is what the true damage is and will put American lives in danger because it decreases the probability of any ally sharing intelligence with the US, and it makes US intelligence operatives more likely to conceal their sources or withhold information out of fear of them being killed by Trump saying something stupid.

Maybe it's possible Trump's action had this result. Or maybe some people deliberately caused the information in question to be leaked after he did something sloppy but less serious than that, so that the fallout could be pinned on him. Maybe your version of it is what happened, maybe not. Now I'm reading in the news that this is all about an Israeli spy that had been planted in ISIS, and that it's Israel Trump has screwed over. So LR, you seem to be making this case, that Trump not only gave Russia some intel about how to deal with ISIS, but also told them point blank he got it from Israel. Because what I heard previously what that it was supposed that it could possibly be traced back to the source, not that Trump blatantly told them the source or revealed it. So this story is not consistent, unless I'm misunderstanding something.

That being said, for reasons totally unrelated to whether Trump did or didn't screw over Mossad, I don't particularly believe that Israel has agents within ISIS whose purpose it is to help defeat ISIS. Here's my wild theory of the day: Israel has various intel about ISIS, which they retain while nevertheless hoping ISIS defeats their enemies, and Trump went and used some of that intel to help Russia, who is helping Israel's enemies, and now Mossad is screaming about it and making a stink. It's fairly clear to me that the Israel/Saudi interest is in ISIS having the run of Syria, and they are both displeased at what Russia is doing to forestall ISIS, as well as currently pissed off that their intel is being used in a way that is against what they see as their interests. And that's the real game, isn't it? If one country has a vested interest in the success of a terrorist organization (even if they don't directly sponsor them) and their ally (America) helps someone like Russia to defeat the terrorists, is it a "betrayal" to take steps to help stop the terrorism? I thought the deal was that "you are either with us, or with the terrorists?" Bah. Even the hidden premises behind these public positions are fake news.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 17, 2017, 07:36:51 AM
LR ...  Surprised that you think that warning Russia about a laptop bomb would constitute an intelligence breach that is significant given out history of dealings with *Israel.*
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: cherrypoptart on May 17, 2017, 08:31:20 AM
Even if Trump told Russia exactly who the Mossad agent is in ISIS, is Russia going to release that information to ISIS and the press? It seems like the Russians are very good at keeping such secrets if they want to. It's also Trump's prerogative to declassify such information, or in this case not declassify it for public release but to decide that, at the highest level, the Russians can know about it. The real treason lies in whoever leaked the story to the press.

If FDR revealed to Stalin during WWII information about Germany including information that could reveal sources, would that be a crime? Or would the crime be telling the Germans and the world that FDR revealed to Stalin such information?

Let's also remember that the Russians told us point blank about the Boston bombers. They may be trying to fracture NATO, but they are definitely our allies against ISIS and Muslim terrorism in general.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 17, 2017, 08:38:01 AM
FDR told Churchill about the A bomb, and that info got leaked through the Brits to Stalin.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: cherrypoptart on May 17, 2017, 08:53:39 AM
I'll take the point there that the only way to keep information secure is not to share it, but on the other hand it seems like the Russians would have a lot more spies in foreign governments than ISIS does. But then ISIS doesn't seem to need to have spies in our government or in Russia's when they have our media who is more than willing to do that job for free. If whoever leaked the information about Trump sharing intel with the Russians had kept their mouth shut, it would have made it much less likely that the information could ever have gotten to ISIS. They didn't do our country or anti-ISIS efforts any favors.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on May 17, 2017, 09:32:38 AM
Even if Trump told Russia exactly who the Mossad agent is in ISIS, is Russia going to release that information to ISIS and the press? It seems like the Russians are very good at keeping such secrets if they want to. It's also Trump's prerogative to declassify such information, or in this case not declassify it for public release but to decide that, at the highest level, the Russians can know about it. The real treason lies in whoever leaked the story to the press.

If FDR revealed to Stalin during WWII information about Germany including information that could reveal sources, would that be a crime? Or would the crime be telling the Germans and the world that FDR revealed to Stalin such information?

Let's also remember that the Russians told us point blank about the Boston bombers. They may be trying to fracture NATO, but they are definitely our allies against ISIS and Muslim terrorism in general.
No but Russia might share it with their allies Assad and Iran.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on May 17, 2017, 09:40:29 AM
Seriati,

Quote
Not sure why "anonymous sources" are given so much credibility.

Because the official source lies so frequently as to have lost all credibility, whereas anonymous sources have nearly a perfect record when they contradict the official source.

Perfect record really?  There's an expression that comes to mind about doing your business or getting off the toilet.  Let's see the proof on Russian collusion, period end of story, now.  There is absolutely zero question that most of the Washington bureacracy is actively hostile to the administration, there is absolutely no question that no matter what the real information is what will get widely printed as "the story" is a version that is actively hostile to the administration even if its not accurate at all. 

In fact, even if you accept the anonymous source (which are subject to gross cherry picking problems), the way they get reported is never accurate.  How many headlines about President implied he illegally released information (not apparently possible), or imply that the Comey memo is proof of obstruction of justice, when by it's language it wouldn't support such a charge, it's a one person account (and necessarily self serving), and if Comey thought Trump tried to obstruct justice he was legally obligated to report that to the Justice Department.

Even the substance here appears to be something that was widely known, ie that there was a laptop risk, and the media accounts are what, if any thing, is causing the actual damage with an ally and putting the agent at risk.  Honest to god, there is NO REASONABLE REASON that a non-illegal action for security cooperation should ever have been the subject of a leak, the "gotcha" value is only in the minds of the deluded and the damage to us is real.

If you have an inside source on a crime that actually harms the country bring it up, and frankly at this point, if they aren't willing to go on the record with the large number of allies waiting to take up their cause they are not credible.

Quote
I can't imagine why anyone would trust something said by Trump, Spicer or any information source which they control unless they are so blinded by partisanship that they have lost the ability to differentiate reality from fantasy.

Because they have said far more that is true than false, and a large portion of the "false" is twisting of words and unfavorable interpretations.

There is literally nothing they can say on or related to Russia that won't be misinterpreted.  Let me posit a question, if there was no collusion, then what the hell is the legitimate point of all this? 

Quote
They have lied when there is video and audio evidence that directly contradicts them - frequently; why do you think they would be more honest when their aren't cameras and recordings to directly contradict them?

Frequently?  Really.  Give me 10 examples, soft references are fine I'll look up the details myself.  But they better be real lies.

Quote
Also the damage to the US was done by Trump betraying the country that the information originated from.  His betrayal of their trust is what the true damage is and will put American lives in danger because it decreases the probability of any ally sharing intelligence with the US, and it makes US intelligence operatives more likely to conceal their sources or withhold information out of fear of them being killed by Trump saying something stupid.

Just knowing what he told them is a gross breach of our security that is FAR more troubling to our allies than what Trump did.  We literally are in a position where an ally has to assume any conversation they have will the US will be leaked if it serves a partisan political goal.  You're really missing the forest for the trees if you want to pretend to be outraged here.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 17, 2017, 10:00:21 AM
More to the point, how can it possibly be evaluated as "bad" when the POTUS helps another nation - any nation at all - to prevent terrorist attacks? It's kind of sick in the first place to take any position other than that it's good to help human beings avoid terrorist plots. The fact that it's Russia shouldn't make any difference there, and I really feel like the reason this blew up is because of the Trump/Russia narrative already in the water, and the media thought they could lump this in with that as proof Trump is in league with Putin. That's definitely how the headlines read to me. The issue about whether Trump screwed over Israeli intelligence (doubtful) is not how the story is mostly being reported.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: cherrypoptart on May 17, 2017, 11:19:36 AM
I'm hearing that it was murdered DNC operative Seth Rich who leaked the emails. Of course there is no way at this point to know if that's true or not but that would make for a very interesting twist in the whole Trump-Russia collusion narrative if it was a Democrat who did it all, possibly motivated by the DNC corruption against Sanders.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: ScottF on May 17, 2017, 11:22:22 AM
This scandal is really just part of the "not my president" crowd's new mission (which includes most of the media). They firmly believe that finding something impeachable and removing this clown is simply a matter of time. 99 false positives are fine as long as they can uncover or generate 1 that gets the job done. This will be their focus for the next few years. Does anyone doubt this?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: LetterRip on May 17, 2017, 02:27:23 PM
Everyone knew about the laptop bomb plot the moment that it was announced that we were restricting flights with laptops and it was utterly obvious that ISIS would be the culprit.  If that is the only thing he told them - then it is a non-issue.

Of course I pointed out around the time of 9/11 that laptop bombs were an obvious issue that made our security theater completely pointless - so any half competent security service should have been aware since at least 9/11 that laptop bombs were a possibility.

Fenring,

Quote
More to the point, how can it possibly be evaluated as "bad" when the POTUS helps another nation - any nation at all - to prevent terrorist attacks?

What help do you suppose was provided - everyone already knew about the possibility of laptop bombs and terrorists, and the US recent restriction and location restrictions provided the knowledge of where the threat could originate.  What 'help' do you feel was provided by providing the city where the intel came from?  That is the compromising knowledge that risks the source of the other country being discovered and provides no help in preventing the threat.  It was his bragging and providing source compromising information that is the concern - not warning Russian about the publicly disclosed terrorism threat.  The terrorism threat knowledge was shared with our allies - it is the detailed information such as what specific city that the intel came from that was not to be shared and that risks compromising the source.

Seriati,

Quote
Let's see the proof on Russian collusion, period end of story, now.

There is already publicly disclosed proof - two Trump campaign officials lied to congress about their contact with Russia including the current AG - when lawyers commit a felony there is usually a very good reason.  There are 5 known members of Trump campaign who had contact with Russia.  Trump told Comey to end the Russian investigation, and then Trump fired Comey using an obvious lie as the stated reason (then later coming clean that he planned to fire Comey regardless, and also suggesting that ending the Russian investigation was part of the reason).  There is also Trump publicly inviting Russia to engage in hacking of the DNC and releasing the information.

Of course the FBI has yet to make a full case, but what is known is already quite damning.

Quote
Even the substance here appears to be something that was widely known.

So Trump supporters seem to be not actually reading or listening about what the issue is.  The issue is not 'Trump tells Russia there is an ISIS laptop bomb threat' - that is completely responsible and expected and was already widely known.  The issue is 'Trump tells Russia the city in ISIS controlled territory that the intel about the laptop bomb plot was discovered' - that is what was extremely secret and has put our ally who provided the intel at risk and our access to future intel at risk and it is something that was not to be shared with anyone including our other allies.

Seriati,

here are 17 - most of these are on video.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/06/17-things-donald-trump-said-and-then-denied-saying/

And that is over half a year old.

Here are 250 lifes since taking office.

https://www.thestar.com/news/world/2017/05/16/donald-trump-has-said-100s-of-false-things-heres-all-of-them.html

You are free to go through and find 10 of them that have video or audio contradictory evidence.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on May 17, 2017, 02:39:33 PM
This scandal is really just part of the "not my president" crowd's new mission (which includes most of the media). They firmly believe that finding something impeachable and removing this clown is simply a matter of time. 99 false positives are fine as long as they can uncover or generate 1 that gets the job done. This will be their focus for the next few years. Does anyone doubt this?

Although that is doubtlessly what is going on in Washington right now (after all, that's how it's been for at least the last 8 years ;) ), I'm not so sure that this is "just part" of it.

The World on NPR was talking about classified subjects, and the expert (I don't recall who it was) made an interesting statement.  She said that when something is classified, part of the process is to list, specifically, how national security could be hurt if this information was revealed.  Point by point the person who classifies it has to state how our country's security could be impaired unless the information was kept secret.

So if Trump inadvertently revealed classified information to the wrong parties (such as the Russian press), there is an actual checklist somewhere that lists how Trump could have hurt our national security.

I would be interested in seeing that checklist, so long as it isn't classified, too.

So while legal, this has the potential of being a serious mistake.  Not just "finding something" to impeach him with.

(And, btw, don't forget that he is a clown. (http://wpcomics.washingtonpost.com/client/wpc/db/2017/05/14/) :) )
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 17, 2017, 03:56:15 PM
Quote
There is also Trump publicly inviting Russia to engage in hacking of the DNC and releasing the information

LR, has your account been hacked? You are not the type to say the thing which is not.

At worst reasonable reading, Trump "invite"  Russia, not to hack, but to disclose what it had already hacked.  Unless you are clawing Clinton a perjurer, her stuff was no longer onlune, ergo unhackable.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on May 17, 2017, 04:56:24 PM

Quote
Let's see the proof on Russian collusion, period end of story, now.

There is already publicly disclosed proof

OMG.  There literally is not, everything you cite is literally garbage not proof.

Quote
- two Trump campaign officials lied to congress about their contact with Russia including the current AG - when lawyers commit a felony there is usually a very good reason.

In what world was either of Flynn or Sessions a "campaign official"?  Flynn was appointed to head the NSA, had the highest clearance from the Obama admin and was vetted and approved from Congress.  He was fired within 2 weeks of the admin realizing he'd lied about a conversation with Russia, in a conversation that he legally could have had a few weeks later.

The Sesssions lie idea is total bull *censored*.  I've read those transcripts multiple times he was asked about his involvement with Russia on behalf of the administration not in his entire history of public service, and he corrected his statement and even went so far as to unnecessarily recuse himself. 

Neither of this claims relate in any way to any meaningful collusion claim for the administration or the campaign.  They are literally the definition of de minimus and after the fact.

Quote
There are 5 known members of Trump campaign who had contact with Russia.

In what way?  There literally 10's of millions of Americans that have had "contact" with Russia, are they all part of a nefarious plot too?   Good lord, you'd be hard pressed to meet any New Yorker who doesn't know a Russian emigrant.

Quote
Trump told Comey to end the Russian investigation...

Really?  Please provide the quote, cause what was cited in the Comey memo is no where close to what you just claimed.

Quote
...and then Trump fired Comey using an obvious lie as the stated reason (then later coming clean that he planned to fire Comey regardless, and also suggesting that ending the Russian investigation was part of the reason).

Lol.  Firing Comey is the one thing that every liberal demanded over the last few months, what hypocrites.  There is no reasonable way to believe that firing Comey would have any impact on the Russian investigation, and sworn testimony by the acting head of the FBI exists saying it did not have such an impact.

Quote
There is also Trump publicly inviting Russia to engage in hacking of the DNC and releasing the information.

Wow.  Just wow.

I can see that there will be no way to come to grips here.  You don't have evidence, nor will you need it, you have partisan outrage and that is far better than real facts.  Interpretation is better than proof anyway as it can be based on anything and can't be undone in the mind of the believer.

Quote
Of course the FBI has yet to make a full case, but what is known is already quite damning.

Or if you look at it objectively, utterly unconvincing.  If there is proof of collusion, or even reasonable evidence put it on the table.  But what you just cited is less damning than the evidence presented in traffic court in cases that get dismissed.

So far, by the way, what I've review of your lies links isn't much better.  He's definitely been caught out in misstatements, or more usually not remembering what he actually said.  I know plenty of people who are the same way in day to day life and no one goes around calling them proven liars.  lol.  But like I suspected, a huge pile of the apparent "lie" is little more than deliberately unfavorable interpretation. 

Really though you just engaged in an avoidance behavior.  Tell me specifically which things you think are lies he has been caught in.  I'll research them on my own, but I want you to commit to them first.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on May 17, 2017, 04:59:29 PM
The World on NPR was talking about classified subjects, and the expert (I don't recall who it was) made an interesting statement.  She said that when something is classified, part of the process is to list, specifically, how national security could be hurt if this information was revealed.  Point by point the person who classifies it has to state how our country's security could be impaired unless the information was kept secret.

So if Trump inadvertently revealed classified information to the wrong parties (such as the Russian press), there is an actual checklist somewhere that lists how Trump could have hurt our national security.

The National Archives would beg to differ on this.

There are thousands of "Classified documents" stashed away in the National Archives awaiting declassification at this time which were classified only by virtue of the space in which they were in. So there is plenty of "classified material" out there reminding government workers of important appointments for themselves, their children, and/or their significant others, among other things.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: LetterRip on May 17, 2017, 05:02:49 PM
Quote
There is also Trump publicly inviting Russia to engage in hacking of the DNC and releasing the information

LR, has your account been hacked? You are not the type to say the thing which is not.

At worst reasonable reading, Trump "invite"  Russia, not to hack, but to disclose what it had already hacked.  Unless you are clawing Clinton a perjurer, her stuff was no longer onlune, ergo unhackable.

He said he 'Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing'.  So I agree my characterization of 'hack the DNC' is inaccurate.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on May 17, 2017, 05:12:28 PM
The Times report said that Trump revealed the city in Syria where the information was obtained. This would presumably allow Russia to identify the local network within which the intelligence asset is embedded. The fact that our incompetent braggart of a president is compromising our allies' intelligence assets in Syria to Russia IS actually objectionable, regardless of whether or not it is technically within the presidential prerogative. Regardless of our puppet president's claims, the reality remains that Putin hasn't been on exactly the same page as the US and her allies in regards to Syria...

On a more personal note, y'all traitors who keep crying "Fake News!" and denying that Putin is puppet-playing our a$$es, are doing nothing more than showcasing the obvious biases y'all already put on record back when you were passing around Russian propaganda last fall. Y'all heard the a$$ clown ask Russia to hack his political opposition ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL, and y'all cheered when it actually happened--then you voted your treasonously partisan consciences to put a traitorous liar into office.

Quote
Let's see the proof on Russian collusion, period end of story, now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gNa2B5zHfbQ

So tired of watching you traitors pretend to be patriotic. Y'all aren't patriots--you're partisans. You're so hypocritically biased that you can't tell the difference.

godsblackestcrow: Please see your email. -OrneryMod
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on May 17, 2017, 06:14:04 PM
Hmm.

I thought I was relatively restrained there...I wrote it last night, then slept on it before posting...I even erased the paragraph that had all the "*censored* yous" in it...

Tell me, Mod: what word would you recommend instead of "traitor," if the intent is to point out that a pattern of partisan actions has attained the level of literal treason, but the word needs to pass some arbitrary standard of politically correct insultlessness?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on May 17, 2017, 06:37:10 PM
Lol.  Firing Comey is the one thing that every liberal demanded over the last few months, what hypocrites.  There is no reasonable way to believe that firing Comey would have any impact on the Russian investigation, and sworn testimony by the acting head of the FBI exists saying it did not have such an impact.
Criticizing Comey isn't the same as demanding he'd be fired. ETA: You can make a start on supporting the "every liberal" claim by quoting where Obama demanded Comey be fired.

And you really don't think the new director isn't going to be affected by the possibility that supporting the Russia investigation will get him fired? Even if Comey's firing didn't have an impact, that doesn't mean his predecessor won't have one. If nothing else, the credibility of the investigation just got blown all to hell if it returns a null verdict.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on May 17, 2017, 08:49:08 PM
Well now that a Special Counsel has been appointed I guess we'll see.  Can't decide yet if this will turn out to be a good thing for Trump or not.  If there isn't any collusion it seems like this will get put to bed, on the other hand no prosecutor ever likes to not bring any charges.  Be really interesting to see if we get surprise charges against leakers out of it.

NobleHunter, I honestly don't think there's any risk at all that the next FBI director would have been intimidated by what happened to Comey.  I really don't think rational insiders look at the situation and think Comey was fired because of a Russian investigation that firing him did nothing to stop.  What would have happened was it would have created a black cloud over any finding by the investigation that nothing untoward happened, which is still - by far - the most likely result of this.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on May 17, 2017, 11:02:50 PM
A rational insider would understand that Comey got fired because he would not kiss the ring.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 17, 2017, 11:25:34 PM
Hmm.

I thought I was relatively restrained there...I wrote it last night, then slept on it before posting...I even erased the paragraph that had all the "*censored* yous" in it...

Tell me, Mod: what word would you recommend instead of "traitor," if the intent is to point out that a pattern of partisan actions has attained the level of literal treason, but the word needs to pass some arbitrary standard of politically correct insultlessness?

I'm just reading this for the first time, so I'm not the one that reported you for this ... in my book, a woeful ignorance of legal definitions is not a suspension level offense.  The cure to ignorance is knowledge.

Treason is defined in the constitution.  I strongly suggest that you look it up, before you use the term again.

The answer to your question is "espionage."  The putative crime which Trump may or may not have committed (based on Congress' interpretation in a putative impeachment trial) is espionage.  Not treason.  At worst possible interpretation he's done what Chelsea Manning did.

==============
Quote
Lol.  Firing Comey is the one thing that every liberal demanded over the last few months, what hypocrites.

Not true.  I defended Comey when he said that the investigation was over; I defended him when he announced it had re-opened, and I defend him now.  He was placed in an impossible situation where ethics contradicted law, and made what I see as the most honorable choice under the circumstances.  You may not agree with his decision, but if you do not concede that he put his conscience ahead of his career, then you have some explaining to do to retain my respect.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 17, 2017, 11:54:28 PM
Y'all heard the a$$ clown ask Russia to hack his political opposition ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL, and y'all cheered when it actually happened

Or maybe he was satirically alluding to the fact that apparently the only way to get the truth out of the DNC is to have a third party hack them and reveal what they won't admit themselves. In the case of Hillary in particular there is no defensible way to claim that she was forthcoming with making her official files transparent, or even disclosing close to what was asked of her (it is factually incontrovertible that she claimed she turned over everything when she had not, and made efforts to scrub much of it). Therefore Trump's comment about Russia finding her missing files again alludes to the fact that the only apparent way to get transparency is to have files leaked by sources such as Wikileaks or Guccifer (which was blamed on Russia). At the time, and still to this time, I read Trump's comment as being a sardonic joke about the fact that even hackers are more honest than Hillary. The joke was about Hillary's unwillingness to turn over her material, not about actually requesting Russian espionage to dial it up a notch. But of course par for the course as this point is for any comment to be taken out of context, and for any flavor intention to be removed when being misinterpreted so that a sarcastic comment will be read seriously, or vice versa. To be fair this is partly Trump's fault because while he's capable enough of coloring his live comments with 'tude it often won't translate very well in written form such as on Twitter. As we just saw from the quote about cancelling white house press briefings, it's not always easy to parse whether Trump is being serious or not, and that's on him. It certainly makes it easier for people to misinterpret what he means, just as I believe you did with the comment you are referring to.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on May 18, 2017, 01:21:17 AM
Fenring:

So...Trump is too much of a liar to take what he says at face value? Awesome defense of your persistent defense of the man...

I thought you were the type who liked to pretend that truth matters, and that there is supposed to be some kind of dignity to the office of the POTUS, Fen...what's up with this constant stream of defense for this untruthful, undignified, un-American clown which I keep seeing flowing from your pen?

Keep telling yourself you're just siding with the legitimate winner of the democratic process because the hate is coming from biased leftist liberal losers, if you like, but you might be careful how you bend your brand around kissing the ass of the powers the be, brother--for all the disclaimers of distaste and independence that preface the side-taking tune you keep singing, surely you'll understand that people will end up seeing which part you always seem to end up taking, in the end...

Pete:

What's your point? That we're not technically at war with Putin and his peeps, so I haven't given a proper reason for calling Trump's treachery treason?

Putin's an enemy of the US, in my book, Pete, regardless of how modern, post-cold war conventions may have muddled our postmodern definitions of war. And the video I posted was of Trump promising our "adversaries" that they would be rewarded if they attacked our country.

That constitutes treason, yo.

The *censored* I care if all this partisan bull*censored* has the whole herd of sheep too confused to admit that the basic facts read so?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 18, 2017, 02:04:16 AM
So...Trump is too much of a liar to take what he says at face value? Awesome defense of your persistent defense of the man...

No, it means that it's all too easy to bend a quote to mean whatever one wants to.

Quote
I thought you were the type who liked to pretend that truth matters, and that there is supposed to be some kind of dignity to the office of the POTUS

There's a difference between acknowledging that the current President doesn't live up to the dignity of his office, and between saying he should be impeached on principle. It does an even greater injustice to the office to refuse to allow the President to do his job because you don't like him. There's a difference between not liking someone (even if justified) and firing them. It's not like the people howling about Trump are actively preventing some kind of real disaster, as in, their complaints will cause Trump to consider his actions more carefully. All it does is create a maelstrom of noise that he has to deal with while trying to do the job at the same time. Overall I see it as weakening the country in the strange hope that a precedent is set wherein a President can be removed from office due to complaints, like what happened to Brendan Eich. Whoever sees that kind of scenario as a win is only shooting themselves in the foot down the road.

Quote
Keep telling yourself you're just siding with the legitimate winner of the democratic process because the hate is coming from biased leftist liberal losers, if you like, but you might be careful how you bend your brand around kissing the ass of the powers the be, brother--for all the disclaimers of distaste and independence that preface the side-taking tune you keep singing, surely you'll understand that people will end up seeing which part you always seem to end up taking, in the end...

Why don't you tell me which part I always seem to end up taking? Please include in your analysis any threads about Bernie's campaign, and going back a bit further, about the Bush admin.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on May 18, 2017, 04:36:54 AM
Quote
No, it means that it's all too easy to bend a quote to mean whatever one wants to.
:lol:

Sooth. The craft in any spell is in the reading...

But your failure to read this liar right seems to be based in denying the power of subtext--as if the conspiring context around quoted text can't simply be taken as a given.

This traitor whose part I keep reading you as taking not only called upon our adversaries to attack our nation through the commission of espionage against his political opponents, but after our adversaries committed the espionage he publicly requested, the traitor and his partisan followers were among the principal disseminators of the stolen information (you know, those "Wikileaks" that you seem to be reluctant to admit were really always Russian propaganda which our intelligence services have told us were illegally obtained through foreign espionage in a directed attack against our country).

The way you seem to want to read things allows the liar to box up and keep the cake he's already ordered and eaten.
Quote
There's a difference between acknowledging that the current President doesn't live up to the dignity of his office, and between saying he should be impeached on principle.
Who the *censored* is claiming that principle has *censored*-all to do with any of this!? I'm of the mind that y'all mob-minded dumbocracy-sheep just definitively proved that your principles have not a *censored* thing to do with your politics (which is actually what I've been saying all along)!

Please remember that y'all partisans just surpassed the point in American history where your political hatred for your fellow Americans grew large enough for half of the *censored*ing country to treasonously help the Russians disseminate propaganda in a blatant attack on our political process.

What I'm saying--if you were asking--is that we should try and execute the orange traitor for inciting this act of mass treason. (I'd be amenable to locking up Hillary too, incidentally, if it would help nail the coffin on this bipartisan political system which is sabotaging our country...)
Quote
Why don't you tell me which part I always seem to end up taking?
I'm talking about the way I keep seeing you take the traitor's side, every time I drop by to see what my Ornery American friends are saying about the treasonous clown who the think-they're-right partisans have put into office.

And while it may read like I'm telling, in my spelling, I'm actually asking, Fenring: why are you selling your credibility out by constantly defending this obvious traitor and fraud?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on May 18, 2017, 08:19:45 AM
Ah, well. Good to see that some people are adhering to the time honored traditions of guilty until proven innocent, and trial by angry mob.

That always helps society get to great things.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Mynnion on May 18, 2017, 09:16:16 AM
A couple of quick thoughts.

Is Trump innocent of all of the allegations being thrown around surrounding Russia?  I believe there is enough smoke to warrant a thorough investigation.  If we want to insure the the integrity of our Democratic system we need our leaders to hold more loyalty to the country than they do to the party.  That means that "We the People" need to lead by example and call for greater integrity in our leaders.  The question becomes how broad a scope the investigation entails.  Should the scope be limited to collusion or broad enough to look at any Russian manipulation?  I am personally sick of investigations designed to specifically target a political opponent.  That undermines are system of justice.

There is plenty of room to criticize both parties and instead of blindly reacting to protect those we see as ideologically similar we need to start listening to opposing views respectfully.  Some of what both sides is garbage but much is real and shouldn't be ignored.

If Comey was removed for the stated reasons.  Great.  If he was however removed for not "kissing the ring" than that can have a negative impact on anyone Trump chooses to replace him.

One thing I know for sure is that I am glad it is not my job to defend the constant chaos that seems to surround Trump.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on May 18, 2017, 09:42:39 AM
Ahh... so it's foulest treachery when the Russian's hack the DNC or Hillary and reveal that they have been lying to the American population and directly manipulating the Presidential election, without Russia violating any duty owed to them, but it's all for a noble cause when intelligence officials commit a crime to reveal legal conversations of a President, the revelation of which harms the national interests for purely partisan reasons.

Maybe check your outrage when you go around labeling your political opponents traitors and ignoring actual treachery that serves your cause.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 18, 2017, 10:24:39 AM
And while it may read like I'm telling, in my spelling, I'm actually asking, Fenring: why are you selling your credibility out by constantly defending this obvious traitor and fraud?

I think you'll find maybe one poster on this site tops who actually endorses Trump in some capacity. For the rest you seem to be losing perspective of context and assuming that being critical of bad methods is the same as being on the side of the person towards whom they're directed. That's a really bad assumption. In fact, it's the kind of partisan assumption that leads to sacrificing the system just to ensure there's no possible chance that the other side gains any benefit whatsoever. This is not merely counter-productive, but also goes against the spirit of good governance, which is that improvements should be made to benefit all, not just those in one's own party. It would benefit all for the media landscape to change, and I will happily post criticism of their bad methods regardless of which side is the current recipient of their nonsense. Since Trump is the sort to constantly occupy media attention it should come as no surprise that he will happen to be the one on the receiving end much of the time.

Before jumping into a diatribe against Ornery members you might stop to first ask them what point they're actually trying to make rather than assuming they've taken a side.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 18, 2017, 11:18:34 AM
Quote
Pete:

What's your point? That we're not technically at war with Putin and his peeps, so I haven't given a proper reason for calling Trump's treachery treason?
 

"technically"?  We're not at war.  Period.
Quote
Putin's an enemy of the US, in my book, Pete, regardless of how modern, post-cold war conventions may have muddled our postmodern definitions of war.

The US constitution is inot a "modern, post-cold war convention." Give it a read some time.  And you are not the one who designates the US' enemy -- that job goes to Congress.

Putin's a horrible person, but so was Stalin, and Stalin was our ally against Hitler.  And when someone leaked information about our nukes to Stalin, that was espionage, not treason.  You going to pretend that Putin is a worse guy than Stalin?

Given that espionage and treason both scale up to the death penalty, I don't know why you're bitching and balking over the word "espionage."  You asked for the right word, and I gave it to you.
Quote
And the video I posted was of Trump promising our "adversaries" that they would be rewarded if they attacked our country.

Huh?  Where? <goes fishing>
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 18, 2017, 11:27:49 AM
Quote
And the video I posted was of Trump promising our "adversaries" that they would be rewarded if they attacked our country.
:o

Checks link, and sorely disappointed.  "Attacked our country" -- you mean providing America with the stuff that American courts had demanded by subpoena?  And "rewarded by our press" ...

I've never seen you so sold out to a political party that you would bend the facts and words that way.  For all your flaws you were an independent thinker.

If I were to publicly ask Russia to publish Trump's tax statements if they have them, or to tell us who killed JFK, would you call me a traitor for that?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on May 19, 2017, 02:49:34 AM
Quote
The US constitution is inot a "modern, post-cold war convention."
Of course it isn't--you need to re-read what I said. The US constitution is a pre-modern, relatively obsolete document which was written without any understanding of what modern statecraft conventions would be 2+ centuries after it was drafted. The fact that it limits the power to declare war to Congress, for example, hasn't stopped the modern America of our lifetimes from ignoring the irrelevant, obsolete stipulation of the constitution, and adapting to modern conventions by engaging in war after war with nary a declaration of war from the body which ostensibly has the sole power to initiate war.

Your argument seems to pretend that adhering to, aiding and colluding with Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War wouldn't have been treason because Congress never officially declared war against Iraq.
Quote
"Attacked our country" -- you mean providing America with the stuff that American courts had demanded by subpoena?
No...I mean what I said: that an American calling for a foreign adversary to commit espionage against fellow Americans constitutes treason.

When did you sell out your ethics so hard that you decided that treasonous, illegal means are justified by the possibility of attaining politically preferred ends?
Quote
I've never seen you so sold out to a political party
No, you haven't. And that's not what you're seeing here, either.

I'm not shilling for loser liberals here--I'm railing against traitors and partisan tyranny.
 
The actual sell-outs here are the folks who completely abandoned their ethics and patriotism the second they found an end that they wanted badly enough to justify traitorous, criminal means.

On an emotional level, I sympathize with y’all (and I don't mean "thou" when I refer to "ye," excepting insofar as thou wouldst self-identify as part of my object's plurality). It’s my opinion that Clinton is a liar whose arrogant disregard for vitally important national security procedures endangered us all. I wanted to see the evidence she burned.

But on an intellectual integrity level, I've never been so disgusted with my fellow Americans. If there be such a thing as Justice, it most hold that just ends do not justify unjust means.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on May 19, 2017, 03:05:32 AM
Quote
Before jumping into a diatribe against Ornery members you might stop to first ask them what point they're actually trying to make rather than assuming they've taken a side.
Lol!

Don’t get too bent, Fenring--diatribe is simply the font I use whenever I’m wielding a pen.

All I’m really saying in your direction is that it disappoints me to see you painting yourself Orange so often these days.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on May 19, 2017, 03:16:34 AM
Quote
Ahh... so it's foulest treachery when the Russian's hack the DNC or Hillary and reveal that they have been lying to the American population and directly manipulating the Presidential election
Nah...the foulest treachery is committed by biased partisans who pretend to have principles while they bend their ethics one way to catch crooks who aren’t on their team, and then bend their ethics the other way defending crooks who are on their side.

You know--it's those hypocrites who want to bend the law to hold an opponent politician to the fire when the crooked liar has negligently disregarded national security protocols, but then turn around and defend another crooked liar who has similarly negligently disregarded national security protocols, simply because he’s on their political team…

Those are the foully treacherous folk, to my mind. It’s the pretense to principles that gets my goat, if you know what I mean--they truly seem to believe themselves to be people of principle, even as they demonstrate themselves to be biased hypocrites, over and over again.

What's sad is that some of these hypocrites are some of the smartest people I meet. They're just blind to their biases, and oblivious to the way they use their intelligence with rankly partisan hypocrisy...
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 19, 2017, 03:20:28 AM
All I’m really saying in your direction is that it disappoints me to see you painting yourself Orange so often these days.

You should then be most displeased at the media centers I criticize. It's my duty to speak out against disinformation and propaganda, and when it happens to be leveled mostly against a schlub like Trump it's doubly vexing because I end up having to take sides against those attacking Trump (which as I mentioned is not the same as taking sides *with* Trump).
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on May 19, 2017, 04:38:06 AM
Quote
You should then be most displeased at the media centers I criticize.
;D

Whoever said I wasn't? If you haven't noticed, my displeasure is great enough to go around.

To be honest with you, though, I'm less displeased with the mainstream media these days than I am with social media.

In the last decade, the masses have acquired powers of publication which vastly exceed the powers possessed by the mainstream corporate publishers of yesteryear. But we are not using these powers to expand knowledge and truth--we are using them as an unruly mob is wont to do: spreading lies, and gossip and innuendo--disseminating untruth.

It's not the journalists in the mainstream media who are really lying to the average Joe. It's us--the mob of know-nothing liars on his Facebook page whom Joe trusts, in spite of the fact that we refuse to check our sources as a rule, and we generally don't even know what journalistic ethics are--much less hold ourselves accountable to any such protocols whenever we spew the ignorant nonsense we do.

What I think happened is that, when we developed technology which eliminated the cost of publication, we also eliminated the processes and systematic practices which functioned to curate the expensive published content.

You can blame the mainstream institutions if you like--I won't welcome you to Ornery over it: the idea isn't wrong. They've always had an angle, and they're still mostly just snowing us to sell us *censored*. But if you're asking me for my opinion, we are the real problem. We just don't care enough about truth not to spread our own stupidity.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 19, 2017, 08:37:04 AM
Quote
The US constitution is inot a "modern, post-cold war convention."
Of course it isn't--you need to re-read what I said. The US constitution is a pre-modern, relatively obsolete document which was written without any understanding of what modern statecraft conventions would be 2+ centuries after it was drafted. The fact that it limits the power to declare war to Congress, for example, hasn't stopped the modern America of our lifetimes from ignoring the irrelevant, obsolete stipulation of the constitution, and adapting to modern conventions by engaging in war after war with nary a declaration of war from the body which ostensibly has the sole power to initiate war.


If the Constitution is "irrelevant," then how come Trump's been stymied so far on the immigration front?

"Modern Statecraft" is more affected by the writing of the constitution and the memes introduced therein as the contemporary English Language is influenced by Shakespeare.  While it's arguably "pre-modern" it shaped much of what we call "modern" ergo remains relevant.

Congress has delegated its right to declare war.  It could easily strip those rights from the President.
Quote
Your argument seems to pretend that adhering to, aiding and colluding with Saddam Hussein during the Gulf War wouldn't have been treason because Congress never officially declared war against Iraq.

Reread the War Clause, which allows for numerous types of undeclared war.  Some of the War Clause measures (e.g. Trading with the Enemy Act which are based on the Captures clauses) were in effect against Saddam Hussein.

By your standards, we should try Obama for treason for dealing with Iran and with Cuba.  Your standard would also make FDR a "traitor" for aiding the soviet Union during WWII. And Truman a "traitor" for accepting a conditional surrender from Japan after the US had made perfectly clear that only an unconditional surrender would do.

Quote
No...I mean what I said: that an American calling for a foreign adversary to commit espionage against fellow Americans constitutes treason.

Reread what I said.  and what he said.  He called on Russia to disclose some of what it might have already have obtained through Espionage.  Calling for disclosure of espionage =/= calling for more espionage.  You're entirely without a leg to stand on here.
Quote
On an emotional level, I sympathize with y’all (and I don't mean "thou" when I refer to "ye," excepting insofar as thou wouldst self-identify as part of my object's plurality). It’s my opinion that Clinton is a liar whose arrogant disregard for vitally important national security procedures endangered us all. I wanted to see the evidence she burned.

But on an intellectual integrity level, I've never been so disgusted with my fellow Americans. If there be such a thing as Justice, it most hold that just ends do not justify unjust means.

Again, you err when you say that asking for *disclosure* of what might have been obtained via espionage, could be construed as treason.  That much isn't even espionage.  Disclosure of the unjust is just.  Truth is the whole foundation of justice; true justice cannot be founded on a lie.  And in Rwanda and South Africa, Disclosure of Truth by villains has sufficed for justice in its entirety, with peace as a result.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 19, 2017, 09:08:12 AM
Quote
You should then be most displeased at the media centers I criticize.
;D

Whoever said I wasn't? If you haven't noticed, my displeasure is great enough to go around.

To be honest with you, though, I'm less displeased with the mainstream media these days than I am with social media.

In the last decade, the masses have acquired powers of publication which vastly exceed the powers possessed by the mainstream corporate publishers of yesteryear. But we are not using these powers to expand knowledge and truth--we are using them as an unruly mob is wont to do: spreading lies, and gossip and innuendo--disseminating untruth.

Amen.  Welcome to the disinformation age.

Quote

It's not the journalists in the mainstream media who are really lying to the average Joe.

I disagree.  Every "interview" that was scripted with Clinton, involved journalist collusion in a lie.  Every misleading assertion that Putin "rigged" or "hacked" the election, intentionally duped readers into believing that the vote itself had been manipulated.  Far more damaging than quibbling over how many folks showed up for Inauguration day.  (Big flogging deal, that)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 19, 2017, 09:10:00 AM
Quote
Nah...the foulest treachery is committed by biased partisans who pretend to have principles while they bend their ethics one way to catch crooks who aren’t on their team, and then bend their ethics the other way defending crooks who are on their side.

When has it been otherwise?  This is precisely the state of affairs anticipated by the Constitution, hence all the anti-Democratic checks and balances.
Quote
When did you sell out your ethics so hard that you decided that treasonous, illegal means are justified by the possibility of attaining politically preferred ends?
Since I've never used the word "treason" as broadly you have, since reading the constitution, I cannot be said to have sold out my ethics in this matter.  I disagree with your ethics.  That's all.  And I think that if you think the matter through to its logical conclusion, that you will disagree with your ethics as well.

As for my "politically preferred ends", I did not vote for Trump.  And even pretending that I was now a Trump supporter, what "politically preferred end" am I serving by saying that the proper crime to charge is espionage, not treason?  If I wanted Trump[ to succeed, then I'd quietly laugh up my sleeve as his enemies raised charges that could not possibly stick.  Overcharging is the reason that death-dealing thug Damien "Football" Williams walked free after the whole nation had seen him shoot and bludgeon Reginald Denny on national TV.

Truth and accuracy aren't politically preferred ends.  They are ethical principles, and I think you will agree with me when your blood cools.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on May 19, 2017, 09:32:58 AM
Quote
Ahh... so it's foulest treachery when the Russian's hack the DNC or Hillary and reveal that they have been lying to the American population and directly manipulating the Presidential election
Nah...the foulest treachery is committed by biased partisans who pretend to have principles while they bend their ethics one way to catch crooks who aren’t on their team, and then bend their ethics the other way defending crooks who are on their side.

Then you are arguing against a strawman.  Evidence of a crime should be pursued no matter who its against.

Holding however, the Trump admin responsible to a political standard, while exculpating the Clinton campaign on a legal standard is rank hypocrisy.  Colluding with CNN to influence an election is FAR more likely to have an impact than colluding with the Russians would.  Whether Russian hackers, US hackers or some poor kid working for the DNC who mysteriously ended up murdered in a robbery where nothing was stolen, revealed a secret shouldn't make a bit of difference to your level of outrage, yet it only matters to the Dems if the Russians did it.

Trying to make a laughable comment asking the Russian's to find Hillary's 30k missing emails, into a bigger issue than the fact that there were 30k missing emails is just pure partisan media manipulation.

Quote
You know--it's those hypocrites who want to bend the law to hold an opponent politician to the fire when the crooked liar has negligently disregarded national security protocols, but then turn around and defend another crooked liar who has similarly negligently disregarded national security protocols, simply because he’s on their political team…

Or maybe the hypocrite is the one who writes a sentence directly equate an actual violation of the language of a statute with something that isn't against the law.

I started this with a specific demand.  Show the actual evidence of collusion.  Any competent prosecutor - that isn't a partisan - would have found enough in Clinton's fact pattern to indict anyone not named Clinton.  If something even remotely plausible comes out about Trump, there is no doubt they will act on it.

Quote
Those are the foully treacherous folk, to my mind. It’s the pretense to principles that gets my goat, if you know what I mean--they truly seem to believe themselves to be people of principle, even as they demonstrate themselves to be biased hypocrites, over and over again.

How you like living in a glass house?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 19, 2017, 10:33:57 AM
Quote
asking the Russian's to find Hillary's 30k missing emails,

Let us be clear -- he wasn't asking them to go obtain them, but rather to disclose *if* they had obtained them.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on May 19, 2017, 01:22:19 PM
I started this with a specific demand.  Show the actual evidence of collusion.  Any competent prosecutor - that isn't a partisan - would have found enough in Clinton's fact pattern to indict anyone not named Clinton.  If something even remotely plausible comes out about Trump, there is no doubt they will act on it.

Agreed, but I've been saying as much since before Trump was elected. The Media is holding true to predictions, with the scant evidence they DO have, they're already screaming about why there isn't an impeachment process already underway. If they actually had something that wasn't simply rumor and innuendo the Republican Leadership in congress would help push Trump in front of bus, that they'll also gleefully help schedule, to get him out the way so he isn't "an ongoing embarrassment"  for their idea of the GOP.

They're not going to circle the wagons around him like happened for the Clintons, recently or back in the 90's.

But this goes back to the Trump Admin being comedy gold, Donald Trump is perhaps "the most impeachable President" we've ever had, even without any criminal wrong-doing on his part, certainly so in recent history. The problem they have is they first have to catch him "doing something." That he's not getting caught is turning into a strong indicator he's probably not doing much in the "criminal deeds" department. (Unethical is another matter, but ethical and legal are not one and the same)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on May 19, 2017, 01:26:33 PM
The missing email comment was easily Trump's finest moment in the election, the only time I actually laughed out loud. I think it's pretty clear what Trump meant by that comment and I fully support him in that. I find the suggestion that he was promoting espionage hilarious - nearly as hilarious as the original comment.

It just goes to show that even a sleazy reality star gets it right occasionally. They say that the "deplorables" comment lost the election for Hillary but I'd say the missing email comment might have won it for Trump.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 19, 2017, 03:17:00 PM
Crow is no partisan hack but like me sometimes gets an odd bee in his britches. I honest don't understand his PoV on that harmless remark.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on May 23, 2017, 07:25:23 AM
Quote
Truth and accuracy aren't politically preferred ends.  They are ethical principles, and I think you will agree with me when your blood cools.
Caw caw caw.

Haven’t you heard? My beak is steeped in blood that burns with that fire which never cools.
Quote
By your standards, we should try Obama for treason for dealing with Iran and with Cuba.
...Hmm...I guess so...maybe if we really squint? Here: let me help you fit your analogy to my standardized script:

If--nine years ago--Obama had publicly asked Cuba to commit espionage against McCain while on the campaign trail, and then Wikileaks released a load of stolen internal communications from the Republican campaign, and Obama stumped on reopening a closed federal investigation into McCain’s mishandling of classified information, and then the FBI director announced that he needed to reopen the McCain investigation to sort through all of McCain’s aide’s husband’s dick pics to see if McCain had exposed anything highly private to Cuban spies, and then our National Security apparatus publicly announced that Cuba had been behind the leak in an act of espionage specifically targeting Republicans in order to influence our election...then I might have been laughing my ass off at this failing American democracy experiment of y’all’s, but I do think I’d also have been pointing out that Obama’s “joke” asking Cuban spies to help him win the election was a gag that, in context, quacked like treason...

Wouldn’t you?

If it also happened that, a year prior to the 2008 election, “Cuba” had invaded the southern half of “Nicaragua” to build a waterway to move billions of dollars worth of “cigars” into the Pacific, and Obama had campaigned on reneging on defense commitments to a “North America Central America Treaty Organization” which (in hypothetical history) had been vital to American security interests for all of living memory, and then it came out that Obama’s campaign manager also had been on the payroll as a lobbyist for the pro-”Cuban” occupation faction in “Nicaragua,” and less than a month after Obama took office, his National Security Advisor got fired for lying about having talked to the “Cuban” Ambassador, about relaxing sanctions imposed by Bush in response to the “Cuban” occupation of “Nicaragua,” and it came out that Obama’s business partners had been drafting “peace” plans permitting Cuba to keep the southern half of Nicaragua for the next century, while other members of Obama’s circle were brokering eleven figure deals for stakes of Cuban cigar companies, and Obama was all the while waging war against America’s fourth Estate for constantly pointing out what a liar he kept proving himself to be...well,yeah--I really do think I’d have been mocking liberal sheep who presumably would have been screaming that all the reports were “Fake News” in the shrillest leftspeak screech which is audible to the human ear…

What about you?
 
Quote
Since I've never used the word "treason" as broadly you have, since reading the constitution, I cannot be said to have sold out my ethics in this matter.  I disagree with your ethics.
Lookit: I’m no lawyer, but every ornery American knows that the American “Justice” system is never going to convict a big league politician of high crimes. There wasn’t any way the Blue team was gonna let the Red team burn the Witch, and there’s no way Putin’s faux-gold Puppet is coming out of the deal he made with the Russian devil without yet another deal for a pardon and a full emolument on the back end from Uncle Sam. The history of American Justice will read just as it always reads...

So if y’all purpose to prosecute the point to the point that I have to lawyer up, I’ll concede I’d have to plead “no contest” to a count of the crime of hyperbole for suggesting we should string the turncoat turkey up--I’m not seriously calling to for the crowd to lynch the man, just to feed the crows (I don’t even recognize trial process of the court to be valid, to be honest--which I kinda figured some of y’all might get). But I’m calling this anti-American partisanship Treason, and I’m just fine with my reasons: my kind may come to crow in murders, but y’all’s a raven mob.

And...for real, Pete? Never mind for a minute the way you think I’m mis-crossing my T’s against Traitors, Treason and Treachery--you’re really telling me that, ethically, you see nothing wrong with each candidate calling for Russian spies to commit crimes to help him/her win the presidency, going forward, as long as he/she claims it’s a joke, and has enough partisan support?

Why don’t we just cut out the middleman, and put Putin in office?
Quote
Disclosure of the unjust is just.
Just never mind any unjust means, huh? Tell me: if an end is an end is an end, and justice is just how it just now is, then how does it happen that, no matter how you look at it, the unjust villain just ain’t ending up locked up?

Smh. Card ought to change the name of this place to the “Orangey American.” Never mind the way that red folk turned yellow, even the putatively purple people have been tainted by this agent Orange.

;)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on May 23, 2017, 07:34:42 AM
Quote
How you like living in a glass house?
:lol:

Life is but a stage, on mine stands no cage: my play gambols over shambles of shards. It’s sharp sometimes, but my claws are hard...
Quote
Holding however, the Trump admin responsible to a political standard, while exculpating the Clinton campaign on a legal standard is rank hypocrisy.  Colluding with CNN to influence an election is FAR more likely to have an impact than colluding with the Russians would.  Whether Russian hackers, US hackers or some poor kid working for the DNC who mysteriously ended up murdered in a robbery where nothing was stolen, revealed a secret shouldn't make a bit of difference to your level of outrage, yet it only matters to the Dems if the Russians did it.
I’m sorry--you were pointing out my partisan hypocrisy, and you lost me in your haste to get to your party: remind me where I exculpated Clinton of anything?

What should one do when a red pot retorts to a raven-colored kettle that red is rubber, and black is actually blue?

Seriesly, who the *censored* do you think you’re talking to?

I’m not actually one of them Dems, but even I think it’s funny to see you pretend that they weren’t outraged by the scenes where the Clinton machine colluded with the media mainstream. Anyone not stuck seeing straight red could tell you that the leftmost half of the Democrats haven’t stopped complaining about exactly that since the 2008 primaries! Don’t you suspect that at least some “level of outrage” over CNN feeding Clinton questions (at a Democrat primary townhall) came from folks wearing blue in the Bernie camp?

Do you ever publish points that aren’t first filtered through a biased-partisan-hypocrite-talking-point-generation machine?

By the way, you forgot to mention the pizza shop basement pedophilia ring--I’m pretty sure that’s tied together with the DNC intern murder thing, even if the connection is shrouded in mystery--undoubtedly because isn’t getting the coverage it deserves from the mainstream media. Let us know when you and your completely credible buddies Alex Jones and Kim Dotcom crack the Clinton-has-been-secretly-assassinating-her-way-to-the-top case, K?
Quote
I started this with a specific demand.  Show the actual evidence of collusion.
I already did. You can claim the liar was just joking when he publicly asked Russian spies to help him win, but you might keep in mind the fact that federal judges have already ruled that the things Trump said on the campaign trail can and will be used against him in a court of law.

History is going to be laughing at that joke for a while...
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on May 23, 2017, 07:42:47 AM
Quote
The missing email comment was easily Trump's finest moment in the election,
Welcome to Ornery, you’re wrong. His finest (and funniest) line was easily the “pardon me” punchline at the Al Smith dinner: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXDoP-gH4aE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXDoP-gH4aE)
Quote
I think it's pretty clear what Trump meant by that comment and I fully support him in that. I find the suggestion that he was promoting espionage hilarious - nearly as hilarious as the original comment
The thing about irony is that it reflects the way reality belies the way you think you see a thing.

The fact that a joke is a joke, doesn’t prove that the subtext isn't true...
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on May 23, 2017, 10:01:57 AM
Crow is no partisan hack but like me sometimes gets an odd bee in his britches. I honest don't understand his PoV on that harmless remark.

I can only base my opinions on the words he chooses to share, which I generally find excessively patronizing.  Maybe you can point out where I missed something he wrote that isn't excessively political and excessively one sided.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Crunch on May 23, 2017, 10:08:30 AM
The thing about irony is that it reflects the way reality belies the way you think you see a thing.

The fact that a joke is a joke, doesn’t prove that the subtext isn't true...
Along those lines, this happened... (http://freebeacon.com/politics/reporters-fall-for-fake-document-showing-trump-making-insane-demands-in-israel/)
Quote
Reporters on Monday fell for a fake "White House" document that supposedly showed President Donald Trump making unusual demands of his Israeli hosts during his trip abroad.

This was shared and propagated by reporters at the Jerusalem Post, Business Insider, the Nation, NBC News, the Washington Post, and Mother Jones and retweeted quite a few times (over 2000).  Among the demands: 8 Hungry Man Fried Chicken Dinners (frozen), 2 cartons KFC paper napkins (must be KFC), 6 boxes double stuffed Oreos (unwrapped, stacked in rows of 8 ), 9 lbs bacon (uncooked). The list was fairly extensive and absurd.

How anyone bought into such an obvious joke (and a pretty funny one at that) is surprising.  That reporters covering Trump not only bought into it but pushed it should be quite worrisome to everyone.  The Washington Post went back and deleted their tweet once they realized they'd been had - down the memory hole for them, also a worrisome practice.

The end result, with all the anonymous sources people so easily duped claim to have, is that the majority of Americans no longer believe anything coming out of the news media.  Obviously for very good reason. Fake news is a standard now, so common that you can no longer tell the fake from the real.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on May 23, 2017, 10:42:58 AM
If--nine years ago--Obama had publicly asked Cuba to commit espionage against McCain while on the campaign trail, and then Wikileaks released a load of stolen internal communications from the Republican campaign,...

If that had occurred, we'd still, nine years later be seeing new stories in the MSM detrimental to the Republicans from either direct quotes in the email or "meta analysis" proving some version of the Republicans are racist, sexist, or homophobic, see,"only a racist would so consistently end their sentences with a preposition."

There is absolutely NO question the media wouldn't give two figs about the source if it damaged Republicans instead of Democrats (note all the "anonymous" sources committing literal treason that are protected by the media today, if they are anti-Trump).

Meanwhile, there are next to no stories about the substance of those leaked emails.  MSM successfully pivoted the entire country to focus on how the leak occurred and not the substance, but hypocritically, asking for the same treatment on anti-trump leaks is attempting to push a "false" narrative to protect the President.

Quote
...and Obama stumped on reopening a closed federal investigation into McCain’s mishandling of classified information, and then the FBI director announced that he needed to reopen the McCain investigation to sort through all of McCain’s aide’s husband’s dick pics to see if McCain had exposed anything highly private to Cuban spies,...

So what's this supposed to be equivalent to?  Did I miss where McCain actually committed a federal crime and the Bush administration refused to prosecute?  Where there was a secret meeting between two planes on a tarmac where the head of the Justice Department met secretly with McCain's wife (or is it only "obstruction" when a President has a meeting  and expresses his hope that a prosecution won't occur?)

If you want to play this game, play it straight, cause throwing down a pre-judged version of nonsense that doesn't matched what happened just proves a bias on your part to me.

Quote
and then our National Security apparatus publicly announced that Cuba had been behind the leak in an act of espionage specifically targeting Republicans in order to influence our election...

And then failed to ever put forward actual proof of the fact, while actual questions about whether their claim was politically motivated in the first place persist?  Where it became widely known that Cuba was not the only group that hacked them, that some of their staffers leaked information, including one killed execution style in the early morning in a "robbery" where nothing was stolen?

I don't dispute that Russians tried to meddle in the election using media influence.  Until the left invested them with mythical super spy/manipulation skills to explain an electoral embarrassment, the obvious intent of their actions was to cause President Clinton to have to spend years defending her own unethical actions. 

Quote
...then I might have been laughing my ass off at this failing American democracy experiment of y’all’s, but I do think I’d also have been pointing out that Obama’s “joke” asking Cuban spies to help him win the election was a gag that, in context, quacked like treason...

Wouldn’t you?

Actually no.  I'm not a moron, and I've pretty well established where I stand on the Rule of Law.  Even for someone like Obama, who in my view, routinely acted against the interests of and to the detriment of the country. 

Quote
Quote
Holding however, the Trump admin responsible to a political standard, while exculpating the Clinton campaign on a legal standard is rank hypocrisy.  Colluding with CNN to influence an election is FAR more likely to have an impact than colluding with the Russians would.  Whether Russian hackers, US hackers or some poor kid working for the DNC who mysteriously ended up murdered in a robbery where nothing was stolen, revealed a secret shouldn't make a bit of difference to your level of outrage, yet it only matters to the Dems if the Russians did it.
I’m sorry--you were pointing out my partisan hypocrisy, and you lost me in your haste to get to your party: remind me where I exculpated Clinton of anything?

What makes you think that was a personal comment?  Was it the vague reference to "Dems" or the prior history there on concepts like "partisans"?  Or just cause it's more convenient to try and defend the specific when you made the general charge initially?

Quote
Seriesly, who the *censored* do you think you’re talking to?

Don't know you at all.  You write like a literary student using words rather than substance to make your case.  I take issue with that.

Quote
I’m not actually one of them Dems, but even I think it’s funny to see you pretend that they weren’t outraged by the scenes where the Clinton machine colluded with the media mainstream. Anyone not stuck seeing straight red could tell you that the leftmost half of the Democrats haven’t stopped complaining about exactly that since the 2008 primaries! Don’t you suspect that at least some “level of outrage” over CNN feeding Clinton questions (at a Democrat primary townhall) came from folks wearing blue in the Bernie camp?

Actually that's kind of my point.  There is a huge chunk of outrage from the extreme left at the party bosses, there's even an active class action law suit by those claiming to be Bernie supporters, and you'd barely know it from the media coverage.  It's almost like there's a campaign to suppress that substantive issue or something.

Quote
Do you ever publish points that aren’t first filtered through a biased-partisan-hypocrite-talking-point-generation machine?

Of course, though not often on purely partisan talking point arguments.  It's hardly my fault that the only talking points from the left are iterations of stop Trump. 

Be happy to debate what the left wants to do on tax reform, or reforming Obamacare, or dealing with immigration and illegal immigration.  Oh wait, the left doesn't have to do any of that?  Why not again?  Of yeah, the claim that Republicans were the party of No so we can be the party of Resistance and refusing to "normalize" our opponents, and suppression of speech we don't like. 

Quote
By the way, you forgot to mention the pizza shop basement pedophilia ring--I’m pretty sure that’s tied together with the DNC intern murder thing, even if the connection is shrouded in mystery--undoubtedly because isn’t getting the coverage it deserves from the mainstream media.

I never read the pizza shop thing directly, what I have read is endless accounts of it as an example.  Is it the only example?  It would crack me up, if it weren't so sad, that the MSM believes that the pizza shop is the dangerous fake news, but their one sided bias and twisting of stories and narratives is just effective advocacy.

Quote
Quote
I started this with a specific demand.  Show the actual evidence of collusion.
I already did. You can claim the liar was just joking when he publicly asked Russian spies to help him win, but you might keep in mind the fact that federal judges have already ruled that the things Trump said on the campaign trail can and will be used against him in a court of law.

Lol.  You clearly know little about law.  A public claim can not be evidence of collusion.  Look up the word.

I get that District court judges have so ruled, an interesting Precedent - in my view unlikely to hold, may even be reversed by the liberal 9th Circuit.  And why?  Cause the flip side of it risks every the left holds dear, empowering everyone of the district judges to overrule facially legal rules because of what a politician once said exposes everything.

Think about it, Texas court bans all payments - Nationwide - to Planned Parenthood because of what a politician said in writing the bill that funds them and inputs that the bill was to fund abortion (illegal) despite that it doesn't do so facially.

Rejoicing in a nonsense standard that has district court judges replace the President's decision making with their own personal opinions is directly contrary to the rule of law, and really is only consistent with the idea of totalitarian rule by philosopher kings.  A judge ordering -nationwide - that the federal government must make payments to cities, replaces the authority of the legislature and the executive with his autocratic opinion. 

If you let the rule of law devolve into the ends justifies the means, it is a pendulum that swings both ways.  Don't believe its possible?  Did I ever tell you about the time the US elected one of the two worse presidential candidates in recent memory, this guy named Trump, and how he continued to blaze the trail of his immediate predecessor and tried to rule through executive orders?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on May 23, 2017, 03:31:28 PM
Now this is what I call Fake News:  out-and-out lying.

Newt Gingrich, Sean Hannity and Fox News claim that slain Democratic staffer gave WikiLeaks "something like 53,000 emails," not the Russians. (http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2017/may/23/newt-gingrich/claim-slain-dnc-staffer-seth-rich-gave-emails-wiki/)  (Although Fox did retract the report two days later.)

It's one thing to have a headline that isn't supported by the story.  But it's another thing when the story itself is pure speculation in an attempt to distract from a politically inconvenient fact.  Especially when it uses the death of someone as a basis for the lie.

That's fake news.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 23, 2017, 03:48:50 PM
It's one thing to have a headline that isn't supported by the story.  But it's another thing when the story itself is pure speculation in an attempt to distract from a politically inconvenient fact.  Especially when it uses the death of someone as a basis for the lie.

That's fake news.

Wait, so now you agree that it's fake news to accurately report on what someone said, when what is said happens to be inaccurate? If so I'm somewhat on your side, however you'd better be pretty darn sure the story is false before calling it a "lie". It's still propaganda to publish unsubstantiated rumors, even if somewhere hidden in an article it's stated that it's merely a theory. However in the case of this particular theory I've read a lot and I do not believe you have the basis to call the story false. In this instance I think the best you can do is to call the theory incorrect and lament that the usual suspects will disseminate anything that appears to support their side or hurt the other side. I'm quite sure that Politifact has zero capacity to know the truth of this theory, and the only basis for its claim that the story is false is that Wheeler retracted his certain-sounding comments and amended them to say he couldn't be certain since he didn't see the evidence first-hand. Great, so that means the matter is still up in the air or at worst unknowable. That's a far cry from calling the story an out-and-out lie.

Wikileaks themselves have been sort of hinting that it was Seth, even though they insist they will never divulge a source for any reason. But they do sometimes say things between the lines hope you'll connect the dots. Regardless of whether he was the actual leaker, Wikileaks was saying from the start that the files were leaked and not hacked. If you are so certain that the purveyors of the files themselves are lying about where they got them from, why don't you provide your conclusive, incontrovertible evidence to support the claim of calling the theory a lie (rather than just a shot in the dark)?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: cherrypoptart on May 23, 2017, 06:18:48 PM
Now there's a witness.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/breaking-internet-hacker-kim-dot-com-releases-documents-seth-rich-leaked-podesta-wikileaks-emails/

Kim Dot.Com: “I KNOW THAT SETH RICH WAS INVOLVED IN THE DNC LEAK.”

Internet entrepreneur and hacker, Kim DotCom, admitted on Saturday that he was part of an operation along with Seth Rich to get stolen DNC emails to Wikileaks.

---------------------------------------------------------

Why would Mr. DotCom make that up?

Does anyone really believe that Seth Rich was killed in a botched robbery in which the robber didn't take anything of his valuables?

What were the results of a forensic analysis of his laptop?

If someone in the Trump camp got those emails released that makes Trump a traitor to the country so if someone from the DNC did the exact same thing does that make the DNC a traitor to the country too?

Or is it like hate crimes when if it's self inflicted then it doesn't count?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on May 23, 2017, 08:41:25 PM
Now there's a witness.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/breaking-internet-hacker-kim-dot-com-releases-documents-seth-rich-leaked-podesta-wikileaks-emails/

Kim Dot.Com: “I KNOW THAT SETH RICH WAS INVOLVED IN THE DNC LEAK.”

Internet entrepreneur and hacker, Kim DotCom, admitted on Saturday that he was part of an operation along with Seth Rich to get stolen DNC emails to Wikileaks.

---------------------------------------------------------

Why would Mr. DotCom make that up?
Partisan shenanigans. But more likely self promotion and greed. Had you ever head of "internet entrepreneur" Kim DotCom before today? And now you have (and lots of other right wing conspiracy theorists) increasing his notoriety and possibly revenue from whatever he entrepreneurs on the internet.
Quote

Does anyone really believe that Seth Rich was killed in a botched robbery in which the robber didn't take anything of his valuables?
Yes, considering that is what the police and his family believe.
Quote
What were the results of a forensic analysis of his laptop?
I have no idea, but I doubt the contents of a victim's laptop are something that is typically revealed in the course of an investigation.

Quote
If someone in the Trump camp got those emails released that makes Trump a traitor to the country so if someone from the DNC did the exact same thing does that make the DNC a traitor to the country too?

Or is it like hate crimes when if it's self inflicted then it doesn't count?

If someone in the Trump camp hacked the emails and leaked them to wikileaks that is a crime.  It doesn't make them a traitor to the country but it makes them a criminal.  If someone working for the DNC leaked the same thing it most likely makes them a whistle blower (with some potential overlap with a crime being committed, depending on how the emails were obtained).
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: cherrypoptart on May 23, 2017, 09:33:21 PM
Julian Assange also as much as said it was Seth Rich.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/05/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-tweets-cryptic-message-seth-rich/

 Julian Assange‏ @JulianAssange

WikiLeaks has never disclosed a source. Sources sometimes talk to other parties but identities never emerge from WikiLeaks. #SethRich

  11:08 PM - 21 May 2017

---------------------------------------------------------------

That's a lot more evidence in favor of it being Seth Rich than any Russians.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on May 24, 2017, 05:44:07 AM
Quote
Had you ever head of "internet entrepreneur" Kim DotCom before today?

I certainly had. He is the founder of Megaupload. He's notorious actually, and was in the news several years back when they raided his mansion. I didn't follow the case but I presumed they had him in jail for mass copyright infringement or whatnot.

Julian Assange I have heard of too and when he says the data was leaked from the DNC I believe him and I don't believe the lying CIA.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 24, 2017, 08:26:42 AM


If someone in the Trump camp hacked the emails and leaked them to wikileaks that is a crime.  It doesn't make them a traitor to the country but it makes them a criminal.  If someone working for the DNC leaked the same thing it most likely makes them a whistle blower (with some potential overlap with a crime being committed, depending on how the emails were obtained).

If someone in the CIA disclosed where his superiors had hidden 1/3 of john f Kennedy's btain, that disclosure would also be a crime. It would also be a public service, neh?

You have actually brought up the best argument so far to support Mr dot com's claim: he is confessing to felony conspiracy to commit a crime.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 24, 2017, 10:01:45 AM
Crow is no partisan hack but like me sometimes gets an odd bee in his britches. I honest don't understand his PoV on that harmless remark.

I can only base my opinions on the words he chooses to share

What I said represents my struggle to form my own opinion, not a criticism of your opinion.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on May 24, 2017, 10:11:09 AM
My apologies then, I too hastily assumed you knew him personally as you seem to know a number of other members and former members.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on May 24, 2017, 10:52:49 PM
Quote
Had you ever head of "internet entrepreneur" Kim DotCom before today?

I certainly had. He is the founder of Megaupload. He's notorious actually, and was in the news several years back when they raided his mansion. I didn't follow the case but I presumed they had him in jail for mass copyright infringement or whatnot.

Julian Assange I have heard of too and when he says the data was leaked from the DNC I believe him and I don't believe the lying CIA.

I remember that story now, had completely forgotten the guys name though.  However I still take their word here with a significant grain of salt.  These are two men who basically had their lives ruined by things Clinton helped orchestrate as Secretary of State.  The Assange honey trap and the international pressure on (New Zealand?) to turn on DotCom.

Wikileaks could just "leak" the proof that it was Seth Rich since they have already implied it was him.  I don't see any reason to withhold evidence of his being the source if you are strongly implying that it was him.  Both men have motives to lie that are too strong to take them at their word with no supporting evidence.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 25, 2017, 12:15:51 AM
Wikileaks could just "leak" the proof that it was Seth Rich since they have already implied it was him.  I don't see any reason to withhold evidence of his being the source if you are strongly implying that it was him.  Both men have motives to lie that are too strong to take them at their word with no supporting evidence.

While there is good reason to doubt all sorts of actors at the moment, one thing you should keep in mind - and this is a significant point - is that while Assange has been known to blow smoke when speaking off the cuff, Wikileaks has, to date, never released faulty data or files that weren't the genuine article. So while you may be right to doubt cryptic tweets from Wikileaks, you would be on the wrong side of the facts to doubt them if they actually released data on the subject. But they won't do that because their confidentiality seems more important to them than any particular case.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on May 25, 2017, 06:44:42 AM
Quote
While there is good reason to doubt all sorts of actors at the moment, one thing you should keep in mind - and this is a significant point - is that while Assange has been known to blow smoke when speaking off the cuff, Wikileaks has, to date, never released faulty data or files that weren't the genuine article.

While by contrast, I note that James Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence, has never been prosecuted for perjury concerning his false testimony before congress. To my knowledge, no one has been prosecuted for illegal surveillance of Americans under the Obama admin. Indeed, the only response to the revelation of this illegal program was the attempted arrest and prosecution of the whistleblower.

So why in blazes would I believe a word these unrepentant (confirmed) liars have to say about anything?

And speaking of motives to lie, it's been increasingly apparent to me that U.S. policy has been to vilify Putin and Russia at every turn. This was obvious long before the election. I don't say that to suggest that everything that was said about Putin was a lie or that he was a nice guy - but that of all the bad men in the world (including several allies) someone high up in the U.S. government seemed to have a particular axe to grind against Russia and Putin in particular.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: JoshCrow on May 25, 2017, 07:40:05 AM
And speaking of motives to lie, it's been increasingly apparent to me that U.S. policy has been to vilify Putin and Russia at every turn. This was obvious long before the election.

This is a fairly recent development, you should note. Until 2014 it was simply not the case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset

The defining incident was the annexation of Crimea and the "operations" (for lack of a better word) in eastern Ukraine. Everything pivoted at that moment. I think the bottom line is that it proved Putin irredeemable to many in the West. I can't say I blame them - frankly I support the "vilification", since he is indeed a worthy villain.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 25, 2017, 10:37:09 AM
And speaking of motives to lie, it's been increasingly apparent to me that U.S. policy has been to vilify Putin and Russia at every turn. This was obvious long before the election.

This is a fairly recent development, you should note. Until 2014 it was simply not the case. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_reset

The defining incident was the annexation of Crimea and the "operations" (for lack of a better word) in eastern Ukraine. Everything pivoted at that moment. I think the bottom line is that it proved Putin irredeemable to many in the West. I can't say I blame them - frankly I support the "vilification", since he is indeed a worthy villain.

No question that he's a villain, although I'd have picked the radioactive tea as the proof, since if you read the European press rather than the US whitewashed version (our press is thoroughly infiltrated by the CIA), the Ukraine/Crimea story is not as black and white as you imply.  If you set aside the passenger jet incident, we're at least as culpable, as HRC intentionally and before the fact, set up an anti-democratic, anti-Russian coup d'etat.  Also, annexing the Crimea to Russia simply undoes what Kruschev did with the stroke of a pen 60 years ago.  Crimea was Russia's for centuries before that.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 25, 2017, 10:41:46 AM
Quote
Indeed, the only response to the revelation of this illegal program was the attempted arrest and prosecution of the whistleblower.

Only "only" if you don't count the production of an anonymous "rape" accuser.  Classic trick the CIA picked up from the KGB of yesteryear.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on May 25, 2017, 10:47:39 AM
Quote
but that of all the bad men in the world (including several allies) someone high up in the U.S. government seemed to have a particular axe to grind against Russia and Putin in particular.

Well he does have a legitimate axe to grind against us, and against the Clintons in particular (Kosovo).  Though you have to go European press to see where Putin makes that vendetta explicit.  He spoke of Kosovo in his Crimea annexation gloat.  And he grinds that axe pretty sharp, as you can see from the storm of refugees running away from his stooge's bombs and chem-fare.   It's Putin's poetic justice for what the West did in Kosovo -- show Germany and France what it feels like to be deluged in violent, raping immigrants.  Exactly what happened to Kosovo, albeit accelerated.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 25, 2017, 11:03:37 AM
I can't say I blame them - frankly I support the "vilification", since he is indeed a worthy villain.

I'd say he'd be a worthy adversary, if indeed he was an adversary. Certainly he puts Russia first, but I do not believe he 'has it in' for the U.S. as a motive unto itself. The U.S. is powerful and so of course a lot of his focus will be on America, just like pretty much everyone else in the world who wants to affect change around the globe. But far more focus is put on him by America than the reverse. You don't see him putting missiles along borders of G20 nations, or building offensive bases around the world. This doesn't mean he isn't a bad guy or a gangster, and certainly doesn't mean he should be trusted. Even if you want to call him a 'villain' in the general sense of his type of character, you shouldn't confuse that with the comic book meaning of villain, which often means a direct opponent of someone in particular. Joker and Riddler, for instance, are Batman villains, and are framed as being his opponents. In this sense I see no evidence that Putin is 'American's villain'. Oh, sure, he wants to achieve things and his news agencies try to point out all kinds of flaws in American policy, but in context they seem to do this only insofar as those particular policies harm Russian interests. I don't think I've ever seen an RT article, for instance, bashing some internal American policy that's harmful but has no bearing on Russia.

Incidentally (or perhaps more to the point) someone being a 'villain' in some capacity is not justification for trying to pin every bad thing on them, or sabre rattling about shooting down their planes. There are plenty of 'bad guys' around the world, but that alone is insufficient justification to take direct aggressive action against them. A country being run by a scumbag or gangster is not any legal ground to invading them, attacking them, undermining their government, or any number of other things. In fact, not only isn't it enough to show that someone is villainous, it isn't even enough to show they've done something reprehensible to another country like attack of bomb them. Unless they are directly threatening America or American allies I think it's a very hard sell to legitimize direct action against such people; and this isn't merely a legal point, but a moral one as well. When you look at North Korea, for example, there we have a case of direct threats being made and I could sympathize with a desire to go do something about it. Likewise I sympathize with Israel not being too thrilled with some of what Iranian officials have said about Israel in the past. But Russia? Putin has gone on record countless times saying he wants better relations with America and will step up to any process where that can be advanced. So show me the leaders who've tried to take him up on that to see if he means it? *crickets*
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: JoshCrow on May 25, 2017, 01:06:54 PM
Incidentally (or perhaps more to the point) someone being a 'villain' in some capacity is not justification for trying to pin every bad thing on them, or sabre rattling about shooting down their planes. There are plenty of 'bad guys' around the world, but that alone is insufficient justification to take direct aggressive action against them. A country being run by a scumbag or gangster is not any legal ground to invading them, attacking them, undermining their government, or any number of other things. In fact, not only isn't it enough to show that someone is villainous, it isn't even enough to show they've done something reprehensible to another country like attack of bomb them. Unless they are directly threatening America or American allies I think it's a very hard sell to legitimize direct action against such people; and this isn't merely a legal point, but a moral one as well. When you look at North Korea, for example, there we have a case of direct threats being made and I could sympathize with a desire to go do something about it. Likewise I sympathize with Israel not being too thrilled with some of what Iranian officials have said about Israel in the past. But Russia? Putin has gone on record countless times saying he wants better relations with America and will step up to any process where that can be advanced. So show me the leaders who've tried to take him up on that to see if he means it? *crickets*

You of all people taking Putin (Putin!) at his word is worth a laugh. I wish your skepticism towards the relevance of public posturing applied here, but it seems to have vanished.

To your larger point, you seem to be harping on 'direct action' whereas Jason's point which I was addressing was the media stoking fires against Putin. Surely you are not suggesting it is beyond the scope of American media to persistently and forcefully criticize a murderous power-mad despot. How quickly you pivot to invasion or 'undermining government' (whatever that means... are harsh words to be taken for 'undermining'?).

That's just the half of it. I find the idea of being a bystander to horrors carried out by other countries morally repellant. It's certainly not an attitude to crow about. That isn't to say we have to blunder off to war to knock over dictators (leaving chaos behind), but I would say pretty much any non-violent way to oppose such regimes can and should be taken. That includes even supporting a local rebellion, promoting regime change and making an international case (directly to the people of said country if possible) against the leader in question.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 25, 2017, 02:23:11 PM
You of all people taking Putin (Putin!) at his word is worth a laugh. I wish your skepticism towards the relevance of public posturing applied here, but it seems to have vanished.

Taking him at his word...about what? I don't know why these issues always have to be all or nothing with everyone. I neither have to 'take his word' for anything nor do I have to suggest that he 'needs to be stopped.'

Quote
To your larger point, you seem to be harping on 'direct action' whereas Jason's point which I was addressing was the media stoking fires against Putin. Surely you are not suggesting it is beyond the scope of American media to persistently and forcefully criticize a murderous power-mad despot. How quickly you pivot to invasion or 'undermining government' (whatever that means... are harsh words to be taken for 'undermining'?).

If that's what was going on I'd be very supportive of it. I believe the media does have a good positioning to be critical of abuses of power, corruption, and inhumane behavior. It's too bad, then, that they're corporate shills instead who have no motive except the bottom line. If some hypothetical media was taking the piss out of dictators I'd be all for it. For this media that we have right now - no, it's disingenuous propaganda being put out to further someone else's agenda, as Jason points out. It's certainly not with any intent to reform Russia or help create bridges between the two countries, because, you know, that would be the actual way to help the situation. Neither the U.S. powers that be nor the media want any sort of rapprochement right now, and any move to 'help our Russian friends improve their standards' would just be labeled as being in Putin's pocket. I wish we had what you're suggesting, but it's utterly implausible to read virtuous motives into the stories that have been put out about Russia.

Quote
That's just the half of it. I find the idea of being a bystander to horrors carried out by other countries morally repellant. It's certainly not an attitude to crow about. That isn't to say we have to blunder off to war to knock over dictators (leaving chaos behind), but I would say pretty much any non-violent way to oppose such regimes can and should be taken.

On this we would be in full agreement. I don't either like the idea of standing by while atrocities or other mayhem take place. It's our job to speak out, try to effect change, and improve overall conditions. And I also agree that non-violent methods of doing this should be preferred. So far we're on the same page.

Quote
That includes even supporting a local rebellion, promoting regime change and making an international case (directly to the people of said country if possible) against the leader in question.

And here's where we're not on the same page, because these are not non-violent methods. Having someone else shoot a gun instead of you doing it yourself isn't non-violence, it's just kicking the can. Regime change is nothing more than invasion through subversion, with the added benefit of not having to foot the bill of stationing an occupying force. Why do you think regime change is such a popular method? Because it costs next to nothing compared to invasion and can be spun as being 'legitimate' since it was just the locals, with 'a bit' of our help. Likewise, proxy wars are simply wars without legal declaration. In both cases I would simply call them dishonest methods. I do believe there are legitimate grounds for use of force in the world, and when there are sufficient grounds it should be employed out in the open. As Han Solo put in, "I'd prefer a straight fight to all this sneaking around." The worst part of it, though, is that it's done by lying to the American people. That is not how a republic is supposed to work.

If by "supporting a local rebellion" you mean to have supportive demonstrations, i.e. to give them our moral support, in that case I'm all for it. We should speak in favor of good changes. But actively participating in foreign rebellious activities to promote American interests is, afaik, illegal under international law, and immoral to boot. When Russia is even merely accused of releasing true data about the DNC they are "subverting democracy", but when the idea is brought up to literally overthrow foreign governments it's fine, because, as Arnie put it in True Lies, "Yeah, but they were all bad."

I would like to see the promotion of non-violent methods of working with other countries to improve human rights there, and to work with their governments to try to reduce abuses of their people. There are ways to do that, but until other nations cease being merely resources for us to farm, it won't happen. After all, you don't make $100 billion+ selling weapons when you're promoting peace.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: JoshCrow on May 25, 2017, 03:15:32 PM
Taking him at his word...about what? I don't know why these issues always have to be all or nothing with everyone. I neither have to 'take his word' for anything nor do I have to suggest that he 'needs to be stopped.

Then don't enter into evidence the idea that Putin "went on the record" saying he wanted to be friends.

Quote

If that's what was going on I'd be very supportive of it. I believe the media does have a good positioning to be critical of abuses of power, corruption, and inhumane behavior. It's too bad, then, that they're corporate shills instead who have no motive except the bottom line. If some hypothetical media was taking the piss out of dictators I'd be all for it. For this media that we have right now - no, it's disingenuous propaganda being put out to further someone else's agenda, as Jason points out. It's certainly not with any intent to reform Russia or help create bridges between the two countries, because, you know, that would be the actual way to help the situation. Neither the U.S. powers that be nor the media want any sort of rapprochement right now, and any move to 'help our Russian friends improve their standards' would just be labeled as being in Putin's pocket. I wish we had what you're suggesting, but it's utterly implausible to read virtuous motives into the stories that have been put out about Russia.

Hogwash - there are so many people willing to write such stories pretty much pro bono if it will hurt a despot. It beggars belief that you think they are all just a bunch of shills. If I were a journalist, would you say that of me? You are hopelessly sweeping away all of journalism under the banner of being bought-and-sold. It's a position that is simultaneously indefensible (impeaching the moral character of everyone in mass media) and rhetorically indestructible from an argument standpoint, since there's literally no way to get inside the head of all employed journalists so that I can convince you that they are not all in the tank.

I leave you to this breathlessly cynical belief and hope you'll one day meet some journalists.

Quote
Having someone else shoot a gun instead of you doing it yourself isn't non-violence, it's just kicking the can.

If you witnessed a person being abused by their spouse, would you not counsel and encourage them to take action? Would you not provide them with support, both moral and even material? It is not 'handing them a gun' - it is to provide the support necessary for THEM to take the action in their own home. It does not mean you go over there and punch their spouse - it  is about teaching the victim that they don't have to fight back alone.

Quote
If by "supporting a local rebellion" you mean to have supportive demonstrations, i.e. to give them our moral support, in that case I'm all for it. We should speak in favor of good changes. But actively participating in foreign rebellious activities to promote American interests is, afaik, illegal under international law, and immoral to boot. When Russia is even merely accused of releasing true data about the DNC they are "subverting democracy", but when the idea is brought up to literally overthrow foreign governments it's fine, because, as Arnie put it in True Lies, "Yeah, but they were all bad."

Again, I view supplying support, both moral AND material, for a battered spouse or citizen to take action as morally justified. You could scold me for saying "it's none of your business what goes on in someone else's house/country", but as I am interested in all human business, I see it as self-evidently justifiable.

The question (really the only point worth arguing) is what materially supporting activities are warranted, and what crosses the line. The line depends, I think, on the situation at hand.

Quote
I would like to see the promotion of non-violent methods of working with other countries to improve human rights there, and to work with their governments to try to reduce abuses of their people.

That last sentence may be one of the most naive things I've seen you put to the page. Work WITH despots to try to reduce abuses of their people... gee, what a great idea.  ::) Why didn't I think of just asking Mr. Putin to stop murdering or imprisoning his political opponents?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 26, 2017, 03:42:58 PM
Then don't enter into evidence the idea that Putin "went on the record" saying he wanted to be friends.

I can go on record saying that, because he did say that. You seem to be implying that I've asserted something beyond that such as his motive or 'real thoughts'. Why should we care about those? If a state leader claims he wants to forward a peace process, the only response is to take him up on it and see if he means it. If he doesn't or stonewalls you have your answer. It doesn't actually require trusting him to call him on it and try to start a peace process. That's kind of the beauty of diplomacy - you go through the forms and process of diplomacy and you can yield a positive result without anyone having to "trust" anyone else. The trust comes later from keeping to the terms of the treaty or agreement. Do you really think that the U.S. and China "trusted" each other during Nixon's presidency? It didn't matter; but now China is a valued trading partner, notwithstanding the fact that tensions occasionally flare up, which is normal. This all-or-nothing mentality of "he's a villain!" or "how can you trust him" isn't how diplomacy was ever understood before, and is really a false dilemma.

Sometimes even when you know someone isn't serious about a peace process, such as we see frequently in the mid-East, even so it is pursued relentlessly, and hopefully one day it can be a reality. And yet despite the frequent attempts to create a dubious peace in the mid-East, where are the attempts to do so with Russia? The fact is that peaceful relations with Russia aren't desired right now. It's not about ability, it's about will.

Quote
there are so many people willing to write such stories pretty much pro bono if it will hurt a despot. It beggars belief that you think they are all just a bunch of shills. If I were a journalist, would you say that of me? You are hopelessly sweeping away all of journalism under the banner of being bought-and-sold.

Actually, no. I never really said anything about journalists. In fact I've written here before that I think the problem lies elsewhere. That being said it would be an interesting, if tedious, exercise to study the landscape and learn all the major journalists for the various publications to see where each person falls on the spectrum, but offhand I'm not that interested in that. No, the issue when there's a problem always starts at the top, not with the workers. It's the editors in chief I'm more concerned with, but even they have their marching orders. Everything gets trickled down from the people holding the reigns, which in the case of media corps is probably very hard to trace. It boils down to principle shareholders in the end, but even then the rabbit hole of locating the actual individuals involved is deep. The best you could do is learn the board members, but that would still leave most of the story untold. It's not a project I'm capable of at any rate.

I feel bad for the journalists, even if on some level many of them are sellouts. They don't have the resources or even the mandate to do what journalists used to, and for the most part when they write about certain topics the best they can do is to repeat the information they're given in their own words. Sometimes you get in-depth analysis, which can be biased or good, but that's not quite 'reporting' even though it's certainly journalism. But the shilling I referred to is principally in regard to the general positions of the company and their willingness to act as an information clearinghouse rather than as a watchdog.
 
Quote
If you witnessed a person being abused by their spouse, would you not counsel and encourage them to take action? Would you not provide them with support, both moral and even material? It is not 'handing them a gun' - it is to provide the support necessary for THEM to take the action in their own home. It does not mean you go over there and punch their spouse - it  is about teaching the victim that they don't have to fight back alone.

The analogy is a good enough one for our purposes, because if you have a feeling there is domestic abuse next door you call the police. If you heard yelling and personally went next door, kicked down the door, and shot the abusing spouse you would go down for premeditated murder. Vigilante justice isn't generally condoned in terms of the rule of law, although in a comic-booky sense we can all perhaps sympathize for a 'heroic vigilante' in the case where the corrupt law is fragrantly not protecting people (such as in Gotham City). The difficulty on the world stage is that there is no lawfully mandated "international police" that can go into any nation and enforce 'the law'. So when you hear your Iraqi neighbor being abused, there is no one to call. So does that mean vigilantism is a viable moral/legal option? It's a fine question, and you'd have to ask yourself what America would look like if - as a thought experiment - the police was dissolved and it was every man for himself. Would you like a landscape where the toughest gang would go into your house and beat or kill you if you did something they found reprehensible? You might say "then I won't do anything bad!" but I somehow don't think that would make the scenario seem prettier. I mean, look at The Godfather, which by all accounts is a very accurate depiction of a territory enforced not by rule of law but by gang force. Sonny's brother-in-law was beating up his sister, and after threatening him once the abuse persisted and so Sonny took matters into his own hands, beating the guy senseless. The result of that was, among other things, Sonny eventually being gunned down by another gang, which in turn led to an all-out war amongst the families. This isn't mere story-telling on my part (after all, it was Puzo's), but I think a very instructive tale about what happens when the law consists of the toughest guy around beating up or killing whomever he wants - even if for 'good reasons'.

So the question always remains, what is a reasonable ground for invading or bombing another country? Should there be a set of laws governing this? In the case of the U.S. I would like to think that at least there should be internal laws governing it. In theory wars are declared by the Congress, for instance, even though in practice that's no longer true and military force can be employed unilaterally by the President. Being an opponent of Trump, I should think that you would have a problem with this as well.

I can acknowledge the validity for all manner of ranges of what people think would be justifiable to attack. I sympathize with extreme isolationists or pacifists who think there is never a justification (although I disagree), I sympathize with those who think that only direct self-defence should justify it, and I sympathize with your view, too, that we should be able to protect others from attack based on nothing more than our own consciences. However I also know that there is no "correct" answer here that negates the other ones.

Quote
You could scold me for saying "it's none of your business what goes on in someone else's house/country", but as I am interested in all human business, I see it as self-evidently justifiable.

The question (really the only point worth arguing) is what materially supporting activities are warranted, and what crosses the line. The line depends, I think, on the situation at hand.

If you could demonstrate completely honorable intentions then it strengthens the case for the use of force; it becomes a question of the lesser or evils - standing idly by versus doing some killing. Maybe sometimes going in and doing some killing really is the lesser of all evils, and that's fine if that's what's decided.

But using your analogy again, if I see someone advocating to bust in and stop a domestic abuse case, and note that the person advocating for it has a mad crush on the wife in question, suddenly we have a conflict of interest, where removing the husband from the equation advantages the person advocating intervention. And that's the reality in the world, where all the cases we've seen of intervention in other countries magically has direct material benefits to the country, or to private parties within the country, doing the attacking. The former is actually kind of understandable; if you're going to go clean up a mess it's somewhat logical to do so in a manner that advantages you in some way. But it's the latter that is worrisome and also, I think, foremost at the moment, which is private parties using the machinery of government to achieve what they can't achieve as private citizens. Can you imagine how hilarious it would be if the board of Coke requested the FBI to treat the board of Pepsi as terrorists and arrest them and shut down their operation? How convenient that would be for them! So yeah, whenever the use of force is advocated I would say that if the push for that is coming from interested parties it should be scrutinized very heavily before being accepted.

In related news, Tulsi Gabbard has announced she is going to stop accepting PAC/lobbyist money. Aside from the fact that I think she's going to run for President in 2020 or 2024 (and possibly win),  I hope she can help to get the ball rolling on campaign finance reform. My issue with financing military adventures around the world has less to do with the moral implications of using force and more to do with the foxes running the henhouse.

Quote
Quote
I would like to see the promotion of non-violent methods of working with other countries to improve human rights there, and to work with their governments to try to reduce abuses of their people.

That last sentence may be one of the most naive things I've seen you put to the page. Work WITH despots to try to reduce abuses of their people... gee, what a great idea.  ::) Why didn't I think of just asking Mr. Putin to stop murdering or imprisoning his political opponents?

Again, you'd be surprised how little you need to trust someone like Putin to make political headway. Relations are built through trade and keeping of promises, not through blustering through the media. The more two economies (and peoples) become entwined the more things will naturally settle into an equilibrium without conflict. It's being said that in the modern age war amongst powerful nations is almost unthinkable; and in the cases where it is thinkable, that should be remedied asap in my opinion. Believe me Putin is concerned for the bottom line of his country more so than being a bully. If he feels it's superior strategy to play ball he will do so; he won't throttle his own power just for the fun of it. He wants the Russian economy to have better chances, and if he can get that it will be better for him than being the big fish in a little pond. He's not stupid.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on May 26, 2017, 03:56:59 PM
And sorry everyone for the ridiculously long post.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on June 06, 2017, 07:01:40 PM
I make no apology for the length of the following, nor for the length of time it took to edit out enough of the assonance to fit the character count limit.
 
:D
 
Seriati:
Quote
You write like a literary student using words rather than substance to make your case.  I take issue with that.
I object--on your honor: you issued the substance of this complaint using literally naught but words. But have your way, Master: we will play the foolish Student as you script your play… ;)
 
Pray Teacher, say: what issue have you with the way a literary Pupil words his say? You see no substance in the subtext wordwrights write under the page? Profess, professed Professor: issue us instructions in this issue with which you issue take.
 
Go on, Teach: crack this unruly case--corner a class Fool, raise your rule, beat a black black blue. Run red ink across my page.
Quote
Lol.
:lol:
 
(I miss the laughing emoji--the Smiley face which I like to imagine will still be bouncing up and down with laughter through the eternity of the ether... The rumor around parenthetical parts of the underground is that Mod Almighty anathematized that thematic ideogram during the Great Migration, ‘cause of a cacophony of complaints that came in claiming it was being abused by cackling crows with immoderacy unto a degree that was deemed obscene. Thus was lost Laughter, by Moderate Decree. The crows convened, considered the consternation of the Mods, and conspired to  a common cause: caw caw caw caw caw! Seriesly though, I’m glad I’ve got you laughing--that’s almost the entire substance of the subtext in my Ornery interactivity. In truth, I’m too terse of tongue to type out half of a fraction of my whole response to the things I’ve seen you say, but if you could imagine this text:

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!

...only doubled up, time and time again, just rolling all the way down the page, it might give you some sense of the fully sincere appreciation I’m inclined to express to my dying breath at the way you sometimes say your sway. Seriesly: if you’ll read the above text aloud, aspirating each H and vocalizing each assonant A, while picturing a crazy man who's staring at a screen in an otherwise empty room, seizing with laughter, for days--just hooting and cackling away--then you may get an idea of how happy it makes me to hear that you’re laughing too…lol.)

:)
Quote
You clearly know little about law.
Caw caw caw.
 
We concurse: what I know is so sleightly versed, it might be contra legem
Quote
A public claim can not be evidence of collusion.
Oh, no? So--in your esteemed judgment--nothing said in public can be used against criminal conspirators in a court of law?
 
What an arresting claim.
 
Wouldn’t that make it impossible to convict a conspirator of committing collusion on the basis of evidence in the form of a public confession?
Quote
I get that District court judges have so ruled, an interesting Precedent - in my view unlikely to hold, may even be reversed by the liberal 9th Circuit.  And why?  Cause the flip side of it risks every the left holds dear, empowering everyone of the district judges to overrule facially legal rules because of what a politician once said exposes everything.
 
Think about it, Texas court bans all payments - Nationwide - to Planned Parenthood because of what a politician said in writing the bill that funds them and inputs that the bill was to fund abortion (illegal) despite that it doesn't do so facially.
 
Lol! That’s some Seriesly sophisticated reasoning. One almost cannot contend but that you prove your point, so adroitly have you considered both sides of things--this is nigh undeniably Principled Print dripping off of your pen, start to end.
 
Then again: take a second look at the sophistically-worded way you sort of sidestepped from the substance in this case (the stated fact of present precedent in Rule of Law in the question of whether the court will consider the campaign statements of the present President as evidence of what is evident), to a confabulate a far-fetched forecast of a fictive future in which the facts are more favorable to your favored point of view than they happen to be in present reality. Id est, it is noted that when the present state of facts doesn’t support your case, you just conjure up alternative facts to speculate into the conjectural record, to proclaim your point will prevail, as soon as your pretext takes shape.
Quote
Rejoicing in a nonsense standard that has district court judges replace the President's decision making with their own personal opinions is directly contrary to the rule of law,
Lol. Lookit--I’m sure your Ornery record shows that you’ve been an uncompromisingly consistent supporter of the unjudgeable, uninfringeable right of a President to rule by Executive Actions, across the years, Ser.
 
But please do note that you shifted the subject here from the original substance--the question of what will constitute evidence of our present President’s motives in the eyes of the courts--to a separate argument in which you appear to be defending the idea of federal government privileges over state rights (nowadays, for the present case, anyways). I’m not inclined to comment on my perception of any internal consistency I may or may not see in the new line of argument you conjecture, but I will observe that your answer has nearly nothing to do with the substance of the point to which you were responding. Regardless of whether or not (in the end) your team gets to abuse the power of the executive pen the way it has been getting abused by recent presidents, the precedent of using anything a criminal says against him in court is likely to remain established law.
 
In other words: you can deny that a man means what he said he meant until you’re literarily red in the face, but what a man says that he means will still be read in as evidence of what the man meant, by anyone not seeing too red to read what I mean.
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Quote
Ahh... so it's foulest treachery when the Russian's hack the DNC or Hillary and reveal that they have been lying to the American population and directly manipulating the Presidential election
Nah...the foulest treachery is committed by biased partisans who pretend to have principles while they bend their ethics one way to catch crooks who aren’t on their team, and then bend their ethics the other way defending crooks who are on their side.
Holding however, the Trump admin responsible to a political standard, while exculpating the Clinton campaign on a legal standard is rank hypocrisy. Colluding with CNN to influence an election is FAR more likely to have an impact than colluding with the Russians would.  Whether Russian hackers, US hackers or some poor kid working for the DNC who mysteriously ended up murdered in a robbery where nothing was stolen, revealed a secret shouldn't make a bit of difference to your level of outrage, yet it only matters to the Dems if the Russians did it.
I’m sorry--you were pointing out my partisan hypocrisy, and you lost me in your haste to get to your party: remind me where I exculpated Clinton of anything?
What makes you think that was a personal comment?
Mostly the fact that your script was responsive of my cited text...but I also read the second person possessive pronoun you slipped in toward the end of the part I quoted as a hint...
 
(I don’t take offence, though, because I know I’m known to overstep the boundary--I’m just noting that you seem to be just as guilty of a libelously liberal use of the literary “ye” as me. Dost see?)
 
At any rate, whatever your aim, do note that your blindside is ever the same. Tell me: how goes the deluded propaganda campaign partisan hypocrites like Hannity are slandering all over Seth Rich’s grave?
Quote
Quote
If--nine years ago--Obama had publicly asked Cuba to commit espionage against McCain while on the campaign trail, and then Wikileaks released a load of stolen internal communications from the Republican campaign,...
If that had occurred, we'd still, nine years later be seeing new stories in the MSM detrimental to the Republicans from either direct quotes in the email or "meta analysis" proving some version of the Republicans are racist...
Nah. Republicans proved themselves racist way back when--in reality--they pushed a paranoid conspiracy narrative that the last President was born in Africa (with no reasonable cause excepting for the fact that the color of his skin raised racist Republican suspicions that he was a Manchurian Muslim Nigerian).
 
I’m sure you right-minded Republicans are all over the record vehemently defending Obama against that racist Republican hoax, though (just like I believe you when you say you would have been defending Obama from liars on the conservative Fake News airways, had he sold American foreign policy promises to Cuba in exchange for a little espionage to help him beat McCain, in the hypothetical case).
Quote
Did I miss where McCain actually committed a federal crime and the Bush administration refused to prosecute?  Where there was a secret meeting between two planes on a tarmac where the head of the Justice Department met secretly with McCain's wife
I’m fine with you fitting such script into my analogy, if you feel you need it there to follow along without froth at your lip (believe it or not, I initially banged out something sorta similar to your exact bit, but I bit it back in the edit, with a boatload of bombast, because it browbeat the issue til the beat didn’t fit…)
 
In such a case--to be honest--I confess I suspect I would probably find it hard to find McCain guilty of high crimes--even if there were evidence that he intentionally subverted national security protocols, and then obstructed attempts to investigate the evidence...mostly because he’s John *censored*ing McCain, and his history of service gives him patriotism credit in my book which I don’t extend to the rest of these popularity clowns. (As for the rest, the gist of my jest suggests that the guillotine is the only machine in history made just to measure off the height of Treachery in the High Crimes of any King or Queen--but I’d be fine here if we slightly spite the legacy of Liberty, and just lock ‘em both up, and throw away the key. As I understand it, the latter is lately established ornery American political idiomese.)
 
In any case, you do get that your bias is showing when you can’t follow the rhetorical direction of an analogy for fixating on subsidiary substance in a purely partisan way?  Why is it that you Orangey Americans are so intent on maligning McCain, anyways?
Quote
Quote

and then our National Security apparatus publicly announced that Cuba had been behind the leak in an act of espionage specifically targeting Republicans in order to influence our election…
And then failed to ever put forward actual proof of the fact, while actual questions about whether their claim was politically motivated in the first place persist?
By these “actual questions” I assume you mean <treasonously partisan> queries which were openly questioning whether the US national security apparatus were the real enemy of America, not “Cuba,” in such a case?
 
Such red herring queries--hypothetically--would probably just be Partisanship unto Treachery, Seriati--no matter what you Orange-Kool-Aid-drinking partisans may have non-hypothetically convinced yourselves (and most of the purple sheep, apparently) an alternative reality might be...
 
Unless, of course, such hypothetical questions came along with some substance of evidence that individuals in our national security agencies really were criminally conspiring to deceive the American people on such an issue, for purely political purposes. Feel free to script that “analogy” for me. 
 
In other words, Teach: put some substance into these treasonous conspiracies of all your allusively worded speech! The posture of your print presumes that your political opponents must proffer proof in an arrangement conforming to the proper pattern of a prosecutorial arraignment, lest what they say be used against them to convict on counts of Bias, Partisanship, and Hypocrisy in your book of judgment, but then you turn right around and postulate purely partisan paranoid propaganda that our national security agents went rogue and conspired to commit mysterious crimes against America--all on the basis of pretty much nothing but what you presumably read in your alt-right/KGB-troll-factory Fake News feed.
 
What is the composition of this Orange Kool Aid?
Quote
If you want to play this game, play it straight, cause throwing down a pre-judged version of nonsense that doesn't matched what happened just proves a bias on your part to me.
:lol:
 
Let me straighten you out, Ser, it seems you’ve mistaken our game. The part that we play remains ever the same, it’s every fool’s favorite, this script even is named--we fools call this folly: The Hypocrisy Game. You should know: you called this roll call, wrote our roles, and rolled curtain on our play...
 
We’ve been reading the way you’ve been writing blame--typing out terms like “bias” “partisan” and holy “hypocrisy,” as if you weren’t the hypocritest cat to scratch out slant always the same. You claim I’ve proved my bias, eh? And Seriesly: you want me to spit a straight game?
 
:D
 
(Caw caw caw! Hear me clear my craw, don’t you know Imma crow?)
 
Straight up then (since we’re saying, you know?)--here’s what your proven part is on the level I’m reading you, yo:
 
Your book reads so red, it’s clear you’ve never read what you write right, cuz you can’t start a sentence straight--you’ve always left off reading right before you even get to the left half of the page! You’re so biased toward recto, you pen that part onto paper like it makes you erect, yo, and you’re literally averse to verso: I heard from the birds you “take issue” with subtext because you see that it’s what’s left underneath the partisan part of print you read every time you turn a page! Everybody knows the way you write is: never not right--only always in the wrong way!
 
You’ve proven yourself so slanted, when people tell you to get bent, their intent is only to set you straight! You sound so partisan, you’re like that guy who always parties on so hard that he talks sideways and clearly can’t see straight! Seriesly, you look more biased than the backside of Siamese twins who are joined at the hip--you partisan-parted double-wide hip o’ crit’ writ!
 
(Why you even step, child? You’re such a redhead, you’re bound catch a beatdown! Don’t be sore, you’re just ginger--ya know?)
 
Don’t get me wrong, Seriesly: I’m just trying to follow the substance of your lecture the way I’m reading it. The way I see it,  you’re so blatantly right, you’re unusually welcome Ornery.
 
;)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on June 06, 2017, 07:10:14 PM
Jason:
Quote
Julian Assange I have heard of too and when he says the data was leaked from the DNC I believe him and I don't believe the lying CIA.
It should be noted that when we say "y"all," we're really not talking to all of youse. After all, what is traitorous slander for the American Gander, is just quackery, coming from a Canadian Goose.

:D

Everybody lies. I believe what people say is truth when they provide proof.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on June 06, 2017, 08:35:43 PM
Thanks for floating the name Tulsi Gabbard.  Jacobin hates her, which is a strong point in her favor as a liberal.

https://www.jacobinmag.com/2017/05/tulsi-gabbard-president-sanders-democratic-party

Quote
She’s opposed US intervention in Syria since 2013, air strikes in Iraq, and arms sales to Saudi Arabia. She backed Sanders in the Democratic primary because of Clinton’s record of supporting “interventionist regime change wars.”

All of this has created the impression that Gabbard, unlike much of the Democratic Party, is antiwar.

She’s not.

Gabbard’s objections to US wars spring not from a concern for those parts of the world the US military bombs and invades, but exclusively from a concern about the Americans who fight them. As she told Truthout in 2012, her own military service in Iraq and Kuwait “changed my life completely” and revealed the “tremendous cost of war,” recounting the daily casualties and injuries to US troop she saw when she was deployed in a medical unit.

“The cost of war impacts all of us — both in the human cost and the cost that’s being felt frankly in places like Flint, Michigan, where families and children are devastated and destroyed by completely failed infrastructure because of lack of investment,” she told Glamour magazine in March last year.

This also formed the thrust of her speech at 2012’s (particularly militaristic) DNC, where she told the crowd, “As a combat veteran, I know the costs of war. The sacrifices made by our troops and our military families are immeasurable.”

There’s nothing wrong, of course, with expressing empathy for the soldiers who are sent to fight, lose limbs, and die in wars of choice launched by their political leaders. The suffering they and their families endure is heartbreaking, especially considering that many join the military because they lack any other economic opportunities. And the money spent on wars abroad would surely be better used on infrastructure at home.

But Gabbard’s almost singular focus on the damage these wars inflict domestically, and her comparative lack of focus on the carnage they wreak in the countries under attack, is troubling.

heaven forbid that an elected American political leader should focus the attention of her speeches towards the benefit of her constituents!  What twit wrote this?  She's speaking to her voters so she brings them the issues as they affect those voters.  It's called Representation, you Jacobin twinkies!

Oh.  She's a friend of Modi?  Ew.  Hate to go with Jacobin on anything, but Modi's a hard pill to swallow.  Don't think burning innocent Muslims alive is a good way to fight terror.

@Prometheus-eatingCrow -- Crows caw, ducks quack, and geese honk.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on June 06, 2017, 09:40:42 PM
Quote
Crows caw, ducks quack, and geese honk.
...and the wise owl hoots...

;D

But keep to cover when you espy the darkest wings alighting from the sky--it's said that Zeus' eagle can rend the heavens with its screech...
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on June 12, 2017, 03:25:54 PM
Here's some more fake news for you. Remember that claim being painted all over the media that Trump 'leaked' information to Russia about the ISIS laptop plot, and that this enraged Israeli intelligence because the U.S. had promised to keep the source a secret, and that supposedly betraying that trust compromised Israeli agents? This was a big deal to everyone reporting it.

Well here's a report from the NYT about where that intel actually came from:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/12/world/middleeast/isis-cyber.html?_r=0

Quote
Even one of the rare successes against the Islamic State belongs at least in part to Israel, which was America’s partner in the attacks against Iran’s nuclear facilities. Top Israeli cyberoperators penetrated a small cell of extremist bombmakers in Syria months ago, the officials said. That was how the United States learned that the terrorist group was working to make explosives that fooled airport X-ray machines and other screening by looking exactly like batteries for laptop computers.

The intelligence was so exquisite that it enabled the United States to understand how the weapons could be detonated, according to two American officials familiar with the operation. The information helped prompt a ban in March on large electronic devices in carry-on luggage on flights from 10 airports in eight Muslim-majority countries to the United States and Britain.

So it was in fact a hacking operation that landed them the intel, not agents on the inside or anyone else who could be compromised. Unless I've misunderstood something it appears that the outrage over this was simply about Trump telling Russia, not about anyone being compromised or endangered. As a diplomatic decision maybe Trump blundered (I have no idea either way), but in terms of screwing up Israeli intelligence efforts, nope; fake news.

edit: I changed the source to NYT since my original source was just quoting them.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on June 12, 2017, 05:36:00 PM
Going back to the original wire report from Reuters, I see (edited for relevance, I just don't feel like making different quote blocks).

Quote
Israeli intelligence experts are gravely concerned that U.S. President Donald Trump's sharing of classified information with Russia may have compromised an Israeli agent, but don't expect any long-term consequences for intelligence cooperation.

Israeli intelligence experts said they could not confirm whether an Israeli asset was the source. But they said Israel had developed a deep network of human and signal intelligence across the region and it was plausible that it had managed to infiltrate Islamic State as part of that long-running effort.

"Israeli intelligence agencies have shown that they can have such human sources," said Aviv Oreg, former head of the Al Qaeda and global jihad desk in the army's military intelligence department, who now runs a counter-terrorism consultancy.

"It would take a lot to put someone inside ISIS. If there is an agent, I'm sure it's the only one. If we have really lost a human source over there, it's a major loss and it will take years to regenerate another one," he said.

"Israel will be furious about it," he added, highlighting that it was likely to have implications for how Israel operates its human intelligence assets more broadly, and may make others unwilling to cooperate with it in the future.

So, this wasn't some unnamed made up source. I assume Aviv Oreg is a legitimate authority on Israeli intelligence, and the piece does indeed talk about hypotheticals. If, may, could, might.

From what I can tell, a lot of blogosphere outlets picked up the furious quote, probably out of context in most cases.

One of my favorites, the times of israel, we get a headline

Quote
‘Horrified’ Israeli intel officials ‘were shouting at US counterparts’ over Trump leak

But they also have some sources, obviously nobody active or present in the room, but they aren't made up people giving comments.

Quote
Shabtai Shavit, who led the Mossad in the 1990s, said that were he in charge of the intelligence organization today, he would not be inclined to share more information with his American counterparts. “If tomorrow I were asked to pass information to the CIA, I would do everything I could to not pass it to them. Or I would first protect myself and only then give it, and what I’d give would be totally neutered,” Shavit told The Times of Israel on Wednesday. “If some smart guy decides that he’s allowed to leak information, then your partners in cooperation will be fewer or just won’t be at all,” he warned.

Danny Yatom, another ex-Mossad boss, told an Israeli radio station that if reports were accurate, Trump likely caused “heavy damage” to Israeli and American security.

So nobody made this up out of whole cloth. There are a lot of if's that people were probably incapable of hearing. And at the end of the day, it sounds like the fact that intelligence was shared is confirmed, and that Israel most likely didn't want it shared regardless if they were named or not.

In terms of screwing up Israeli efforts, I wouldn't say that's not true. The Russians are now aware of an elint capability that Israel might have preferred not to reveal - and not just the Russians but others. Because this didn't stay behind closed doors, did it? So now Iran knows of that capability.

If you saw other reports than me that made unqualified, wrong claims, then I'd change my mind.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on June 12, 2017, 11:41:45 PM
Drake, it's all well to point out which parts of the narrative being put forward were true, but that's what propaganda tends to be: bits of truth mixed up with made-up innuendo and sometimes outright lies. I was hearing rhetoric referring to Trump "endangering" lives of intelligence agents, which indeed was based on innuendo that never had any scrap of truth to it. The quote above should qualify, knowing what we know now, as a probable knowing falsehood; at best, a very misleading statement.

It's true they could have gone with "Trump chooses to disregard Israel's request" and left it at that. It would have been a minor, but legitimate, blemish on him. But no - they got greedy and wanted to make him out to be a traitor to his allies.

And so we go back to what the story really was all along: Israel throws a hissy fit because they didn't want Russia to be told what they learned. You'd think any reasonable report might inquire about why information on stopping terrorists shouldn't be shared with absolutely everyone, to say nothing of a nation on the security council. I guess America isn't ready for "good guy Trump helps Russians prevent terror attacks despite tensions in Syria." I'm not saying that's the entirety of the story, but it's telling that it isn't even being presented as a part of it at all. What Trump did is still a diplomatic gaff.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: JoshCrow on June 13, 2017, 07:43:58 AM
Fenring, your supposition is made moot by a single line of that self-same NYT report.

Quote
It was also part of the classified intelligence that President Trump is accused of revealing

Moreover, while cyber espionage CAN be conducted without assets on the ground, they sure help. I don't know how you can rule that out summarily. If there is an insider who is enabling the backdoor into the bombmakers that would indeed be an asset who is now endangered. And, either way, this is an intelligence operation that has been compromised, even without such an agent.

Your claim of "fake news" is weak sauce.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on June 13, 2017, 08:58:55 AM
JoshCrow, if you're going to highlight "part of" why not highlight "accused"?  Who is making this accusation?  Has it been confirmed by anyone?  In fact, the only official comments on it have stated that what he revealed was appropriate have they not?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on June 13, 2017, 09:23:06 AM
And so we go back to what the story really was all along: Israel throws a hissy fit because they didn't want Russia to be told what they learned. You'd think any reasonable report might inquire about why information on stopping terrorists shouldn't be shared with absolutely everyone, to say nothing of a nation on the security council. I guess America isn't ready for "good guy Trump helps Russians prevent terror attacks despite tensions in Syria." I'm not saying that's the entirety of the story, but it's telling that it isn't even being presented as a part of it at all. What Trump did is still a diplomatic gaff.

Wouldn't that be putting an undeserved slant on it? Israelis were telling news organizations that they would be throwing a fit. So they reported that Israeli reaction was that of a fit. Mitigating that would be less responsible, IMO. Another way to put it would have been "Trump can't keep big mouth shut.", but that would have been a bit much, although super partisans like CNN surely came close.

In a thread titled "Fake News Lie", I think this doesn't pass muster. If the point was "Biased News Reporting" there's a lot more ground.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on June 13, 2017, 09:44:40 AM
Wouldn't that be putting an undeserved slant on it?

Of course, but its the slant it would have had if Obama had done it isn't it?  I mean honestly, imagine the reporting by this media if Trump had a plane load of cash delivered to Iran.  Or did the Tango in Cuba, taking many ackward and naive photos while a major terrorist attack hit an ally.  Can you even imagine how the media would react?  It'd be like Christmas in June.

Quote
Israelis were telling news organizations that they would be throwing a fit.

Were the Israelis calling the NYT and saying they would pitch a fit?  Or was it the other way around, with the Times calling every Israeli official they could find, telling them that Trump had released super duper secret information including the names of their spies (whether or true or not) and pestering them for a reaction?  What was the official Israeli response again?

Quote
So they reported that Israeli reaction was that of a fit. Mitigating that would be less responsible, IMO. Another way to put it would have been "Trump can't keep big mouth shut.", but that would have been a bit much, although super partisans like CNN surely came close.

Another way to handle it would have been to ask the White House about unconfirmed reports that Trump had revealed secret information to the Russians.  Rather than deliberately trying to undermine the US-Israeli relationship by publishing exaggerated rumors.

Quote
In a thread titled "Fake News Lie", I think this doesn't pass muster. If the point was "Biased News Reporting" there's a lot more ground.

No I think Fenring is correct.  Propaganda is effective because it always contains some elements of true, that's what defenders retreat to when questioned, when they attack they add the full force of the made up and speculative.

Turning a non-story into a story is literally fake news.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on June 13, 2017, 10:54:55 AM
No I think Fenring is correct.  Propaganda is effective because it always contains some elements of true, that's what defenders retreat to when questioned, when they attack they add the full force of the made up and speculative.

Turning a non-story into a story is literally fake news.

That was pretty much my point. In this case it's not that there was literally no story, but that the real story wasn't all that sensational and so they spiced it up. 'Biased news' would be the fact that in helping Russia it's framed as being an act of betrayal of Israel rather than an act of friendship to Russia. The 'fake' part, to me, is the insertion of "may have compromised" and so forth with regard to Israeli agents. It's not enough of a lie to be called "false" but also needs pass no standard to be called "true". Including those vague insinuations with the rest is why I called it 'fake news', but really propaganda is the better word, if a bit cliche. I put it here since there isn't a "fake news that should properly be called soft deceptive propaganda" thread.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on June 13, 2017, 10:56:30 AM
I guess we'll just have to agree it is a matter of opinion. If you assume that news organizations are having secret interviews, cherry picking results, then nothing I can present will matter.

These aren't random officials that got quoted, they included former Mossad chiefs, and they were told to Israeli news sources, not CNN or NY Times.

Quote
“What Trump did is liable to cause heavy damage to Israel’s security, as well as the source, and U.S. security,’’ Danny Yatom, a former chief of Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service, told a Tel Aviv radio station. “Especially if this information reaches our good friends, the Iranians.”

This started being a story in the Israeli press around the inauguration. The concern voiced was that anything the US shared with Russia could wind up in the hands of Iran. The gaffe just set off the chain of events.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on June 13, 2017, 11:04:00 AM
I guess we'll just have to agree it is a matter of opinion. If you assume that news organizations are having secret interviews, cherry picking results, then nothing I can present will matter.

What's secret?  How do you think they get quotes?   They call everyone they can think of official or non-official and share whatever tidbits they think are most likely to generate a response.  They have extensive lists of contacts will to comment on the record and off, I bet you they even have them sorted by their political and other views.

Quote
These aren't random officials that got quoted, they included former Mossad chiefs, and they were told to Israeli news sources, not CNN or NY Times.

Maybe I haven't looked at them closely enough, most of the quotes I've seen from them include statements like, "if he told them that, then.." which make it clear they were told something by the reporters and speculated.  Did you see quotes from people with actual knowledge from internal rather than media sources?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on June 13, 2017, 11:14:14 AM
They call people favorable to them, of course. When they can't get someone with weight, they say "a senior official" or "an unnamed source" which is why I've come to ignore any such quotes.

The people who would present an alternate point of view are likely so mistrustful that they aren't going to answer anyway.

The quote you just read demonstrates very little equivocation. It is still mostly opinion, would you suggest that nobody should report on general sentiment of knowledgeable people?

Here it is again:

“What Trump did is liable to cause heavy damage to Israel’s security, as well as the source, and U.S. security,’’ Danny Yatom, a former chief of Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service, told a Tel Aviv radio station. “Especially if this information reaches our good friends, the Iranians.”

What would your headline be if you picked up that quote on the wire?

Surely you don't believe this is so minor that it shouldn't have been reported.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on June 13, 2017, 11:40:05 AM
I guess we'll just have to agree it is a matter of opinion. If you assume that news organizations are having secret interviews, cherry picking results, then nothing I can present will matter.

Wait, you don't think news organizations cherry pick results? Are you telling me they'll print literally anything they hear, boring or not, important or not? Rather, I think you should be able to agree that the entire raison d'etre of a news organization is to cherry pick results so as to be able to present a story worthy of attention. That by itself isn't the problem. The problem is cherry picking with an eye strictly toward ratings and making copy, rather than an eye towards informing people of fact they should know. Even if we put aside pushing specific narratives and only ascribe all of this to whoring for ratings, that alone would incentivize fishing around for juicy scandals such as endangering Israeli agents.

Quote
Quote
“What Trump did is liable to cause heavy damage to Israel’s security, as well as the source, and U.S. security,’’ Danny Yatom, a former chief of Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service, told a Tel Aviv radio station. “Especially if this information reaches our good friends, the Iranians.”

This started being a story in the Israeli press around the inauguration. The concern voiced was that anything the US shared with Russia could wind up in the hands of Iran. The gaffe just set off the chain of events.

Look at that quote from Yatom again and tell me how it damages Israel for Iran to learn about the ISIS laptop scheme. It's a defensive piece of intel, about foiling a terror plot. Or is there some other secret piece of intel Trump shared? If so, how do the people giving sound bites know about it, unless they, too, are privy to classified info they shouldn't be? And by leaking to the press that intel they shouldn't know about has been given to Russia, are they not, too, betraying their country by speaking about it on the record? I think it's fairly clear that statements such as the one above are purely speculative and are meant as general political statements. I'll give the general formula: Iran is bad, Russia works with Iran, and anything good Russia gets helps Iran, which hurts us. It doesn't even matter what is given to Russia, Israeli intelligence would call it dangerous to them and helpful to Iran.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on June 13, 2017, 12:36:48 PM
Isn't it obvious? When Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism, them knowing the technique is compromised would be problematic.

And whether you agree with the concern or not is up to you. Personally, I'd prefer both Iran and Russia learn as little as possible about Western intelligence.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on June 13, 2017, 12:51:00 PM
And so we go back to what the story really was all along: Israel throws a hissy fit because they didn't want Russia to be told what they learned. You'd think any reasonable report might inquire about why information on stopping terrorists shouldn't be shared with absolutely everyone, to say nothing of a nation on the security council. I guess America isn't ready for "good guy Trump helps Russians prevent terror attacks despite tensions in Syria." I'm not saying that's the entirety of the story, but it's telling that it isn't even being presented as a part of it at all. What Trump did is still a diplomatic gaff.

Wouldn't that be putting an undeserved slant on it? Israelis were telling news organizations that they would be throwing a fit. So they reported that Israeli reaction was that of a fit. Mitigating that would be less responsible, IMO. Another way to put it would have been "Trump can't keep big mouth shut.", but that would have been a bit much, although super partisans like CNN surely came close.

In a thread titled "Fake News Lie", I think this doesn't pass muster. If the point was "Biased News Reporting" there's a lot more ground.

Biased news spins.  Fake news misinforms.  Here, the story misinforms the public.  People have been led to believe that Trump has put Israeli agents physically at risk.  It's pure sophistry and technicality to try to distinguish that sort of deception from fake news.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on June 13, 2017, 01:34:43 PM
One of the VERY FIRST things I read when this came up was that Israel would make a bigger deal out of this than it strictly warranted in order to gain currency to spend elsewhere when it comes to getting Trump to see things their way. 

While that opinion is possibly tin-foil hattery, it's also just as plausible as intentional miss-characterization by the press in order to mislead the reader/viewer.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on June 13, 2017, 01:57:41 PM
One of the VERY FIRST things I read when this came up was that Israel would make a bigger deal out of this than it strictly warranted in order to gain currency to spend elsewhere when it comes to getting Trump to see things their way. 

While that opinion is possibly tin-foil hattery, it's also just as plausible as intentional miss-characterization by the press in order to mislead the reader/viewer.

True that!  Certainly they followed that strategy with Obama, with collaboration of the conservative press.  It will be fun to watch 3 more years of anti-semitic and left wing reporters swallowing their bile and crying for poor little misunderstood Netanyahu. :D
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on June 13, 2017, 02:48:53 PM
“What Trump did is liable to cause heavy damage to Israel’s security, as well as the source, and U.S. security,’’ Danny Yatom, a former chief of Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service, told a Tel Aviv radio station. “Especially if this information reaches our good friends, the Iranians.”

What would your headline be if you picked up that quote on the wire?

I'd investigate it like a good journalist.  Danny's been retired from politics for almost 10 years, and left Mossad over 15 years ago.  Is it possible he's still an inside source?  Maybe, but most likely not.

What was the context, Danny called into a radio program, no idea if he's a regular analyst of if this was a one time thing.

What does "What Trump did" refer to exactly?  I've not seen one quote that says want Danny meant by that, or that even explains what the radio program attributed to Trump prior to Danny's quote.

Do you have any actual information?  Cause what I see is a title with a convenient phrase being thrown at the back end of articles that are rampant speculation from other unnamed sources.  Do you see any instance where that is not the case?

Quote
Surely you don't believe this is so minor that it shouldn't have been reported.

Actually I guaranty it would not have been reported if Obama was in the White House.  The leak would never have occurred.  The NYT would never have run the story if it had occurred.  No one would have cared what a retired man in Israel told a radio host.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on June 13, 2017, 02:59:49 PM
One of the VERY FIRST things I read when this came up was that Israel would make a bigger deal out of this than it strictly warranted in order to gain currency to spend elsewhere when it comes to getting Trump to see things their way. 

While that opinion is possibly tin-foil hattery, it's also just as plausible as intentional miss-characterization by the press in order to mislead the reader/viewer.

Oh, I don't think it's tinfoil hat territory to suggest countries make hay out of minor things for publicity. That seems to me almost a given, to the point where I'd be surprised if it didn't happen. I don't think this 'fake news' item was the result of some coordinated conspiracy. It was Israel making a fuss to continue making their case against Russia and Iran (painting themselves as a victim), and taking the opportunity to stick it to Trump, who I assume isn't quite catering to them as much as is desired. On the American side of things the press loves an opportunity to make a big story out of a minor one, and of course it's free ratings to simultaneously ride the crest of a meme like Trump Is Bad.

The best part is that both parties have a built-in insurance policy when peddling stories like this. On the Israeli side it's not like you have swarms of people praising Iran and Russia, and so there's a pre-existing confirmation bias in favor of believing that anything good for those countries is bad for everyone else. On the American side the insurance is that even though a story about Trump may be overblown, the result is that something making him look somewhat worse than he actually is won't spark outrage among the NYT readers. They are already predisposed to hate anything Trump does, so an exaggerated case of him doing a bad thing won't generate blowback from the readership about the honesty of NYT reporting (just for example, you can take CNN or others just as easily). They will not so readily admit that something he did was vaguely bad but not as bad as they thought; credit isn't given in that direction freely.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on June 13, 2017, 03:24:44 PM
“What Trump did is liable to cause heavy damage to Israel’s security, as well as the source, and U.S. security,’’ Danny Yatom, a former chief of Mossad, Israel’s intelligence service, told a Tel Aviv radio station. “Especially if this information reaches our good friends, the Iranians.”

What would your headline be if you picked up that quote on the wire?

I'd investigate it like a good journalist.  Danny's been retired from politics for almost 10 years, and left Mossad over 15 years ago.  Is it possible he's still an inside source?  Maybe, but most likely not.

What was the context, Danny called into a radio program, no idea if he's a regular analyst of if this was a one time thing.

What does "What Trump did" refer to exactly?  I've not seen one quote that says want Danny meant by that, or that even explains what the radio program attributed to Trump prior to Danny's quote.

Do you have any actual information?  Cause what I see is a title with a convenient phrase being thrown at the back end of articles that are rampant speculation from other unnamed sources.  Do you see any instance where that is not the case?

Quote
Surely you don't believe this is so minor that it shouldn't have been reported.

Actually I guaranty it would not have been reported if Obama was in the White House.  The leak would never have occurred.  The NYT would never have run the story if it had occurred.  No one would have cared what a retired man in Israel told a radio host.

Breitbary would have run it all over facebook until Fox picked it up.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 11, 2017, 06:46:19 PM
Interesting compare and contrast in the world of fake news:

Donald Trump apparently took a meeting that originated from the following email teaser:

Quote
Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.  The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father

Which, if true, would have been actual evidence of a crime by Hillary.  Surprise surprise he agreed to take the meeting, as would anyone in any campaign in the history of the US (including the Clinton campaign - not a speculation see below).  Meanwhile, this is not in any way a crime, it's literally not.  So how did the press react?  8 stories from CNN leading their feed, not a one of which is anything close to neutral or accurate.  NYT "broke" the "story" and was negative all day. 

Heck Tim Kaine claims to believe this rises to the level of treason (notwithstanding it fails to meet any reasonable standard for treason:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/11/politics/tim-kaine-donald-trump-jr/ (http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/11/politics/tim-kaine-donald-trump-jr/)

And for comparison, lest we forget, the Clinton campaign was intimately involved in the production of the fake Trump dossier that was generated by a foreign agent, with whom they had contact, which was also linked to Russian intelligence, yet I didn't see Kaine turn himself in for treason.  Not to mention, they actually took the materials from the foreign agents and distributed them to the media. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2017/06/19/is-russiagate-really-hillarygate/#71c49baf5cf6 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderickgregory/2017/06/19/is-russiagate-really-hillarygate/#71c49baf5cf6)

Nothing to see here, no fake news.  lol, yeah right.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 11, 2017, 07:37:03 PM
First, Jr. not President Trump.

And while I agree there does need to be a way to get that info to light, it is indeed a "no no".  That doesn't mean you aren't correct about anyone taking that meeting.  Or, if they were smarter about it, having someone do so for them keeping their hands clean.   ::)

I think the biggest part of the issue is how vehemently they've denied ANY contact with ANYONE related to Russia.  And, while not all that significant (though this one seems obvious to me as testing to see if the bait works) in content, it's the fact they all managed to forget or decided for themselves that these encounters didn't matter and could therefore be answered in a negative, because, actually airing the contacts may... give someone the wrong idea?  That's the true "WTF were you thinking?" part of this and, IMO why it's a scandal.  This campaign is establishing a pattern of deciding the rules (and possibly the law) doesn't apply to them, and has zero issue with changing their story as more info is uncovered.

It's not that anything all that damning has come out (that wasn't obvious to anyone with a clue already) it's how ineptly they are handling this relatively innocent (so far) stuff.  Even this rather juicy piece of info wouldn't have been a big deal if he had disclosed it when he was suppose to.  I mean, it wouldn't have been good, but it could have been handled / spun by any campaign / admin with their *censored* together. 

That aside, if you do want to play the "but look at the other side!" game, you've got a good tool in Hillary.   :-\
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on July 12, 2017, 07:04:01 AM
Quote
Which, if true, would have been actual evidence of a crime by Hillary.
There are so many things wrong with this post that it is hard to know where to start... but maybe with hearsay.

"If true", at best, this would have only been evidence that the author of the email was told there was "information that would incriminate Hillary". Of course, the word "incriminate" could mean any number of things not even legally proscribed, the word itself might have been either directly quoted or just paraphrased, and we already know the email is not 100% accurate, because Russia is not a monarchy. The meeting as described by Trump junior, if he is to be believed, just illustrates the fact that hearsay is not the nail either a prosecutor or the press should hang their hat on when making a case.  A news organization that had made any such claim or even insinuation about Clinton based purely on that email would have then needed to make a retraction and correction later in the same day.

So no, the email in itself is not even weak evidence of any bad actions on Clinton's part, and it would have been irresponsible to make claims about Clinton purely based on the contents of that email.  I would like to say I am shocked that anybody here would even suggest that the media should have used that email as the only basis on which to write a story suggesting bad actions by Clinton - unfortunately, I'm not.

The one thing that the email is evidence of, is that Trump junior was told that a Russian government official - a representative of an adversarial foreign state - had offered to provide the Trump campaign with information that might "incriminate" the campaign's political opponent, a candidate for president.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 12, 2017, 08:28:31 AM
Donald, you know I actually don't have a problem with that. I don't see anything criminal or even unethical about meeting with a foreign agent to see evidence he claims to have incriminating an adversary. Paying for this information or promising favours *if* the information was actually used - maybe. But just meeting and listening? I just can't bring myself to care. Seems like another dud story to me. The Dems should keep at it. I'm sure something good will turn up eventually. The great thing about Trump is he keeps giving you more chances.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 12, 2017, 10:19:44 AM
Just to put this in perspective, this morning the CBS morning show was stating that these emails are proof that the Russian government supported the Trump campaign.  Anyone able to follow that logic leap?

What we have is a Russian lawyer, who used false promises to get in front of Trump Jr. to advocate for something else entirely.  Where is the Russian government in that?  Does Panetta's clicking on a phishing scam represent substantive proof that he was working with the fake "security" company that sent the phishing email?

And on this idea that the Trumps have said they never talked to the Russians.  Talk about revisionist history.  There is no one who lives in NYC who does not talk to Russians, there are 600,000 Russian Americans living in NYC alone.  They didn't have contact with the Russian government, though if this meeting had been legitimate maybe that would have changed.

And, important point, talking to Russian people is not illegal.  Talking to members of the Russian government is not illegal.  Getting position papers, even dirt from the Russians, government or otherwise is not illegal.  It's a farce to even claim its unethical against a backdrop where both sides  retain entire people to dig up dirt, any dirt, from any source and use it.

First, Jr. not President Trump.

Correct, sorry dropped the Junior.

Quote
And while I agree there does need to be a way to get that info to light, it is indeed a "no no".  That doesn't mean you aren't correct about anyone taking that meeting.  Or, if they were smarter about it, having someone do so for them keeping their hands clean.   ::)

It's literally not a no no.  Prior to Trump, the idea that a politician or their proxies wouldn't take that meeting would never occur to you.  In fact, every single politician on the left would still take that meeting if the contact said they could provide damaging info on Trump.  Not one would turn it down.

Quote
I think the biggest part of the issue is how vehemently they've denied ANY contact with ANYONE related to Russia.

See prior note.  This is a huge goal post shift.  It's been 100% clear from day one that they've denied actual contact or coordination with the Russian government.  Even this contact was not purported to be with the government, or even necessarily to reveal anything illegal.

Quote
That's the true "WTF were you thinking?" part of this and, IMO why it's a scandal.

They were thinking that part of a every single campaign in America for the last 200 years is digging up dirt on your opponent and that every single politician or their proxies would take this meeting.  WTF are you thinking, buying into the media pretending this is novel or shocking?

Quote
This campaign is establishing a pattern of deciding the rules (and possibly the law) doesn't apply to them, and has zero issue with changing their story as more info is uncovered.

The only campaign is the media's relentless drive to paint this group as acting outside the ordinary, when so far there is literally no evidence that they are doing even as much as the Clinton campaign (remember, we have actual proof the Clinton campaign and the DNC colluded with various parties to manipulate the election, but ooh Trump scary!).

Quote
Even this rather juicy piece of info wouldn't have been a big deal if he had disclosed it when he was suppose to.

Out of curiosity what should the disclosure have been?  I have never seen any politicians disclosure of their investigation teams efforts, did I miss it?

In this case, would the disclosure have looked like this?  "Met with a Russian lawyer we thought had dirt on Clinton, turned out to be a trick to get Facetime to pitch us on Russian adoptions."  Can you show me the law that requires this disclosure?  Honestly, you seem to be shoehorning into a completely unrelated disclosure requirement - don't blame you, the media is pretending for all its worth.

Quote
That aside, if you do want to play the "but look at the other side!" game, you've got a good tool in Hillary.   :-\

I picked Hillary because Kaine was calling Donnie Jr. a traitor for doing less than the Clinton/Kaine campaign did, seems super hypocritical.

I literally could have pointed at just about any national campaign by either party for virtually our 200 plus years of history and shown an example.  If something in present in 90 cases out of 100 and it's only been raised as a problem in 1 out of million, what does that actually tell you?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 12, 2017, 10:27:18 AM
Quote
Which, if true, would have been actual evidence of a crime by Hillary.
There are so many things wrong with this post that it is hard to know where to start... but maybe with hearsay.

I think you are confused.  If the meeting had been to deliver what the email claimed it would have put proof of criminal activity by Clinton into the Trump campaign's hands.  I never said it was true, or that such evidence exists.  I just commented that the email was promising to deliver evidence of a crime to the Trump campaign.

That's a meeting that any member of the Democratic party would take today if they thought someone in the Russian government was credibly promising to deliver evidence of a crime by Trump.

The rest of you post is really non-responsive.

I will note, you can't have it both ways, this email can't be an obvious fake and still be evidence of collusion with the Russian government.  It's odd choice of Putin to set up a meeting promising evidence with a private Russian lawyer who instead chooses to pitch for the rights of Russian orphans instead, if that's the kind of "collusion" you're concerned about then we are talking about different things.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 12, 2017, 10:33:57 AM
Just wanted to add this link:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donald-trump-jr-was-told-campaign-meeting-would-be-with-russian-government-lawyer-according-to-emails/2017/07/11/70b957e2-664c-11e7-9928-22d00a47778f_story.html?utm_term=.72806a95daa6 (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/donald-trump-jr-was-told-campaign-meeting-would-be-with-russian-government-lawyer-according-to-emails/2017/07/11/70b957e2-664c-11e7-9928-22d00a47778f_story.html?utm_term=.72806a95daa6)

Not cause the article's any good, but because it has a chart.  If you've ever played six degrees of Kevin Bacon, this shows Putin to Trump in 5 steps.  Lol, take a look at the actual relationships they highlighted.  I guarantee you can get from Putin to any US politician in two or less steps through people both would trust, but hey crazy conspiracy theories sell papers.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on July 12, 2017, 10:57:52 AM
Jason, your response to me was a bit of a non-sequitur - I said little about the relative importance of this particular meeting in the grand scheme of things, just pointing out that yes, it seems Trump junior, Kushner and Manafort, at least, were willing to meet with Russian officials in order to acquire dirt on Clinton.

I was simply responding to Seriati's claim that the email from Goldstone to Trump junior should have been given any weight as evidence against Clinton. 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 12, 2017, 11:13:59 AM
Quote
They were thinking that part of a every single campaign in America for the last 200 years is digging up dirt on your opponent and that every single politician or their proxies would take this meeting.  WTF are you thinking, buying into the media pretending this is novel or shocking?
I realize you are supporting your assertion this was nothing wrong/new, but I didn’t suggest anything of the sort.  Were this some US citizen who came forward with this info, I’d have zero interest and wouldn’t be shocked at all.

As for the revisionist history…  Maybe I’m just making the obvious mistake of listening to the words that come out of Trump’s, or his campaign/staff’s mouths regarding contact with any Russians.  And how absurd the idea is. 

Quote
The only campaign is the media's relentless drive to paint this group as acting outside the ordinary, when so far there is literally no evidence that they are doing even as much as the Clinton campaign (remember, we have actual proof the Clinton campaign and the DNC colluded with various parties to manipulate the election, but ooh Trump scary!).
I’m not going to defend Clinton.  Had she won… maybe I’d feel SOME obligation to defend her as I did, in the end vote for her.  And, while I get that it’s a trope in politics today to set the line at “the other side”, I don’t feel I have to.  Would “The Media” have been taking it easier on Clinton at this point had she won?  Ya, seems plausible.  I’m not saying you’re wrong on this.  I will say that I find it disturbing you take any comfort at all in this, and feel it excuses what is going on now.
Quote
Out of curiosity what should the disclosure have been?  I have never seen any politicians disclosure of their investigation teams efforts, did I miss it?
So here’s the part where I MAY be victim of being mislead by the media, and all the political thrillers I watch and read…  It is my understanding, that as part of the security clearance and vetting process, which Don Jr. (I believe) went through, that you must disclose, in writing, contacts you have had with foreign persons.  The extent of this, I don’t know about, the amount of info you must provide, I don’t know about.  The ability for those interviewing you to ask follow up questions, I don’t know about.  If he, and apparently several other key people in the campaign, omit these contacts (or forget about them…) then obviously nobody can eliminate them as without risk. 

This system is meant to protect us, and these people from being exploited or manipulated as much as it is to provide a legal “gotchya!” perjury charge should they be shady characters and lie about it.  Am I totally off in Tom Clancy land?  Is it all BS, that others in the media like to believe and our metaphorical ass is out there exposed and the idea of a background check, (something some of my tech sector friends have even had to go through) is a myth when it comes to the highest level of our government?  Thanks for not blaming me, but feel free to educate me.

Quote
I picked Hillary because Kaine was calling Donnie Jr. a traitor for doing less than the Clinton/Kaine campaign did, seems super hypocritical.
Fair enough.  I also find hypocrisy to be the most outrageous sin in today’s politics.  I would again highlight this is not about opo-research.  It’s about the source.  How people draw the line at Russia and think UK info is groovy kinda is a head scratcher to me.  Maybe the whole ally / ???  (I’m hesitant to call Russia anything but a competitor at this point in history) is the hang up?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 12, 2017, 03:14:11 PM
The disturbing part of the e-mails (which isn't fake news) is this:

Quote
During the email exchange, Trump Jr. was told by an intermediary that the “high level” information he would be offered about Clinton was “part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump” and would be “highly useful for your father.”

The younger Trump appeared to relish the opportunity. “If it’s what you say I love it especially later in the summer,” he wrote back.

So Trump Jr. was under the impression that the Russian government was trying to support his father, and it didn't set off any warning bells with him.  He apparently relished the idea of getting support from the Russians.

Doesn't this disturb anyone?  Do we really want our Presidential candidate teams looking for and accepting help from foreign governments, especially ones we are in conflict with?

It is also not clear that Trump Jr. did not break the law.  Per NPR (http://www.npr.org/2017/07/11/536711570/the-question-hanging-over-washington-did-donald-trump-jr-break-the-law):

Quote
The problem is that a federal law says foreign nationals cannot "directly or indirectly" give a "thing of value" to American political campaigns. Moreover, the law says no one is allowed to "solicit, accept, or receive" any thing of value from a foreign national to help a candidate.

Trump Jr.'s attorney Alan Futerfas says "Don Jr. did nothing wrong," but Robert Bauer, a Democratic campaign finance lawyer, says the law is not on Trump Jr.'s side.

"This is a case where a campaign may have been openly courting support from a foreign national in trying win an election. And that is squarely prohibited by the federal campaign finance laws," Bauer said.

This law, I understand from another segment, was written in response to the money Hillary received (and returned) from China (though don't quote me). :)

Trump Jr. may not have done any actual criminal behavior because he supposedly received nothing of value from the Russian lawyer.  But it seems pretty clear that Trump Jr., Jared Kushner and Paul Manafort all had the intent of getting valuable information for the campaign from what they were told was the Russian government.

This time he failed, but not for lack of trying.  It remains to be seen if perhaps he, or someone else, succeeded later. ;)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 12, 2017, 03:28:54 PM
Quote
Doesn't this disturb anyone?
I am disturbed they were so blatant about it.  Sadly, I'm not surprised at all, and would, as Serati suggested, expect any campaign to arrange some sort of follow up to this type of bait.

Not sure how you could stop it.  Considering how even our lackadaisical efforts are so easily ignored.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 12, 2017, 03:59:22 PM
Quote
So Trump Jr. was under the impression that the Russian government was trying to support his father, and it didn't set off any warning bells with him.  He apparently relished the idea of getting support from the Russians.

Doesn't this disturb anyone?  Do we really want our Presidential candidate teams looking for and accepting help from foreign governments, especially ones we are in conflict with?

I'm sorry it's not disturbing in the slightest. If someone claims to have dirt on a rival candidate, including "incriminating" evidence, I would be shocked if they didn't agree to hear that person out. You're suggesting that if it comes from the Russian government, it's unethical to use or reveal incriminating evidence about a rival? Just meeting with him and listening to his words is treasonous is it?

So if Putin hands Trump Jr. a memo proving that Hillary committed fraud or murdered someone for example, he'd be the "unethical" one if he revealed it? :)

I know I know - Putin is evil and anyone touched by this Mephistopholis even directly can't help but be corrupted. But by the way, maybe I missed something, but when was this declaration of war on Russia? For how many years has this "conflict" been going on? How long has the war been waged and how many casualties have there been?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 12, 2017, 04:17:24 PM
Doesn't this disturb anyone?

Why would it?  I can point to dozens if not hundreds of statements by members of the various governments in Europe and the rest of America that express support or preference for one campaign or doubt of the other.  Does that "disturb" you?  Are foreign governments prohibited from preferring US candidates?  What law is that?  It certainly doesn't apply the other way, where we routinely make statements about our preferences in other peoples government.

Quote
It is also not clear that Trump Jr. did not break the law.  Per NPR (http://www.npr.org/2017/07/11/536711570/the-question-hanging-over-washington-did-donald-trump-jr-break-the-law):

It's actually very clear he didn't.  If you applied these laws as strictly as you seem to think, we could probably throw every national politician in jail.

I think Jasonr's analogy is pretty good, but the interpretation you espouse, for receiving anything of value could be tripped up by a foreign national announcing their love for a candidate and releasing damaging information unsolicited, or by a foreign national announcing they have evidence that a candidate committed a crime, and the other side calling for it to be made public.

Even if such were the correct interpretation of the law, shouldn't it trouble you even more that you seem to prefer that evidence of a crime be buried rather than made public to maintain a "fair" election, where our choice is not influenced by foreign nationals?  If Trump had spent his youth as a mercenary butchering villagers, would it really be an illegal foreign influence for the Clinton campaign to have brought those foreign victims to light?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on July 12, 2017, 04:42:18 PM
If it was all innocent and above board, why are we only hearing about it now? Why not volunteer the information when there started to be concerns about contact between the Russian government and the Trump campaign?

It's a pretty tidy story: someone who was represented as being in contact with the Russian government said they had damaging information on Clinton. Trump campaign goes to check it out and see if it's something they can verify from less dubious sources (and maybe even see if it demonstrates malfeasance by the Russians). The person didn't have anything worthwhile and tried to talk government policy so Trump's people told her to get stuffed and left. At the time, they thought it was just someone trying to pull a fast one but given recent allegations they feel it's necessary to present this information to the American people.

Instead we get: nope, never happened, none of my people ever talked to the Russians, you're the puppet. Wait? NYT is about to break the story? Here's the emails proving it wasn't really anything.

I think we're drifting into if not malice then incompetence territory.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 12, 2017, 04:50:16 PM
Foreign campaign contributions are illegal. Not sure if providing information of this type can be considered an in-kind donation. If they spent money obtaining it, or were paid to broker it, I suspect a case could be made. Just talking about providing it, however, that's quite unclear.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on July 12, 2017, 05:20:50 PM
Quote
Sadly, I'm not surprised at all, and would, as Seriati suggested, expect any campaign to arrange some sort of follow up to this type of bait.
I disagree - any experienced political campaign researcher would have had it drilled into the brain that everything they touch may, and very likely will, come to light over the period of the campaign.

Having questionably sourced negative information on an opponent, regardless of whether it was actually used, has in the past been a fire-able offense. It's in vogue to cut the Trump campaign and administration a huge amount of slack in the experience area, but it is NOT an accepted practice for exactly the reasons we are seeing now: because the blow-back is potentially huge, either on the campaign or the administration (ignoring the actuality, in this case, of providing leverage to a foreign state, one that is now in possession of possible blackmail material - and well, hey, why exactly is a an adversarial government providing you with this information anyway...)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on July 12, 2017, 05:36:15 PM
(ignoring the actuality, in this case, of providing leverage to a foreign state, one that is now in possession of possible blackmail material - and well, hey, why exactly is a an adversarial government providing you with this information anyway...)

Well, from what we've "know" (or at least have been told), nothing came of it, so the "foreign leverage" was near nul to start with, and it certainly is nul now that it's become public.

As to what Russia could have gained? (Assuming the offer had been legit) That is something we've already covered, Russia(Putin) did NOT want Hillary Clinton as the next PotUS. It really doesn't need to go much deeper than that.

Edit: There is also the possibility that Russia felt that Trump's administration would be unstable(doesn't take a Rocket Scientist to realize that was a likely outcome), and because of that instability, it would potentially provide them with openings to expand their own sphere of influence.

Gaining direct leverage over Trump isn't needed, if it could be obtained? Great. But not required.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 12, 2017, 05:46:07 PM
Not to state the obvious.  But THIS is what they had to gain.  The news frenzy right now. 
>Dangle bait
>Reel in fish
>Throw fish back

Proves that if you DO want to get them damaging info, they are open to it.
Gives you something damaging to leak later.

You got to keep in mind this is a win-win situation for Russia.  They get rid of a candidate that seemed a shoe in.  They gain damaging leverage over the Trump campaign.

If you are inclined to ask, "what damaging leverage?", turn on your TV.  The substance, and legality are (dishearteningly) inconsequential.  P.R. wise, this reveal is a blow to the administration.  Contrary to what some seem to believe, Trump and Putin are not friends.  In so far as Russia "wanted Trump to win", it was because he'll be easier to *censored* with and will diminish our global influence. 

America First!
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 12, 2017, 05:59:42 PM
If it was all innocent and above board, why are we only hearing about it now? Why not volunteer the information when there started to be concerns about contact between the Russian government and the Trump campaign?

Disclose what?   Based on the meeting, would their be any reason to think this person actually was part of the Russian government?  The meeting apparently had nothing to do with the teaser, and was not itself something that would be required to be disclosed on a security clearance form.

I think, you guys are assuming this is a "government" contact with the Russian government.  That's not the case.  It's not even the case if you assume the email was in "good faith" in the first place.  All you have is a guy - not in the Russian government - asserting the Russian government wants them to win, arranging for a lawyer who is not in the Russian government to meet them. 

Honestly, if it turns out that Donnie's barber is a Russian national is that disclosable in your world?

And the idea that because it's dirt its disclosable is nonsense.  Show many any disclosure of the muckracking meetings of the Clinton campaign, or heck to be parallel, of the Obama campaign since he actually was elected President.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on July 12, 2017, 06:03:59 PM
Quote
Well, from what we've "know" (or at least have been told), nothing came of it, so the "foreign leverage" was near nul to start with, and it certainly is nul now that it's become public.
You seem to be misunderstanding what the foreign leverage had been in this case - it's not the information, but the possession of the information, the mechanism of acquiring it.

Is there more where this came from? I wouldn't bet against it.

And as D.W. mentioned above, the current paralysis of the administration is certainly not "nothing".
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on July 12, 2017, 06:10:02 PM
Quote
I think, you guys are assuming this is a "government" contact with the Russian government.  That's not the case.  It's not even the case if you assume the email was in "good faith" in the first place.  All you have is a guy - not in the Russian government - asserting the Russian government wants them to win, arranging for a lawyer who is not in the Russian government to meet them.
No, that is not being assumed, and I don't think any honest reading of what was written here could give you that impression.

The issue is that the Trump campaign members showed themselves willing to meet with Russian government officials, and attempting to meet with what they thought were Russian government officials, in order to acquire potentially damaging information against a US presidential candidate.

A secondary issue is that Trump junior showed glee at the prospect of the Russian government working to get his father elected - which is more a PR issue for him than anything.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 12, 2017, 07:13:02 PM
DonaldD, if it's not assumed, and no honest reading could get me there, what exactly are the demands that this should have been disclosed?  Or statements to the effect of why are we hearing about this now?

This is literally a not an event required to be disclosed.  That may change if it were with a government official, and you're trying to get a security clearance.  But that's kind of it.  I'm not seeing how to read the demands/outrage here other than in that way given the background.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on July 12, 2017, 07:58:38 PM
I said nothing about any demands for disclosure.  You're reading things into what I wrote that are simply not there, nor even implied.

Just read my last post, the part that I actually wrote, not the other part that you imagine I wrote.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 12, 2017, 08:00:34 PM
To be fair.  I did bring that up.   ;D
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on July 12, 2017, 08:16:00 PM
I suppose Seriati might have meant the "royal" "you guys", then...
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on July 12, 2017, 08:23:49 PM
I wonder how this would have been treated by today's Trump apologists back in the day: "Obama campaign chairman attempted to meet with an Iranian government lawyer reputed to have evidence that would have incriminated Mitt Romney in his dealings with Iran"
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 12, 2017, 08:33:21 PM
Let me flip that on you.  Think we'd be in the same boat if today, with Trump, it was Iran instead of Russia?

I think part of this is that the Trump crew, and indeed an increasing amount of our nation, see Russia in a less adversarial role and more just "the competition" and a potential partner or opportunity even in some things.

Now, recently, there's been some backsliding on that, but it's still worth mentioning.  The lack of outrage is in some ways, a dismissal of the old cold war dynamic. 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 12, 2017, 08:47:03 PM
Quote
I wonder how this would have been treated by today's Trump apologists back in the day: "Obama campaign chairman attempted to meet with an Iranian government lawyer reputed to have evidence that would have incriminated Mitt Romney in his dealings with Iran"

Donald, I am sincerely puzzled by your outrage, which you seem to see as self-evident, but others (myself included) are scratching our heads over.

Foreign governments can talk with anyone they please and conversely, anyone can talk with them. I don't see this as untoward unless there is some kind of money changing hands, or otherwise a conflict of interest developing.

It's like if the other side in a lawsuit calls me to have a meeting with them. They may be adversaries of my client, by why wouldn't I at least listen to what they have to say? As the Ferengi say, hear all, trust nothing. Seems logical to me.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on July 12, 2017, 08:55:51 PM
Disclose what?   Based on the meeting, would their be any reason to think this person actually was part of the Russian government?  The meeting apparently had nothing to do with the teaser, and was not itself something that would be required to be disclosed on a security clearance form.

I think, you guys are assuming this is a "government" contact with the Russian government.  That's not the case.  It's not even the case if you assume the email was in "good faith" in the first place.  All you have is a guy - not in the Russian government - asserting the Russian government wants them to win, arranging for a lawyer who is not in the Russian government to meet them. 

Honestly, if it turns out that Donnie's barber is a Russian national is that disclosable in your world?

And the idea that because it's dirt its disclosable is nonsense.  Show many any disclosure of the muckracking meetings of the Clinton campaign, or heck to be parallel, of the Obama campaign since he actually was elected President.
To avoid this kind of situation and to control the narrative around the meeting. "No, the lawyer totally didn't discuss anything of interest and we just ignored her," sounds a lot more convincing when you volunteer the information rather than scramble to get it out ahead of the media. Especially since three people who are inclined to talk to NYT saw the email. 

Not to mention, if the person wasn't with the government, and Trump's believe didn't believe they were from the Russians, why did three top members of the Trump campaign meet with them? The only thing giving the claim that they had info on Clinton any weight was that it was from the Russians. Or did those three just meet any Tom, Dick, or Ivan that promised them dirt?

If they did believe they were meeting someone with the government, they should have disclosed it to because the lawyer in question had some very high-level clients in Russia and wanted to talk government policy. The reverse of the barber scenario also seems to apply: so long as anyone Trump's people talk to isn't officially employed by the Kremlin then they're non-disclosable.

Donald, better example is vs McCain.

jasonr, part of it is context for me. There's been months of noise about potential issues with Russia and denials about any sort of contact, yet they fail to mention meeting someone who represented to them as being associated with the Russia government and has high-level Russian clients? If it was nothing, why not get out in front of it?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on July 12, 2017, 09:04:52 PM
I get that Jason - it's clear that half the country doesn't care whether foreign governments work to elect their preferred candidates in US elections, and the other half, seemingly including Congress, actually don't want foreign governments directly and indirectly working with one candidate to bring another candidate down.

Basically, it's the difference between those who are OK with foreign governments exerting control over the US democratic process, and those who are maybe a little more naively invested in having the US electorate come to its own decision.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on July 12, 2017, 09:21:13 PM
Quote
Let me flip that on you.  Think we'd be in the same boat if today, with Trump, it was Iran instead of Russia?
If the Trump campaign had organized a meeting with who they thought were Iranian government lawyers who had evidence purported to incriminate Clinton?  Yes, I'm pretty sure the Trump campaign would be getting skewered just the same.

My analogy, however, was a thought exercise for Trump apologists, to see whether a similar situation in the Obama era would evince the same reactions - sure, I could have used Russia for the comparison, but it seems like some folks have grown a somewhat irrational acceptance of Russian interference of late, I can't imagine why, so I used what I expect is another foreign adversary that had not been so normalized in their minds.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 12, 2017, 09:23:24 PM
I meant would "the apologists" still do so?  Or would they turn their backs on him?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 12, 2017, 09:40:12 PM
Quote
Basically, it's the difference between those who are OK with foreign governments exerting control over the US democratic process, and those who are maybe a little more naively invested in having the US electorate come to its own decision.

You will have to elaborate further on what is meant by "control" in this context, because I find your insinuation bears little resemblance to the facts. If you mean a foreign government buying a candidate or blackmailing a candidate, then we'd agree that this is extremely bad. If a foreign government hacked into election machines and changed the outcome of vote, that would be another example of a very worrying thing.

But I'm baffled by your concept that a foreign government *speaking to* a candidate or seeking to *influence* that candidate with words is somehow equated with "control" and a corruption of the system.

That's like saying that if I listen to a settlement proposal from the other side's lawyer or hear his arguments, I am somehow being unethically "controlled" by him. What bollocks.

Why can't a candidate or his surrogate listen to what a Russian lawyer has to tell him? If there is crucial information promised that could expose criminality on the part of the opposition, who in blazes wouldn't want to give this a hearing?

Are you suggesting the Russian lawyer bribed Trump Jr.? Blackmailed him? Or are you insinuating that they mind controlled him? Or are you simply condemning the fact that Trump Jr. appeared in this instance, to feel that he could profit from the information they were providing? And exactly why would that be unethical? Because the lawyer was Russian? They're our enemies now? Says who exactly? If it had been a Swedish lawyer or a Korean lawyer, it would have been okay to take the meeting?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: DonaldD on July 12, 2017, 11:23:36 PM
Jason, I'm not sure why you are ignoring the specifics of what Trump junior's expectations were.  He wasn't meeting with a lawyer who just happened to be Russian - he thought he was meeting with a "Crown Prosecutor" (yes, I know that isn't a thing in Russia) who was going to provide "high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump" (my bold) And that is completely outside the context of the Russian government's propaganda and hacking war against western democracies.

The Trump campaign was attempting to acquire information provided by a foreign government, information that was being characterized as beneficial to the Trump candidacy and damaging to the Clinton candidacy. There are so many reasons why normalizing this would be a bad idea. Your seeming assumption that the Russian state information apparatus, having acquired compromising information about US politicians, would not use this information to damage the USA in specific ways, yes, including releasing only the information that would help themselves the most and damage the USA the most, and keeping to themselves that information that would damage the candidate that would be most beneficial to Russia, shows a complete lack of imagination on your part.

And no, it would be no less bad if it was "high level and sensitive information part of Sweden and its government's support for Mr. Trump" that was being delivered by a Swedish government employee, nor if it were "high level and sensitive information part of South Korea and its government's support for Mr. Trump" that was being delivered by a South Korean government employee.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on July 12, 2017, 11:48:28 PM
If they did believe they were meeting someone with the government, they should have disclosed it to because the lawyer in question had some very high-level clients in Russia and wanted to talk government policy. The reverse of the barber scenario also seems to apply: so long as anyone Trump's people talk to isn't officially employed by the Kremlin then they're non-disclosable.

The issue here is that while they may have met with the person thinking they were agents of a foreign government. They evidently left those meetings thinking otherwise. So where exactly under existing law is THAT supposed to be disclosed? "Oh yeah, I met with this one guy that I thought represented a foreign government, but after I met with them, I was convinced they were full of hot air."

The requirement/expectation was disclosure of known communication with representatives of foreign governments, which this contact evidently wasn't. So you're left with splitting hairs on the whole matter of if initiation of a contact believing that to be the case is sufficient grounds.

Contact with foreign nationals is not the same thing as contact with foreign governments.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on July 12, 2017, 11:56:03 PM
And no, it would be no less bad if it was "high level and sensitive information part of Sweden and its government's support for Mr. Trump" that was being delivered by a Swedish government employee, nor if it were "high level and sensitive information part of South Korea and its government's support for Mr. Trump" that was being delivered by a South Korean government employee.

So then, how about that information dossier that the Obama Admin obtained from a foreigh(British) agent via "russian agents" in regards to activities Trump allegedly undertook in Russia any different?

That the source was foreign doesn't matter much. What would matter would be any "terms and conditions" that may have come with that information. But as no information exchange actually happened, there isn't anything to see here. Doubly so since the "foreign agent" doesn't appear to have been working for any government in the first place.

As to the scenario regarding Obama, Romney and Iran. You're assuming I hadn't already "turned my back" on Obama by then. But in that particular case, I'd be calling the Republicans pants on head retarded for pursuing that issue too. I didn't like Obama, but that didn't stop me from calling the birthers stupid and irrelevant from the onset.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 13, 2017, 07:27:03 AM

Quote
The Trump campaign was attempting to acquire information provided by a foreign government, information that was being characterized as beneficial to the Trump candidacy and damaging to the Clinton candidacy. There are so many reasons why normalizing this would be a bad idea. Your seeming assumption that the Russian state information apparatus, having acquired compromising information about US politicians, would not use this information to damage the USA in specific ways, yes, including releasing only the information that would help themselves the most and damage the USA the most, and keeping to themselves that information that would damage the candidate that would be most beneficial to Russia, shows a complete lack of imagination on your part.

You are insinuating that the Russian information may be selective, biased or self serving. I file that under the Duh category. The question is, why would that preclude someone from listening to that information and making his own judgment? If Russia presented solid evidence that, say, Hillary had a rival murdered, you would shut your ears, disconnect your phones and put out your eyes because of the fear that *gasp* the source might be self-serving or impure in his motives? Either the info is credible or it isn't.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 13, 2017, 09:37:22 AM
You tell them to release it, or refer them to the the proper agency to disclose information they may have and tell them it would be inappropriate for your campaign to accept this information from you.

You then report to the same agency, and any other relevant agency, that you were approached, and that this information may be out there.  Maybe you even do so publicly.  Letting "the people" know not only how principled you are in not "stooping to letting a foreign power hand you the election", but also how concerned you are that this info may be out there, and how you dread the idea of the Russians having potential blackmail material on your opponent.

Or... you know, you *censored* it up in spectacular fashion, like Don Jr. and crew managed.  Whatever works.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on July 13, 2017, 10:03:58 AM
You tell them to release it, or refer them to the the proper agency to disclose information they may have and tell them it would be inappropriate for your campaign to accept this information from you.

While not opposed to the information release, or worse, then discovering there is information and then "colluding" as to the timing of said information release. I'm going to side on human nature compelling most normal people to want an advance look at the information so "your team" can prepare a response before it hits the general public, even if the lead time is only an hour or so. That's not dirty politics, that's human nature.

As it was, there was no information, so we'll never know which choice they would have made.

Quote
You then report to the same agency, and any other relevant agency, that you were approached, and that this information may be out there.  Maybe you even do so publicly.  Letting "the people" know not only how principled you are in not "stooping to letting a foreign power hand you the election", but also how concerned you are that this info may be out there, and how you dread the idea of the Russians having potential blackmail material on your opponent.

Yes, reporting something like this to the Obama Administration about Hillary Clinton was very likely to result in immediate, swift and meaningful action.  ::)

Where exactly have you been since 2012?

As to the hazard of prematurely bringing that information forward yourself(prior to meeting them), clearly if they had done so in this instance, it would have been a massive win for the Clinton Campaign as not only did you just make baseless accusations against them, but you were "bamboozled" by someone pretending to be an agent of a foreign government.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 13, 2017, 10:31:54 AM
Quote
That's not dirty politics, that's human nature.
"Clean" politics, would probably be constraining human nature.  Just because "everyone" would be tempted, doesn't make it OK.

Quote
As it was, there was no information, so we'll never know which choice they would have made.
Wait a week or two.  Never say never with this crew.

Quote
...very likely to result in immediate, swift and meaningful action.  ::)
So demonstrating you can play a clean game is synonymous with being a looser.  Got it.  If your opposition isn't equally worthy of sainthood, you should play in the mud.  /shrug  Probably not wrong.  Maybe, that's why I'd risk being labeled as "bamboozled" in public, rather than just trust them to do the right thing.  I honestly don't see the risk here if you declined the meeting. 

It only becomes a PR mess, when you accept it.  You only tip your hand to Russia that you are willing to cooperate with them if you accept it.  You only open yourself up to Russia revealing at a later date that you accepted help in order to damage your reputation if you accepted that meeting.  (and lied about it...)

Listen, if a foreign power wanted my opponent to lose; groovy.  To quote Don Jr., "I love it"!  That doesn't mean I'm going to let them get their hooks into me in their effort to sabotage my opponent. 

This, right now, in the news, this week.  This is a weapon Russia could have (or is) employing to weaken Trump.  It cost them NOTHING.  All because these people succumbed to "human nature" and took the meeting. 

I cannot grok how people are defending this as no big deal.  It may not be some smoking gun that will torpedo the administration.  But it perfectly illustrates how out of their depth this whole team is.  They don't understand how the global game is played and how terrible they are at it.  From out the gate, and showing no signs of learning.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 13, 2017, 10:58:34 AM
Quote
Listen, if a foreign power wanted my opponent to lose; groovy.  To quote Don Jr., "I love it"!  That doesn't mean I'm going to let them get their hooks into me in their effort to sabotage my opponent. 

Like Donald you seem to equate listening to someone with being controlled by them.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 13, 2017, 11:27:30 AM
As a general rule?  No. 
But in this situation, the act of listening, after being informed as to the source and the subject matter?  Yes.  That's a hook. 
When the meeting existing at all, can cause all this media attention? 
Holding that over someone would be a form of control.

Is this ammunition being spent, or just an un-orchestrated leak?  Does it matter?  Again, this was a win-win for those making the offer.  Which leads to it being a lose-lose to accepting the meeting. 

Now, as has been pointed out, most wouldn't let such an opportunity slip by.  But I expect MOST, would know how to insulate themselves from any possibility of "being controlled".
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on July 13, 2017, 12:10:44 PM
I cannot grok how people are defending this as no big deal.  It may not be some smoking gun that will torpedo the administration.  But it perfectly illustrates how out of their depth this whole team is.  They don't understand how the global game is played and how terrible they are at it.  From out the gate, and showing no signs of learning.

It's no big deal because it's not really news, or unexpected where Trump and his crew of misfits is concerned. I already knew full and well Trump was "out of his depth" before he started doing well in the primaries. How many times do I have to reiterate I thought he was a terrible candidate?

This latest reveal ultimately changes nothing. Particularly given the matter that with what we know at present, nothing actually happened. He was a bad candidate, he's a sub-par President. The system of Government we have says he's President until at least January 2021, possible as long as January 2025.

Suck it up, this isn't the first time this nation has dealt with incompetents at the steering wheel. So far he hasn't done anything that seriously endangers the nation, and there are no provisions for unseating a President on the basis of thinking he's a Prime Recruit for the Keystone Cops.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 13, 2017, 12:32:50 PM
Quote
How many times do I have to reiterate I thought he was a terrible candidate?
A few more than I do regarding Hillary?  :)

Quote
Suck it up
I'm not out there shouting this is enough.  Impeach!  Impeach! 

And you're right.  It changes nothing.  We already knew they lied habitually.  It's mostly just depressing.  If Jr. broke an actual law, he'll be sacrificed for Sr.  If not, business as usual.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: rightleft22 on July 13, 2017, 12:43:20 PM
Quote
It's no big deal because it's not really news

So it doesn’t bother you how much, or in what ways, a foreign power might try to influence USA elections/democracy?
No one is going to do anything about it so its not news, nothing we can learn from or take measures limit such inevitable future intrusions.

How are we defining news? I'm so confused.

Trump presidency is unique in that people don’t expect him to mean what he says or tweets. It is mystifying and understandable only as a physiological happening

Historically when the election of such leaders those that supported them will convince themselves, when all is said and done, that they never did. 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 13, 2017, 01:03:54 PM
Quote
Trump presidency is unique in that people don’t expect him to mean what he says or tweets.

Respectfully, what rock have you been hiding under? For most of my adult lifevI watched greasy politicians smile and say things I knew weren't true, they knew weren't true and even the journalists questioning them knew weren't true.

When Obama said that he supported the traditional definition of marriage, did you seriously believe him? I mean really? That's about as brazen a lie as any Trump ever made - it's just with Obama you couldn't prove it because Obama wasn't an idiot.

The difference is one of degree not kind. Unlike his more evolved breathren Trump won't even bother to mask his lies with obsfuscation and plausible deniability. The man is a garbage fire. Yet it's been heading in this direction for a long time. Standards have been slipping for a long time, accelerated by the switchover from journalism to punditry.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on July 13, 2017, 01:05:55 PM
Historically when the election of such leaders those that supported them will convince themselves, when all is said and done, that they never did.
Well, I didn't vote for him, so don't look at me.  8)

I think Trump is ultimately either going to be a Republican Jimmy Carter(which actually wouldn't be too shocking, he was a Democrat back then), or he'll make an attempt at being Reagan. Based on what I've seen so far, Bush(43) is probably the best he'll do(hopefully without the major events).

Of course, failing that, I guess he could pull a Nixon on us.

I highly doubt the doomsday scenarios so many others are proffering out there. I'm more concerned about the SJW/AntiFa crowd to be honest. I'm certain "they don't get it" and will fail to amount to much, but looking at the history of what went down in Germany with their National Socialist party, all it could take is a solid drop in the economy and all bets are off. Only instead of the Jews getting the blame, it'll be CIS-gendered White Males on the receiving end for it was their efforts to "preserve their White Privilege" that lead to that dire outcome.  ::)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 13, 2017, 01:19:53 PM
If there is somehow an uprising from "the left" you'd be a fool to believe it was the "SJW/AntiFa" crowd.
The only potential uprising I can see on the horizon is Trump supporters if some new method of kicking the President out of office was invented just for Trump.  And I don't know as I'd blame them entirely for it.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 13, 2017, 03:33:57 PM
Quote
So Trump Jr. was under the impression that the Russian government was trying to support his father, and it didn't set off any warning bells with him.  He apparently relished the idea of getting support from the Russians.

Doesn't this disturb anyone?  Do we really want our Presidential candidate teams looking for and accepting help from foreign governments, especially ones we are in conflict with?

I'm sorry it's not disturbing in the slightest. If someone claims to have dirt on a rival candidate, including "incriminating" evidence, I would be shocked if they didn't agree to hear that person out. You're suggesting that if it comes from the Russian government, it's unethical to use or reveal incriminating evidence about a rival? Just meeting with him and listening to his words is treasonous is it?

So if Putin hands Trump Jr. a memo proving that Hillary committed fraud or murdered someone for example, he'd be the "unethical" one if he revealed it? :)

I know I know - Putin is evil and anyone touched by this Mephistopholis even directly can't help but be corrupted. But by the way, maybe I missed something, but when was this declaration of war on Russia? For how many years has this "conflict" been going on? How long has the war been waged and how many casualties have there been?

Here's the difference, jasonr.

Why go through Trump, Jr.? ;)

Think about it.  You have damaging information on a candidate that you oppose.  It's good information; it's been vetted; it's confirmed true.  So why not just publish that information?  What's stopping you?  You still get the information out.  You still damage the candidate you're against.

So why offer it to the opposing candidate (through his son) first?  What can you possibly gain from that?

There are only two things I can think of.  Money and/or influence.  He'll either pay you for it, or he will owe you.  And by offering it first, you can set the terms, or else refuse to give the info or publish it.

By offering it first to Trump, Jr., the person was either trying to get money or to influence the candidate, the one who became President.  And the info came from, according to the e-mail that Trump, Jr. got, "part of Russia and its government support of Trump."  And the Russian government doesn't need his money (no matter how rich he is).

To which Trump, Jr. said, "I love it"!

He loved the idea of owing Russia for the information.  And he asked Jared and Manafort along to witness the deal.

I'm sorry you're not disturbed in the slightest.  Russia may not be our enemy, but they are by no stretch of the imagination our friends and ally.  So I don't see why you wouldn't be disturbed at the idea that they wanted the President to "owe them one."  To personally "owe them one."  And that Trump, Jr. jumped gleefully to take that gift.

Republicans were outraged--outraged--that Clinton took money from China (although it was given back).  Why?  What possible reason should anyone be the slightest disturbed that the President's campaign took a few measly bucks from China.  Unless we wanted to prevent the President from "owing them one."

Be disturbed, by this, and by the people who are telling you not to be disturbed.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 13, 2017, 04:17:29 PM
Wayward I do see your point, but I can't help but find the equivalence between accepting information and accepting *money* a bit specious. I'm curious - does this purely apply to a foreign government or to anyone? And if it is not exclusive to monetary favours (i.e. taking bribes) but includes even the provision of mere information where does this stop?

If an anonymous tipster calls up Trump's foot soldier and offers to tip him off on some piece of information, is he not allowed to hear that person out or communicate with him because he might "owe" the tipster who might in turn work for a foreign government for all he knows?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 13, 2017, 05:12:00 PM
Quote
While there is good reason to doubt all sorts of actors at the moment, one thing you should keep in mind - and this is a significant point - is that while Assange has been known to blow smoke when speaking off the cuff, Wikileaks has, to date, never released faulty data or files that weren't the genuine article.

While by contrast, I note that James Clapper, the former Director of National Intelligence, has never been prosecuted for perjury concerning his false testimony before congress. To my knowledge, no one has been prosecuted for illegal surveillance of Americans under the Obama admin. Indeed, the only response to the revelation of this illegal program was the attempted arrest and prosecution of the whistleblower.

So why in blazes would I believe a word these unrepentant (confirmed) liars have to say about anything?

And speaking of motives to lie, it's been increasingly apparent to me that U.S. policy has been to vilify Putin and Russia at every turn. This was obvious long before the election. I don't say that to suggest that everything that was said about Putin was a lie or that he was a nice guy - but that of all the bad men in the world (including several allies) someone high up in the U.S. government seemed to have a particular axe to grind against Russia and Putin in particular.

Yes; Putin seems to be the new Saddam, and the stung post-2016 DNC seems to be the new Bush Jr, using jingo and obfuscation to hurtle us into another unnecessary war.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 13, 2017, 05:14:26 PM
Quote
So Trump Jr. was under the impression that the Russian government was trying to support his father, and it didn't set off any warning bells with him.  He apparently relished the idea of getting support from the Russians.

Doesn't this disturb anyone?  Do we really want our Presidential candidate teams looking for and accepting help from foreign governments, especially ones we are in conflict with?

I'm sorry it's not disturbing in the slightest. If someone claims to have dirt on a rival candidate, including "incriminating" evidence, I would be shocked if they didn't agree to hear that person out. You're suggesting that if it comes from the Russian government, it's unethical to use or reveal incriminating evidence about a rival? Just meeting with him and listening to his words is treasonous is it?

So if Putin hands Trump Jr. a memo proving that Hillary committed fraud or murdered someone for example, he'd be the "unethical" one if he revealed it? :)

I know I know - Putin is evil and anyone touched by this Mephistopholis even directly can't help but be corrupted. But by the way, maybe I missed something, but when was this declaration of war on Russia? For how many years has this "conflict" been going on? How long has the war been waged and how many casualties have there been?

Here's the difference, jasonr.

Why go through Trump, Jr.? ;)

Think about it.  You have damaging information on a candidate that you oppose.  It's good information; it's been vetted; it's confirmed true.  So why not just publish that information?  What's stopping you?  You still get the information out.  You still damage the candidate you're against.

So why offer it to the opposing candidate (through his son) first?  What can you possibly gain from that?

There are only two things I can think of.  Money and/or influence.  He'll either pay you for it, or he will owe you.  And by offering it first, you can set the terms, or else refuse to give the info or publish it.

By offering it first to Trump, Jr., the person was either trying to get money or to influence the candidate, the one who became President.  And the info came from, according to the e-mail that Trump, Jr. got, "part of Russia and its government support of Trump."  And the Russian government doesn't need his money (no matter how rich he is).

To which Trump, Jr. said, "I love it"!

He loved the idea of owing Russia for the information.  And he asked Jared and Manafort along to witness the deal.

I'm sorry you're not disturbed in the slightest.  Russia may not be our enemy, but they are by no stretch of the imagination our friends and ally.  So I don't see why you wouldn't be disturbed at the idea that they wanted the President to "owe them one."  To personally "owe them one."  And that Trump, Jr. jumped gleefully to take that gift.

Republicans were outraged--outraged--that Clinton took money from China (although it was given back).  Why?  What possible reason should anyone be the slightest disturbed that the President's campaign took a few measly bucks from China.  Unless we wanted to prevent the President from "owing them one."

Be disturbed, by this, and by the people who are telling you not to be disturbed.

Eight Million dollars to President Clinton's 1996 campaign is "a few measly bucks"?  But information on the DNC's wrongdoing is a clear bribe.

Wayward, you running for Ornery's new Kool-Aid man?

If one party is running us into an unnecessary war, and lying to the public, is it really wrong for the country that we're being run into a war with, to pass information to the opposing party, so that the truth comes out and the conflict averted?  I seem to remember several movies and TV shows where the heroes speak to the "enemy" and prevent a war.  Using American hyperpatriotic jingo to punish those who brought out the truth seems, well, more "disturbing" than Trump Jr's meeting with Russia (which doesn't disturb me) or even than the earlier Trump lies that no one had met with Russia (which *do* disturb me).  Although when I see a Canadian like Donald feeding the America hyperjingo panic, that's more funny than disturbing.   To subvert a phrase from the McCarthy hearings, have you no sense of irony, sirs?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 13, 2017, 07:04:43 PM
Regardless of the amount, the difference is in quality. All the China stuff that I'm familiar with had China using US fronts to make the donations, and apparently nobody at the DNC was lunching with Chinese government lawyers. Dunno if that means "less corrupt" or "better at being corrupt".

I agree that the difference is in the fact that the meeting happened. If the Russians just mailed whatever info they had unilaterally to Trump Tower, then I couldn't see holding anyone responsible, even if they used the information.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 13, 2017, 07:46:49 PM
Wayward I do see your point, but I can't help but find the equivalence between accepting information and accepting *money* a bit specious. I'm curious - does this purely apply to a foreign government or to anyone? And if it is not exclusive to monetary favours (i.e. taking bribes) but includes even the provision of mere information where does this stop?

If an anonymous tipster calls up Trump's foot soldier and offers to tip him off on some piece of information, is he not allowed to hear that person out or communicate with him because he might "owe" the tipster who might in turn work for a foreign government for all he knows?

Those are interesting questions, jasonr, and worth considering.  But not entirely applicable to this situation.

The law states that campaigns cannot accept money or "anything of value" from foreign citizens and governments, IIRC.  And certainly, information that is detrimental to your opponent is something a campaign might reasonably pay money for, thus establishing that it is valuable.  This was advertised as not just "mere information," but significant information that could have turned the tide of the election.

So if we decide that campaigns can accept valuable information from foreigners and foreign governments, then why shouldn't we also allow them to accept money?  What is the real difference if they accept information, or use money to advertise and/or buy that information?

It's one thing to accept valuable information or money when you don't know, or are fooled about, who the source is.  But it's an entirely different matter when you know the source is a foreign government and you try to get the information or money anyway.  And "love it." :)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 13, 2017, 08:01:41 PM
Quote
Eight Million dollars to President Clinton's 1996 campaign is "a few measly bucks"?  But information on the DNC's wrongdoing is a clear bribe.

I don't quite remember it being that much, although maybe I didn't add it all up at the time. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_United_States_campaign_finance_controversy)

But I also recall that all the money was returned when the source was discovered.

Quote
If one party is running us into an unnecessary war, and lying to the public, is it really wrong for the country that we're being run into a war with, to pass information to the opposing party, so that the truth comes out and the conflict averted?  I seem to remember several movies and TV shows where the heroes speak to the "enemy" and prevent a war.  Using American hyperpatriotic jingo to punish those who brought out the truth seems, well, more "disturbing" than Trump Jr's meeting with Russia (which doesn't disturb me) or even than the earlier Trump lies that no one had met with Russia (which *do* disturb me).  Although when I see a Canadian like Donald feeding the America hyperjingo panic, that's more funny than disturbing.   To subvert a phrase from the McCarthy hearings, have you no sense of irony, sirs?

If the foreign government gave the information to the press, that is one thing.  If it is only facts that affect policy, that is the same thing.  But if it affects the outcome of an election, isn't that a different thing?  Because we're talking about a race here, where two sides are competing with each other, winner takes all.  A situation where every advantage is important, and people are willing to compromise to attain their goal.  Where they worry that, if they don't have the advantage next time, they might lose.  And who are grateful to those who helped them win.

If those who helped are American citizens, that's one thing.  They are part of the country and part of the electorate, and have a stake in the outcome as citizens.  Their fate is tied to the fate of our country.  But if those who helped are not American citizens, or are actually competing countries, then their fate is not tied to ours, and may in fact be in opposition to our fate.  American citizens should at least have the best interest of the country in mind (whether we agree with them or not), because they will suffer if things go wrong along with the rest of us.  (At least, that's the theory. :) )  But foreign nationals may be immune to what happens to our country.  So their best interest may not coincide with our own.

Once again, if there is no problem with foreigners trying to influence the outcome of our elections by giving valuable information to candidates, then why not money?  Why would providing funds that helps a candidate win an election so much worse than providing information that helps a candidate win an election?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 13, 2017, 08:03:32 PM
gathering intelligence on a crime from any source is legitimate so long as it doesn't violate fundamental human rights (e.g. info obtained by torture)

Accepting money otoh is corrupt if done knowingly. And taking from the PRC was particularly ugly since Clinton's release of gyroscope tech looks like a quid pro quo.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 13, 2017, 08:07:16 PM
At best, only that which was discovered could have been returned. Surely you don't suppose it was all discovered.

Quote
Once again, if there is no problem with foreigners trying to influence the outcome of our elections by giving valuable information to candidates, then why not money? 

Freedom of speech and association covers information. It does not cover money.  Not unless you buy into the Republican argument that money is a form of "speech."
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 13, 2017, 08:12:28 PM
Quote
Once again, if there is no problem with foreigners trying to influence the outcome of our elections by giving valuable information to candidates

You really want to go down that road of treating information as money?  Can information be taxed in your moral universe?

I'd rather live a hundred years under Trump than under a government based on the moral assumptions that you are making to overthrow him. Talk about swallowing the spider to catch the fly! Is there any moral or constitutional principle you would *not* trammel to get this guy?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 13, 2017, 08:24:00 PM
Wayward, I don't know about the law. But I just can't accept the premise that taking money and just listening passively to what someone is telling you is the same thing. Or is the crime here supposed to be the fact that Trump Jr. was enthusiastic about the info, versus just sitting back and absorbing it?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 13, 2017, 08:24:10 PM
Would it be legally okay for a foreign government to:

Provide a donor list (of Americans) for use by a campaign.
Send out emails to recruit volunteers and pass the results along.
Make a youtube video and hand it over in a private meeting.
Generate polling results.

These are all information, it seems to me, nothing tangible. Maybe they are all legal. But there's a shady morality there.

Of course, getting worked up about it is pretty silly considering how companies owned and by foreign nationals funnel money legally into campaigns.

Quote
Basically, companies owned by foreign firms can spend in U.S. elections as long as the funds are generated in the U.S. and no foreign national has a role in the decision-making process.

Public attention grew in August, when The Intercept reported that a California company owned by Chinese nationals, American Pacific International Capital Inc., directed $1.3 million to Right to Rise USA, Jeb Bush’s super PAC. (That made it No. 30 on our list of top organizations funding outside groups.)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 13, 2017, 08:40:06 PM
Would it be legally okay for a foreign government to:

Provide a donor list (of Americans) for use by a campaign.
Send out emails to recruit volunteers and pass the results along.
Make a youtube video and hand it over in a private meeting.
Generate polling results.

These are all information, it seems to me, nothing tangible. Maybe they are all legal. But there's a shady morality there.

That's not a moral issue, but rather an issue of international relations and sovereignty.  We do it to other governments and we don't like it when it's done to us.  The remedy is cut diplomatic relations, declare war, and a thousand variations in between.  Obama tossed out a bunch of Russian diplomats.  That's pretty par for the course.  Consider that Clinton and Obama helped back a Coup D'etat in the Ukraine, it's hard to say that we should not have seen the threat of Russian interference coming.  And Obama has now admitted that he DID see it coming, and yet kept it a secret.

IF President Obama had made a public announcement that Russia was trying to manipulate our election, and had put folks on notice (based on one of thousands of tools that Congress has put to the President's sole discretion) that one should not communicate with the Russian government or its proxies, THEN you might have an argument that Trump Jr. did something wrong in communicating with the Russian attorney.

Quote
Make a youtube video and hand it over in a private meeting.

I don't understand that hypo.  Please clarify or illustrate.

Quote
Generate polling results.

Seems like that's something that should be illegal, but at this time, I don't think there's even any law that would prohibit, say, CAIR from running surveys of the American people and then posting the results in public where it could be used by ISIS and/or Al Qaeda to manipulate an election as they did for Zapatero in Spain.  I think that such a law, if enacted, would pass constitutional muster as espionage. 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on July 13, 2017, 09:43:03 PM
If there is somehow an uprising from "the left" you'd be a fool to believe it was the "SJW/AntiFa" crowd.
The only potential uprising I can see on the horizon is Trump supporters if some new method of kicking the President out of office was invented just for Trump.  And I don't know as I'd blame them entirely for it.

Not so much, as part of the whole "They don't get it" I expect the mid-terms are not going to meet with their hopes and expectations.

We've already seen how violent they've been after 2016 didn't go their way.

Care to take bets as to how violent they may get if 2018 doesn't go their way?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 13, 2017, 10:03:48 PM
Quote
Would it be legally okay for a foreign government to:

Provide a donor list (of Americans) for use by a campaign.
Send out emails to recruit volunteers and pass the results along.
Make a youtube video and hand it over in a private meeting.
Generate polling results.

These are all information, it seems to me, nothing tangible. Maybe they are all legal. But there's a shady morality there.

Of course, getting worked up about it is pretty silly considering how companies owned and by foreign nationals funnel money legally into campaigns.

You're asking if it's illegal for a foreign government to do these things?

Provide a donor list? I'm not sure what's being referred to, but you're suggesting that it's illegal to create and distribute a list?

Send e-mails? Make a Youtube video? Generate a poll?

I don't even need to look it up - I can't conceive of how this could ever be illegal in any free society.

I don't even consider any of it to be particularly "shady" frankly.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 13, 2017, 10:38:52 PM
Quote
If there is somehow an uprising from "the left" you'd be a fool to believe it was the "SJW/AntiFa" crowd.

If you'd qualified a national uprising, then you'd be right, but since you didn't,  uprisings at Evergreen and Berkeley and Missouri prove you wrong.  We're talking about a series of university based mini-uprisings that resemble the Cultural Revolution in the PRC, which when it ran its course resulted in two million deaths.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 13, 2017, 11:21:20 PM
Quote
If you'd qualified a national uprising, then you'd be right, but since you didn't,  uprisings at Evergreen and Berkeley and Missouri prove you wrong.
Sorry, I guess I just consume liberal media.  NPR didn't see fit to inform me of these and prove me wrong...

From where I'm sitting any talk of uprising is just hyperbole and silliness.  But thanks for the heads up.  I'll keep an eye out for when I need to take cover from the National Guard when they come to deal with the UofM students.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 14, 2017, 12:15:00 AM
Then I will try to remember that the New York Times isn't liberal enough for you and that if didn't happen on NPR, you don't care. :(


Youtube shows People being held against their will and subject to humiliating mob punishments.  If this is allowed to go on as the Cultural Revolution was, it will get murderous.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 14, 2017, 09:45:23 AM
To say I don't care, is not accurate.

To say that I've become skeptical enough to not take people's word for it that this is a "sky is falling" event, would be fair.

Do you honestly believe this is a culture that is likely to continue or to expand?  I'm with you that it's a terrible incident and we need to safeguard against all intimidation and threatening behavior when possible, no matter what the politics or goals are of the perpetrators.  But no, I find it hard to get worked up about this.

Maybe I don't watch enough YouTube?  That's certainly a fair... criticism?   I don't spend my outrage currency as freely as you do.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 14, 2017, 10:27:53 AM
Reread what you said and tell me if it looks more like a skeptical "I need sources to believe that" or a "if it ain't on NPR, it didn't happen."

NPR did a whitewash piece on it, one of those "nothing to see here, move along."

Here's VICE News (a liberal-center source like most of what I follow): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2cMYfxOFBBM

Note the "protesters" discussing openly about putting their prisoners in rooms where they cannot escape.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 14, 2017, 10:37:21 AM
I'll try and check it out later.  I don't watch videos from work.
In general, I'm a dinosaur and consume my "news" either on my alarm clock radio, in the car, or in written form on the web. 

So... maybe not a dinosaur, but video averse?

Quote
Reread what you said and tell me if it looks more like a skeptical "I need sources to believe that" or a "if it ain't on NPR, it didn't happen
That's me.  If I ain't heard about it, it's either fake news or not worth knowing!

"a liberal-center source"  Out of curiosity, where's NPR on your scale?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 14, 2017, 12:42:48 PM
gathering intelligence on a crime from any source is legitimate so long as it doesn't violate fundamental human rights (e.g. info obtained by torture)

Accepting money otoh is corrupt if done knowingly. And taking from the PRC was particularly ugly since Clinton's release of gyroscope tech looks like a quid pro quo.

The fundamental question is why accepting money is corrupt?  What harm does it do?

I believe that, if you can explain that to me, I can explain why knowingly seeking private intelligence from a foreign government (especially one that is not an ally) for political purposes is also problematic.

I'm not saying that information is the same as money.  I'm saying that trying to get secret information from a foreign government has the same problems as trying to get money from a foreign government.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 14, 2017, 01:20:35 PM
Quote
Would it be legally okay for a foreign government to:

Provide a donor list (of Americans) for use by a campaign.
Send out emails to recruit volunteers and pass the results along.
Make a youtube video and hand it over in a private meeting.
Generate polling results.

These are all information, it seems to me, nothing tangible. Maybe they are all legal. But there's a shady morality there.

Of course, getting worked up about it is pretty silly considering how companies owned and by foreign nationals funnel money legally into campaigns.

You're asking if it's illegal for a foreign government to do these things?

Provide a donor list? I'm not sure what's being referred to, but you're suggesting that it's illegal to create and distribute a list?

Send e-mails? Make a Youtube video? Generate a poll?

I don't even need to look it up - I can't conceive of how this could ever be illegal in any free society.

I don't even consider any of it to be particularly "shady" frankly.

The restrictions are on foreign nationals, not governments. So a bunch of random North Koreans start pitching in to support a Senate candidate in Kentucky, and that wouldn't seem at all shady to you?

What if, instead, they manufactured 100,000 bumperstickers and yard signs?

As far as "why care"? Because we've used exactly these tactics to help elect pro-American candidates and sponsored coups in other countries.


Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 14, 2017, 01:55:17 PM
gathering intelligence on a crime from any source is legitimate so long as it doesn't violate fundamental human rights (e.g. info obtained by torture)

Accepting money otoh is corrupt if done knowingly. And taking from the PRC was particularly ugly since Clinton's release of gyroscope tech looks like a quid pro quo.

The fundamental question is why accepting money is corrupt?  What harm does it do?

I believe that, if you can explain that to me, I can explain why knowingly seeking private intelligence from a foreign government (especially one that is not an ally) for political purposes is also problematic.

I'm not saying that information is the same as money.  I'm saying that trying to get secret information from a foreign government has the same problems as trying to get money from a foreign government.

What is the information you are claiming was "secret"?

Should it have been secret?

Are you trying to pitch this like insider trading information?

If you offer money to get out of a legal snafu, that's a bribe.  If you offer a cop information in exchange for leniency, I have never heard anyone call that a bribe or undue influence.

Political candidates, like police, need accurate information to do their job.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 14, 2017, 01:58:06 PM
Quote
"a liberal-center source"  Out of curiosity, where's NPR on your scale

Used to be liberal-center, but after its apologetics on Evergreen, I don't know anymore.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 14, 2017, 02:09:54 PM
If you disagree on the VICE characterization, let me know.

Note that vice is generally more lowbrow than pubs despite similar political leanings
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on July 14, 2017, 02:47:32 PM
What if, instead, they manufactured 100,000 bumperstickers and yard signs?

Or 100,000 "Make America Great Again" ball caps.  8)

In reality, I think you'd find a lot of campaign paraphernalia from the last several cycles used materials that made either in part, or in whole, on foreign soil. Of course, they were paid for, but there were foreign origins all the same.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 14, 2017, 03:25:55 PM
OK, well I watched the clip Pete.
My first reaction is this.  How afraid of not fitting in do you have to be to not call out your peers on their BS?  How afraid of avoiding controversy do you have to be as a staff member must you be to not call people out on this BS?

The only part I hadn't heard about is the apparent detention (though he seems to deny that characterization) of their President.  This is a case of people obsessed with their own outrage and victim hood that they are willing to create their own oppressors in order to pat themselves on the back for standing up against it. 

Echo-chamber combined with "like" whoring behavior meets young adulthood.  Maybe they'll figure out how to channel their energy in more productive ways when they are out in the real world.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 14, 2017, 06:00:50 PM
OK, well I watched the clip Pete.
My first reaction is this.  How afraid of not fitting in do you have to be to not call out your peers on their BS?  How afraid of avoiding controversy do you have to be as a staff member must you be to not call people out on this BS?

The only part I hadn't heard about is the apparent detention (though he seems to deny that characterization) of their President.  This is a case of people obsessed with their own outrage and victim hood that they are willing to create their own oppressors in order to pat themselves on the back for standing up against it. 

Echo-chamber combined with "like" whoring behavior meets young adulthood.  Maybe they'll figure out how to channel their energy in more productive ways when they are out in the real world.

He's not the only one that was so detained, but he's the only one whose show-trial was recorded.

Do you agree with me that what occurred at Evergreen is a variation of the Salem Witch trials, the Spanish Inquisition, the cultural revolution, where otherwise decent people get swept up in mass hysteria?

The recipe seems to be:
(1) Religion or ideology ascends and becomes more powerful. (Puritanism in Salem escaping England, Catholicism in Spain kicking out the moors, Maoism in China beating Chang Kai Shek, and SJW-ideology at the university.
(2) Having overcome previous enemies and obstacles, the new power group seeks new opponents.

If you follow the youtube links from that one, you start to see the professors that were behind those students.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 14, 2017, 06:35:53 PM
According to NPR, Russia's allowed to lobby the American government:

http://www.npr.org/2017/07/14/537247838/what-really-irritates-vladimir-putin-the-magnitsky-act

Quote
The Magnitsky Act reemerged as a front-burner topic this week in connection with the investigations surrounding President Trump's campaign and possible links to Russian meddling in last year's presidential race.

Russia has lobbied hard for repeal of the act. That's what Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya said she was doing when she met with Donald Trump Jr. in June 2016 at Trump Tower in New York

Quote
Akhmetshin is, he added, "someone who can ingratiate himself with members of Congress and their staffs, power figures here, and make things happen."

Levine said they've been in touch periodically over the years, including in brief email exchanges in recent days as Akhmetshin's name began to surface in media reports.

Akhmetshin, who has become a U.S. citizen, has aggressively lobbied against the Magnitsky Act. Just a few days after his meeting with Trump Jr. in New York last year, Akhmetshin was in Washington to promote a movie called The Magnitsky Act – Behind the Scenes.

The film was shown at the Newseum in Washington on June 13 of last year. It offers the Russian government's version of events and claims that Magnitsky was not mistreated by Russian authorities.

Trump Jr. has also said that — to his disappointment — last year's meeting with the Russians focused on the Magnitsky Act. Trump was told in advance the meeting would produce critical material on Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. When the topic turned out to be the U.S. law, he considered it a waste of time.

So we have a known Russian agent, someone who lobbies to be more lenient with Russian oligarchs that commit crimes against humanity, who the Obama administration actually allowed to become a US citizen to facilitate his lobbying work on behalf of Putin.

In this light, do you understand my incredulity that some of us want to go after Trump just for receiving information from these guys?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 14, 2017, 07:07:44 PM
Well, he didn't receive any information, so the whole thing is silly theater on that point. More interesting is the idea of lying about it (I never did meet with any Russians. Except that one time that you have proof of.)

Clinton was impeached, not because his sex acts were illegal, but because he lied under oath. Things like this don't help:

Quote
Jared Kushner's lawyers say there's an innocent explanation for why his first security clearance application omitted his meetings with several Russians, including Sergey Kislyak and Natalia Veselnitskaya: A member of Kushner’s staff hit send on his form too early. But the thing is, there isn’t one “send button” for this kind of security clearance form. There are 28.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 15, 2017, 12:01:29 AM
Quote
Do you agree with me that what occurred at Evergreen is a variation of the Salem Witch trials, the Spanish Inquisition, the cultural revolution, where otherwise decent people get swept up in mass hysteria?
If by variation you mean like how me and my work team playing softball is a variation of MLB... Sure.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 15, 2017, 05:03:00 PM
Quote
Do you agree with me that what occurred at Evergreen is a variation of the Salem Witch trials, the Spanish Inquisition, the cultural revolution, where otherwise decent people get swept up in mass hysteria?
If by variation you mean like how me and my work team playing softball is a variation of MLB... Sure.

 that's a reasonable place to start.  But one of those events stands out different, the Chinese Cultural Revolution, in that there are people alive who have given video testimony as to how it all started and snowballed.  Check that out if you're curious.  We can't say for sure how the Spanish Inquisition or the Salem Witch trials started, but the record of the cultural revolution is quite fresh and detailed.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 18, 2017, 04:21:14 PM
gathering intelligence on a crime from any source is legitimate so long as it doesn't violate fundamental human rights (e.g. info obtained by torture)

Accepting money otoh is corrupt if done knowingly. And taking from the PRC was particularly ugly since Clinton's release of gyroscope tech looks like a quid pro quo.

The fundamental question is why accepting money is corrupt?  What harm does it do?

I believe that, if you can explain that to me, I can explain why knowingly seeking private intelligence from a foreign government (especially one that is not an ally) for political purposes is also problematic.

I'm not saying that information is the same as money.  I'm saying that trying to get secret information from a foreign government has the same problems as trying to get money from a foreign government.

What is the information you are claiming was "secret"?

Should it have been secret?

Are you trying to pitch this like insider trading information?

If you offer money to get out of a legal snafu, that's a bribe.  If you offer a cop information in exchange for leniency, I have never heard anyone call that a bribe or undue influence.

Political candidates, like police, need accurate information to do their job.

You're still missing the point, Pete.  I'm not talking about accepting money in general.  I'm asking about the specific rules for elections.

As I understand it, it is illegal for a campaign to accept money or anything "of value" from foreign nationals or foreign governments.

Why is this illegal?  What is the basis for this law?  What harm does it do for a campaign to get funds or other things "of value" from foreign nationals or governments?

If you can explain to me why we have this particular law on the books, then I think I can explain to you why Trump, Jr. gleefully seeking information from the Russian government to help defeat Clinton is similarly disturbing.  Because Trump, Jr. apparently believed that information was also "of value."
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 18, 2017, 04:36:51 PM
It was used in this case, and harm is pretty clear, at least to me. It is a direct influence from outside governments and actors. The presumption being that they do not have the interest of Amercians at heart, and if one imagined a world where America wasn't dripping with money compared to other places, it could easily vault someone into position who didn't represent Americans at all. This affects issues of international trade, various sanctions (Russia's big one), and other big ticket items that could benefit other countries oligarchs (not necessarily their people)

Sadly, there's nothing stopping a candidate from selling their time to the highest American bidder except waterly campaign contribution limits.

Here's a case where it DID apply in practice.

Quote
One of the largest and more interesting scandals involving foreign contributions to a presidential election involves the Democratic Party, Bill Clinton, the China’s People Liberation Party, Al Gore, and a Californian Buddhist monastery. The FEC documents describe fundraising attempts by members of the DNC that set prices so foreign nationals could meet with President Clinton and Vice President Gore. In response to these findings, the FEC imposed a civil penalty on the DNC, the International Buddhist Progress Society, and various other actors for a cumulative total of $719,500.

http://www.uky.edu/electionlaw/analysis/foreign-contributions-us-elections

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 18, 2017, 11:58:33 PM
Quote
You're still missing the point, Pete.  I'm not talking about accepting money in general.  I'm asking about the specific rules for elections.

I'm not missing your point; I just think you are wrong.  I *am* talking about politicians accepting bribes in general, and I've explained why it's wrong, and you know very well that it's wrong, regardless of whether there's an election going on.  Whether or not there's an election going on has nothing to do with whether taking a bribe is *wrong.*

I decline your request that I explain why it's wrong to specifically take money during an election, because the election has nothing to do with the wrongness as I perceive it.  If you think that accepting INFORMATION from a foreign government during an election is "wrong" (as opposed to illegal) that's your burden of proof if you want to convince us that you actually believe it, let alone that we should believe it.

If you think that what Trump did was illegal, and that the law as you want to apply it is constitutional, then take your case to court.  Seems to me that if y'all had the law on your sides on this one you wouldn't be stirring up lynch mobs.

Riddle me this: say Israel sidles up to Secretary Clinton during the election and says -- pst -- our intelligence confirms that your opponent has a plan to assassinate you.  Has she violated election ethics, based on the "value" of the information from a foreign power?

If you are right on your interpretation of the law, then it's too stupid to be constitutional.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 19, 2017, 11:19:27 AM
Quote
Riddle me this: say Israel sidles up to Secretary Clinton during the election and says -- pst -- our intelligence confirms that your opponent has a plan to assassinate you.  Has she violated election ethics, based on the "value" of the information from a foreign power?

It would certainly be unorthodox, which makes it suspicious. Are they deliberately not informing the government through intelligence channels in an attempt to influence the candidate to be favorable toward them? I would think the FBI would be the place to go, not to request a private meeting with Clinton - and then spend the whole time talking about more support for settlements and giving no actual information on the assassination threat...  ;D

Should it be illegal? Is it illegal? Meh. The ways in which foreign interests can get money to the candidate that they want to back makes all but the most inept actors capable of that influence. Pushing that out to information is even more sketchy. I'd prefer that this behaviour be illegal not to disclose to the public, rather than illegal to do. Then voters can decide if it is unseemly or not. But once again, there are so many other influences that go entirely unreported that its not really a hot issue.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 19, 2017, 02:15:38 PM
Quote
You're still missing the point, Pete.  I'm not talking about accepting money in general.  I'm asking about the specific rules for elections.

I'm not missing your point; I just think you are wrong.  I *am* talking about politicians accepting bribes in general, and I've explained why it's wrong, and you know very well that it's wrong, regardless of whether there's an election going on.  Whether or not there's an election going on has nothing to do with whether taking a bribe is *wrong.*

But there is nothing wrong with giving money to a campaign.  That is not considered a "bribe."  But it is illegal for a foreign person or government to give money to a campaign.  So bribes in general do not apply to this conversation.

If you believe that foreign campaign contributions are OK, then say so.  But you've brought up Clinton receiving money from China and the possibility there was some quid pro quo involved with it.  I see the possibility that there was some quid pro quo involved with the information from the Russian government.  Why is one disturbing but not the other?  ???

Quote
I decline your request that I explain why it's wrong to specifically take money during an election, because the election has nothing to do with the wrongness as I perceive it.  If you think that accepting INFORMATION from a foreign government during an election is "wrong" (as opposed to illegal) that's your burden of proof if you want to convince us that you actually believe it, let alone that we should believe it.

But I have outlined why I think getting information from a foreign government is wrong.  For the same reason I see getting money from a foreign person or government is wrong: because it provides undue influence by the foreign person or government who's fate is not tied to our country's.

You also seem to think that information cannot be valuable.  You said, "If you offer a cop information in exchange for leniency, I have never heard anyone call that a bribe or undue influence."

If the information was a legal stock tip from a broker that could make the cop a lot of money, and he got leniency, would you still say it was not a bribe or undue influence? ;)

The information Trump, Jr. was expecting was something he believed would help win the election.  He believed it would be valuable.  If money is valuable, and information is valuable, then why is one illegal and other is not?
 
Quote
If you think that what Trump did was illegal, and that the law as you want to apply it is constitutional, then take your case to court.  Seems to me that if y'all had the law on your sides on this one you wouldn't be stirring up lynch mobs.

The problem is that we still don't know what information was offered, and under what terms.  (I assume no one still believes that the Russians needed that  group of people just to talk about adoptions, right? :) )  Perhaps nothing of substance was offered, or perhaps it was declined.  The story keeps changing, and I'm sure we haven't heard the last version yet.  But until we have evidence of exactly what happened, there is no court case.

But it stinks to high heaven.  He went in there, with company, to hear what they had to offer.  Did he really expect there would be no strings attached?  Did he think it was appropriate to convey whatever offer it was to his father?

Quote
Riddle me this: say Israel sidles up to Secretary Clinton during the election and says -- pst -- our intelligence confirms that your opponent has a plan to assassinate you.  Has she violated election ethics, based on the "value" of the information from a foreign power?

If you are right on your interpretation of the law, then it's too stupid to be constitutional.

Obviously taking, or even seeking, information of a possible crime against you or someone else is not trying to get an advantage in an election, even if it is from some foreign power.  So any rule about the ethics of info from a foreigner that makes that illegal is stupid.

But do you really want to make a blanket rule that no secret information from a foreign power can be considered illegal?  Especially when it may come with strings attached?

The information was not advertised as something that would prevent a crime.  It was advertised as something that would help Trump win the election.  If giving money to help Trump win is illegal and unethical, then why is giving information to help Trump win is perfectly ethical?

Information is an odd thing.  If it is spread about, and well known, it has only a small value to the bearer.  But if it is not well-known, or only know to a few people, then it can be extremely valuable.  And worth quid pro quo.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 19, 2017, 04:23:01 PM
Quote
But there is nothing wrong with giving money to a campaign.  That is not considered a "bribe."  But it is illegal for a foreign person or government to give money to a campaign.  So bribes in general do not apply to this conversation

You are wrong. And I will bet that if I searched the Ornery history I would find you right alongside me condemning special interest money on politics. "Campaign finance reform" ring a bell?  We all know passing money to a campaign is something like a bribe but we view it as an unavoidable evil, and we allow this bribery to occur between US citizens and campaigns.

Foreign governments do not have this special dispensation to bribe during political campaigns.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 19, 2017, 06:03:34 PM
OK, so why is special interests giving money to a campaign akin to a "bribe?"  What makes them giving money to a campaign wrong?

And how does it differ from you or me giving money to a campaign?

It's because the candidate is indebted to the donor, right?  Because he knows he might not get elected next time if he doesn't get the contribution from the special interest again.  Because he knows, on some level, his victory was dependent on that contribution.

So why is it any different with secret information?  Without it, the candidate might lose the election.  Without more the next election, he might not win that one.  So he wants to stay on the good side of the contributor, just in case they have more, or have some on him.  He is indebted.

The medium is different, but the results are the same.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 19, 2017, 08:46:31 PM
Quote
OK, so why is special interests giving money to a campaign akin to a "bribe?"  What makes them giving money to a campaign wrong?

Like I said, it's wrong for exactly the same reason it's ok to give politicians money while in office. Because there's no reasonable way to interpret the gift other than as a bribe to purchase influence.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 19, 2017, 08:51:38 PM
Quote
So why is it any different with secret information?  Without it, the candidate might lose the election.  Without more the next election, he might not win that one.  So he wants to stay on the good side of the contributor, just in case they have more, or have some on him.  He is indebted.

If your reasoning weren't full of bad assumptions and absurd blind side omissions, then it should be illegal to allow police and prosecutors to receive information from criminals.

What I mean by your absurd blind side omissions is that you ignore the valid things that a candidate might do with inforation that simply don't apply to money.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 19, 2017, 10:04:43 PM
Quote
So why is it any different with secret information?

Why is giving a woman affection and compliments in the buildup to sex considered seduction and wooing, but giving her money considered prostitution?

Because giving money has always had a certain cultural significance that cannot be equated with softer forms of persuasion. I hand you a $20 bill and that means something very specific, whereas just whispering some information in your ear, even valuable information, doesn't. Because I can give you information that you may or may not find useful, that may or may not assist your campaign, that you may or may not be thankful for (depending on what it is about) but a suitcase full of cash is unambiguous and always connotes a bribe.

So yes, could information be considered a bribe? Maybe, in the right circumstances. Does agreeing to listen passively to something someone tells you mean, a priori, that you are accepting a bribe and "influence", let alone control? Certainly not.

Does it make the slightest sense to me that by the mere act of *listening* to something someone tells you constitutes a crime or unethical act? I find that hard to swallow.

The proof will be in the pudding. If what Trump Jr. did was illegal, then they should arrest him and charge him for it. I have my doubts that it is, notwithstanding what is being heavily implied here and elsewhere. But we'll see if anyone is prepared to follow this through.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on July 19, 2017, 10:48:41 PM
Quote
So why is it any different with secret information?

...

Because giving money has always had a certain cultural significance that cannot be equated with softer forms of persuasion. I hand you a $20 bill and that means something very specific, whereas just whispering some information in your ear, even valuable information, doesn't. Because I can give you information that you may or may not find useful, that may or may not assist your campaign, that you may or may not be thankful for (depending on what it is about) but a suitcase full of cash is unambiguous and always connotes a bribe.

So yes, could information be considered a bribe? Maybe, in the right circumstances. Does agreeing to listen passively to something someone tells you mean, a priori, that you are accepting a bribe and "influence", let alone control? Certainly not.
...

Insider trading is illegal. That is the closest thing I can think of that is a real crime that is predicated on the sharing of "secret" information. If the Russians really had evidence that Hillary committed a crime the Trump campaign could have referred them to the FBI or asked for the FBIs help in looking into the info. Instead all of Trump's top advisers took a secret meeting with a bunch of Russian's with ties to Russian oligarchs and potentially the Russian government. If there really is absolutely nothing here I think its interesting how insistent they have been so insistent that Trump had no knowledge of the meeting. I find Trump's ignorance of the meeting somewhat unlikely as it was attended by his son, hit son-in-law, and his campaign manager.

Honestly I think there was probably no intent (~70%) to break the campaign finance laws that prohibit campaigns from accepting "anything of value" from foreign nationals or governments. However I think this is just one example of the inexperience of Trump and his advisers on the world stage or maybe just the general attitude of the super rich that laws don't apply to them.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 20, 2017, 09:05:17 AM
Quote
Insider trading is illegal

The crime there is trading with secret information. Not receiving information and disclosing it to the public.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on July 20, 2017, 10:07:54 AM
Quote
Insider trading is illegal

The crime there is trading with secret information. Not receiving information and disclosing it to the public.

A hedge fund manager takes a secret meeting with a corporate executive where they are promised insider information, maybe an Enron executive in 2000 claims the company is about to go bust that they have been lying about financials for years. The hedge fund manager instead of contacting the SEC takes the meeting to see if there is anything useful. Is he guilty of conspiracy or not? From a legal standpoint maybe not but it certainly is the first step towards committing a crime.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 20, 2017, 12:45:10 PM
Quote
Insider trading is illegal

The crime there is trading with secret information. Not receiving information and disclosing it to the public.

We don't really know what they would have done with the information they never got. :D

They could just as easily have blackmailed Hillary as disclose it to the public, or once in control of the information release it at the time and place of their choosing. Or keep it secret and share it only with select donors who would be outraged and funnel even more money to superPacs.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Mynnion on July 20, 2017, 01:41:51 PM
Why do we assume they got nothing from the meeting?  I'm not saying they did but we only have the word of those who benefit from a denial.  The fact that the DNC emails were released shortly after might have come as a result of the meeting.  Removal of sanctions that Trump has promoted is a nice incentive on the Russian side.  None of this may be connected but saying that nothing of value was gained or given based on the words of those already shown as liars strikes me wishful thinking :o
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 20, 2017, 02:30:41 PM
Quote
Insider trading is illegal

The crime there is trading with secret information. Not receiving information and disclosing it to the public.

A hedge fund manager takes a secret meeting with a corporate executive where they are promised insider information, maybe an Enron executive in 2000 claims the company is about to go bust that they have been lying about financials for years. The hedge fund manager instead of contacting the SEC takes the meeting to see if there is anything useful. Is he guilty of conspiracy or not?

Possibly.  Do you understand how you just proved that the reason cannot apply to Trump Jr?  What's the actus reus that you're implying that Jr conspired to commit?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 20, 2017, 02:32:37 PM
But again, why are you arguing technicalities?  If you think the law is on your side, go to court.  Technical illegalities do not give you a reasonable expectation for everyone to get freaked out and constipated over Trump pulling tags off his mattress.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 20, 2017, 02:53:27 PM
Quote
Insider trading is illegal

The crime there is trading with secret information. Not receiving information and disclosing it to the public.

A hedge fund manager takes a secret meeting with a corporate executive where they are promised insider information, maybe an Enron executive in 2000 claims the company is about to go bust that they have been lying about financials for years. The hedge fund manager instead of contacting the SEC takes the meeting to see if there is anything useful. Is he guilty of conspiracy or not? From a legal standpoint maybe not but it certainly is the first step towards committing a crime.

You guys are confused about what insider trading actually is, and when it occurs.  Without a doubt the meeting described above is not actionable, a crime or insider trading.  Every day hedge funds, and plenty of others, get inside information about the companies they own, that doesn't make it a crime to own the company, it makes them insiders for the purpose of trading.  Usually that means deferring the trade until the information is made public.

You are all also skipping over a vital element that is required to have a liability for insider trading.  The tipper has to receive a personal benefit.  No one goes to jail for insider trading if the President of a Company tells a random stranger on the street inside information and that person then trades on it.  The insider who gave up the information could have legal liability to the company, but for breach of trust or breach of duty, not insider trading.

In any event, this is a complete side track until Wayward explains what was secret about the information.  The email implied it was evidence of  a crime, weren't you just arguing last week that there's no entitlement to keep that kind of information secret?

It's beyond silly to try and create a rule that defines "benefit" to mean literally anything beneficial.  How would you distinguish a Russian government official who calls a press conference and publically discloses crimes of Hillary Clinton but prefaces it with the statement that they are bringing this to light specifically because they like Trump better and want to help him? 

Bringing forward true and relevant information on a candidate is a public service even if it helps one candidate more than another.

If a foreign national reveals a voter fraud perpetrated by the Clinton campaign, should we "disallow" such help and count the fraudulent votes as well?

Honestly, I feel like the left has jumped the shark at this point, and the lost the ability to distinguish between good "arguments" and rational positions.  You know for instance foreign nationals can volunteer their time to help a campaign?  If the crazy interpretation you are holding to here were appropriate then all that aid, which usually favors one party, is a cause for concern as well, right?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 20, 2017, 03:11:12 PM
But, Seriati, if there's nothing wrong with the meeting, surely there is a problem failing to disclose it on official documents when required to? And why does that form specifically ask about meetings with foreign nationals? Because it represents a potential security threat.

So while I don't think that any law was broken here, its not "nothing to see here, move along" territory, is it?

There are edge cases, btw, in terms of foreign nationals:

Quote
In AO 2014-20 (Make Your Laws PAC), the Commission concluded that a political action committee could accept assistance from a foreign national in developing intellectual property for the PAC, such as trademarks, graphics, and website design because the services accepted by the PAC would fall under the volunteer exemption. Similarly, in AO 2004-26 (Weller), the Commission held that a foreign national could attend, speak at campaign events for a federal candidate, and solicit contributions to the campaign. However, the Commission cautioned that the foreign national could not manage or participate in any of the campaign committee’s decision-making processes. See also AOs 2007-22 (Hurysz) and 1987-25 (Otaola).

In MUR 5987, the Commission examined a situation in which a foreign national provided an uncompensated musical concert performance as a volunteer for a federal candidate’s campaign as part of a fundraising event. The candidate’s campaign had paid all of the costs of hosting the concert, including the rental of the venue and equipment and providing security. The performer had merely provided his uncompensated volunteer services to the campaign and had not participated in any of the campaign’s decision-making. Based on these facts, the Commission found no reason to believe that the foreign national or the federal candidate’s committee had violated the Act’s foreign national prohibition.

Note that the litmus test for volunteer exemption is...

Quote
Generally, an individual (including a foreign national) may volunteer personal services to a federal candidate or federal political committee without making a contribution. The Act provides this volunteer "exemption" as long as the individual performing the service is not compensated by anyone.

If Russian lawyers are anything like their American counterparts, I'm assuming the meeting was billable.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 20, 2017, 03:29:11 PM
But, Seriati, if there's nothing wrong with the meeting, surely there is a problem failing to disclose it on official documents when required to? And why does that form specifically ask about meetings with foreign nationals? Because it represents a potential security threat.

Maybe you should cite the required disclosure.  There is no requirement to disclose on "official documents" a meeting with foreign nationals.  There are two relevant requirements (of which I'm aware, paraphrasing of course), meetings with foreign officials - which this does not appear to be - and disclosure of foreign nationals with whom you have a close continuing relationship - which this is not.

Maybe you have better knowledge, please provide the citation if you do.

Honestly, if you had to disclose at the level you are implying, it'd be impossible to meet the burden if you lived and or worked in a major metropolitan area.  Heck some of my kid's friends parents are foreign nationals, some are citizens borne in a different country how would I know the difference?  As I said before, there are 600,000 people of Russian nationality living in NYC, everyone there knows a Russian.

Quote
So while I don't think that any law was broken here, its not "nothing to see here, move along" territory, is it?

It really is.  Or more it's selective enforcement of a rule that's at best grossly overbroad.

Quote
There are edge cases, btw, in terms of foreign nationals:

These aren't edge, they fit into the existing rules.  The point, however, is that clearly we are able to parse that some contributions, even material ones, are viewed as benefits that don't risk causing a problem.

I'm struck too by the idea of what "should" have happened.  What exactly is that?  What if they had been handed information of a crime and immediately publicaly disclosed it or handed it to the authorities?  Is that something that causes you concerns?  What if they had also disclosed the source - not that information related to a criminal prosecution in Russia would be a mysterious source.

Given that this seems to be exactly how the Trump Dossier was used - disclosed to the media and sent to the authorities - and it was sourced, and potentially bought, from foreign agents, I'm finding the hypocrisy a little thick on this.

Quote
Quote
Generally, an individual (including a foreign national) may volunteer personal services to a federal candidate or federal political committee without making a contribution. The Act provides this volunteer "exemption" as long as the individual performing the service is not compensated by anyone.

If Russian lawyers are anything like their American counterparts, I'm assuming the meeting was billable.

Maybe, but it also didn't provide anything of benefit to the campaign.  I'm not aware that a campaign is barred from talking to foreign nationals who have jobs.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 20, 2017, 03:42:32 PM
I'm going to add this one as a fake news headline from Fox:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/19/justices-allow-strict-enforcement-trump-refugee-ban.html (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/19/justices-allow-strict-enforcement-trump-refugee-ban.html)

The SC left in place the expanded definition of close relatives, which the article discloses (though I think this got clearer in later versions), but the headline makes it sound like a big win, rather than what it actually was.

I don't see, by the way, the expanded family group as something that can hold up.  The government is entitled to broad deference on something like that and the court just replaced it with its own will.  While I agree that grandparents should have been allowed in the first place, cousins are not a category that should automatically be included.  Plenty of people barely know their cousins, and that is so easy to abuse.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 20, 2017, 04:18:18 PM
Maybe you should cite the required disclosure.  There is no requirement to disclose on "official documents" a meeting with foreign nationals.  There are two relevant requirements (of which I'm aware, paraphrasing of course), meetings with foreign officials - which this does not appear to be - and disclosure of foreign nationals with whom you have a close continuing relationship - which this is not.

Security form, not election form, and happened well after the meeting in question.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/jared-kushner-russians-security-clearance.html

It is well established that this lawyer did business for the Russian government, and in Kushner's own words was lobbying for a change in legislation. And again, if it were listed on the form, it probably wouldn't have amounted to anything. It's not like those meetings were going to be grounds for denying clearance.

But let's go your way, and say that this meeting didn't rise to that level of requirement. If so, why would Kushner and his people say "oops we forgot and hit send" as opposed to making your claim, that it was never required in the first place.

Quote
Maybe, but it also didn't provide anything of benefit to the campaign.  I'm not aware that a campaign is barred from talking to foreign nationals who have jobs.

As far as we know, it didn't. But obviously Kushner wouldn't have taken the meeting if he didn't at least hope to get a boon to the campaign - whether material or not.

Probably the only thing different here from other administrations is that they are really inept at doing these things in a more sly manner.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 20, 2017, 04:34:23 PM
Maybe you should cite the required disclosure.  There is no requirement to disclose on "official documents" a meeting with foreign nationals.  There are two relevant requirements (of which I'm aware, paraphrasing of course), meetings with foreign officials - which this does not appear to be - and disclosure of foreign nationals with whom you have a close continuing relationship - which this is not.

Security form, not election form, and happened well after the meeting in question.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/06/us/politics/jared-kushner-russians-security-clearance.html

Not sure why you cited an article that cites to an anonymous source talking about Kushner's form.

I've looked at what I think is the actual form.  I don't see this question.  Please point it out to me.

Quote
It is well established that this lawyer did business for the Russian government, and in Kushner's own words was lobbying for a change in legislation.

Not the test for whether they are an official.

Quote
But let's go your way, and say that this meeting didn't rise to that level of requirement. If so, why would Kushner and his people say "oops we forgot and hit send" as opposed to making your claim, that it was never required in the first place.

Your link is to something else entirely, and from April, where this story broke in July.  It says in your own article that he told the FBI he would be supplementing the form within 24 hours of submitting it. 

Honestly, take a look at the form.  I can't imagine anyone filling it out perfectly, unless they've never had any real leadership position in politics or business.

Quote
Quote
Maybe, but it also didn't provide anything of benefit to the campaign.  I'm not aware that a campaign is barred from talking to foreign nationals who have jobs.

As far as we know, it didn't. But obviously Kushner wouldn't have taken the meeting if he didn't at least hope to get a boon to the campaign - whether material or not.

So what.  Again, this meeting on the corruption scale is way down at the bottom maybe even a zero given it didn't apparently cover the topic promised.  It's being blown out of proportion solely based on the parties involved.  If you cared about corruption, there was blatant corruption in the last election and it got less than 1% of the coverage that's being given here.  I'm left asking myself why people are trying to make this into something more than it is, and can't see any real legitimate reason.

Quote
Probably the only thing different here from other administrations is that they are really inept at doing these things in a more sly manner.

No.  The only thing different is the coverage.

Imagine, if the Trump admin started meeting with lobbyists off premises specifically to avoid them being on the White House visitor logs.  We would literally never here the end of it, and that is something that actually happened.

Imagine, if Meuller were to request a Trump server and he were to "wipe" it and only send over print outs of the emails on it that he thinks are relevant.  The press would never let it go.

Imagine, if the Russians were to hack into the IRS, steal and release Trump's tax returns.  Where the press got the information would be relevant to their stories for about 35 seconds, then years of dirt and muckraking coverage.  Exact opposite of what they are doing on the DNC emails.

We need a national moment of zen or something, where we cut through the BS and stop just falling for spin hook, line and sinker.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 21, 2017, 03:56:05 PM
Then, of course, there is always the obvious Fake News stories that turn out to be completely true.

Bear riding on motorcycle sidecar. (http://www.snopes.com/bear-motorcycle-sidecar/) :)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on July 21, 2017, 06:13:09 PM
Quote
Imagine, if the Russians were to hack into the IRS, steal and release Trump's tax returns.  Where the press got the information would be (spin spin spin BS spin spin spin spin spin, spin spin BS spin spin spin BS spin spin spin spin spin BS spin spin spin spin spin. Spin spin spin BS spin spin BS spin).

We need a national moment of zen or something, where we cut through the BS and stop just falling for spin hook, line and sinker.
Maybe if people would stop telling themselves that their blatant biases were actually intellectual integrity, that moment of enlightenment could actually happen...
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 21, 2017, 08:37:21 PM
The classic sophists such as Gorgias would respond that integrity itself is a "bias."  :P

But then they would argue also that there's no such thing as "enlightenment." that words themselves are no more than a means of compulsion, and that persuasion is coercion. 

If curious why this is relevant, see http://www.classics.ucsb.edu/classes/cla175-s09/Gorgias.pdf and connect the dots.

Edited to correct the link
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Greg Davidson on July 22, 2017, 12:03:15 PM
Quote
Imagine, if Meuller were to request a Trump server and he were to "wipe" it and only send over print outs of the emails on it that he thinks are relevant.  The press would never let it go.

Awesome ignorance, Seriati. Really, a perfect illustration of either your ignorance of relevant history or your willingness to fabricate arguments that you know are false.

Remember the time when the Democrats were investigating the Bush Administration's firing of Republican-appointed State's Attorney Generals when they refused to fabricate evidence of voter fraud. It turns out that the Bush White House was using a private server, and when the emails were requested, the Administration refused to do so and said that 24 million emails had been deleted.  Here's substantiation from Snopes, which clarifies that more than half the emails were eventually recovered, still leaving 8 million emails - those are White House emails, at least as important as Secretary of State emails - that were never found. And 8 million is about 240 times more deleted emails than 30,000.

http://www.snopes.com/g-w-bush-lost-22-million-e-mails/ (http://www.snopes.com/g-w-bush-lost-22-million-e-mails/)

Remember how we had three years of hearings and national headlines about the Bush Administration emails? No? Neither does anyone else.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 22, 2017, 03:23:56 PM
What content of the Bush emails are you claiming were comparably damming to the HRC ones, Greg?

At this point, reducing the myriad of problems associated with HRC's emails to "the e-mail issue" of her negligent coversecurity is grotesque gaslighting.

 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Greg Davidson on July 22, 2017, 05:27:14 PM
The investigation was over whether the Bush Administration was systematically pressuring States Attorney Generals to fabricate evidence of voter fraud in order to use as a justification for voter suppression laws. The Attorney General and eight other members of the Justice Department wound up resigning - that's a pretty strong indicator of something more damming than . As part of the investigation, it was discovered that the Bush White House was using a private email server to conduct government business and was not even in technical compliance with the laws on record-keeping (which Hillary Clinton was). 

Despite this vastly greater use of an unsecured private server at a higher level of government, Seriati's point is totally disproven that Democrats would respond more extremely to use of a private email server than Republicans did for Clinton.

And there is no telling how much classified information was revealed through those 22 million emails, because they never got the intense level of scrub that Hillary Clinton's 30,000 did. And we still don't know what was in the Clinton emails (remember, quoting New York Times articles about Snowden or Karachi Times articles about armed drone attacks could have qualified as classified information), but it is extremely unlikely that any part was a damming as when President Trump revealed the identify of the top HUMINT source within ISIS as being an Israeli agent.   
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 22, 2017, 06:12:43 PM
Quote
The investigation was over whether the Bush Administration was systematically pressuring States Attorney Generals to fabricate evidence of voter fraud in order to use as a justification for voter suppression laws. The Attorney General and eight other members of the Justice Department wound up resigning - that's a pretty strong indicator of something more damming than .

"More damning than."  Than what?  You can't even say it!  Come on, Greg, out with it.  Articulate what scandals were exposed in the Clinton and DNC emails, and let's weigh which was more damning.  The fact that you say more damning than [period]--the fact that you evade saying what the other side is, suggests that you know as well as me that the statement doesn't stand to scrutiny.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on July 23, 2017, 12:34:22 AM
I'm willing to agree with Greg on the point that the Bush admin certainly conducted many grievous activities and were never really taken to account for most of them. If you want to compare Hillary to him I'm all for it. But in terms of the reception of the other party it's a bit of an unfair comparison, since Hillary was running for President while Bush was already a sitting President as he conducted his affairs. Further, it was during a time that was being cloaked under the auspices of being a Time of War and there was severe reluctance to undermine his presidency during such a 'dangerous' time. Things are different now, clearly, since I think very few Americans feel that there country is being put in any peril by undermining Trump. The fear from before has made way for tribal posturing. And yes, the cultural tone has shifted a great deal in the last 10 years. The media has become a bit of a different animal, and the public's view of authority has shifted significantly.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Greg Davidson on July 23, 2017, 01:57:44 AM
I really don't understand what scandal you think is buried in the Clinton emails. There was some spillage of classified information. And a few members of the DNC wrote some personal emails, most of which were done when Sanders was essentially mathematically eliminated, griping about him not stopping his campaign and focusing instead on how to get the person who was in all likelihood the nominee in the best possible position to win.

So please, succinctly, tell me what I scandals am I missing? Now note that scandal is a slippery term - if enough people hyperventilate over something based on false accusations (think: Benghazi) that may be a "scandal", but it does not make the accused guilty.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Greg Davidson on July 23, 2017, 02:01:39 AM
Quote
it's a bit of an unfair comparison, since Hillary was running for President

The Bush Administration was committing acts that rose to the true level of a scandal - remember, the Attorney General resigned due to this scandal. That's not normal.

Despite dozens of false accusations, there was nothing close to being criminal in the Clinton emails.

The imbalance is that the Republican destruction of hundreds of times more emails than Clinton was far more serious. But unlike Seriati's claim, the Democrats did not go far more wild than the Republicans did - they gave it vastly less attention.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Pete at Home on July 23, 2017, 11:44:43 AM
I really don't understand what scandal you think is buried in the Clinton emails. There was some spillage of classified information. And a few members of the DNC wrote some personal emails, most of which were done when Sanders was essentially mathematically eliminated, griping about him not stopping his campaign and focusing instead on how to get the person who was in all likelihood the nominee in the best possible position to win.

And what did those "personal" emails actually say, according to your best recollection?  Can you think of any content at all that might seem scandalous?  :o  You obviously understand one of the scandals since you took great care to dance around it and provide excuses for the scandalous act.

the chanting of "lock her up" preceded the release of the emails, so please don't obfuscate and conflate illegal with scandalous.

Look, you can't have it both ways.  You can't say that "Russia" interfered with the election by releasing damaging information on Clinton, while at the same time acting like the information released wasn't seriously pejorative.

And if what the emails disclosed was so innocuous, why have you gone to such extremes to avoid stating it?
 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 24, 2017, 12:05:14 PM
Quote
Imagine, if Meuller were to request a Trump server and he were to "wipe" it and only send over print outs of the emails on it that he thinks are relevant.  The press would never let it go.

Awesome ignorance, Seriati. Really, a perfect illustration of either your ignorance of relevant history or your willingness to fabricate arguments that you know are false.

Neither ignorance or revisionist history, though it appears you're going to go down the revisionist rabbit hole in making your point.

By the way, what I said above is literally true.  Whether you can quibble about history on this is an interesting question, but there is no doubt what the reaction would be today to Trump doing what I said.

Quote
Remember the time when the Democrats were investigating the Bush Administration's firing of Republican-appointed State's Attorney Generals when they refused to fabricate evidence of voter fraud. It turns out that the Bush White House was using a private server, and when the emails were requested, the Administration refused to do so and said that 24 million emails had been deleted.

That's got all the classic half truths of really good propaganda.  No one was fired for refusing to fabricate evidence of voter fraud, that's just a partisan lie.

It's also a lie that the Administration "refused" to do so.  They came forward and said they could not do so, because some of the emails were not in the government records where they were supposed to be.  Staff in the GWB White House were issued separate communications gear for their political work to avoid violated the Hatch Act (not an unreal worry, since you guys have accused several Trump officials of violating it).  Basically its illegal to use government resources (ie systems) for their political work.  Some of that staff used their RNC gear to do government work. 

When the RNC was contacted to get the emails back it came to light that they deleted all emails after 60 days and couldn't provide the emails.  The GWB White House went about pursuing emails and delivering all they could find - into the Presidential Archive - where they still aren't public by law.

This CNN account puts into doubt your claim that they were never really recovered.  http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/14/white.house.emails/ (http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/14/white.house.emails/)

So why are you still bringing them up?  They were "lost" in apparent good faith, and found and put where they belong in good faith.  The media did make a big issue of it, notwithstanding you claims, but apparently hasn't made as big an issue of the amount of good faith involved since you're still citing it as "equivalent."

HRC on the other hand deliberately created her server to do private business - grossly factually different - deliberately destroyed the records - grossly factually different - and has made no good faith efforts to assist in their recovery.  But hey, great for you to find a propaganda talking point about them being the exact same thing.

Quote
Remember how we had three years of hearings and national headlines about the Bush Administration emails? No? Neither does anyone else.

Lol, again cause the breach occurred because people were trying to comply with the law, not because they were trying to avoid it.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 24, 2017, 05:25:05 PM
I also found  this Bernard Goldberg opinion piece interesting.  I was beginning to wonder if I was the only one with anti-trump media fatigue.

https://www.creators.com/read/bernard-goldberg/07/17/if-arrogance-were-a-crime-a-lot-of-journalists-would-be-in-jail (https://www.creators.com/read/bernard-goldberg/07/17/if-arrogance-were-a-crime-a-lot-of-journalists-would-be-in-jail)

The negative coverage statistics are truly astonishing.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: rightleft22 on July 24, 2017, 05:56:44 PM
The article has a point… I just wish it wasn’t dressed up in the Liberal/elite media bias dogma. Perhaps the fatigue goes both ways.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Gaoics79 on July 24, 2017, 07:25:39 PM
I had a subscription to the New Yorker and was really enjoying it, until Trump. I had to just cancel it, not out of outrage, but out of fatigue. I just couldn't take it anymore. Everything else, from the sciences to the arts to international news just exterminated from view until there was nothing left but Trump, Trump, Trump. Is the president newsworthy and therefore worthy of such coverage? Obviously to some extent given his position, but this level of overwhelming non stop coverage was like  someone putting a pillow over my face and suffocating me. The endless hatred, the endless campaigns to destroy Trump, coupled with his own outrageous behaviour (which is only a little less outrageous than his enemies claim), the infinite arrogance and presumption of the media - it nauseates me. It makes me want to retreat and withdraw. It chased me away from the New Yorker, just as it's chased me away from CNN.

I still read the National Post and the Toronto Star, which mercifully have not been overrun to the extent of American outlets. I may come back to the New Yorker one day, although I doubt I'll ever return to CNN, which is just tainted for me beyond redemption.

Trump didn't just poison his own party, he poisoned his enemies too. He made the Democrats and their media allies contemptible for me in a way I could never have imagined before.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: NobleHunter on July 25, 2017, 11:38:06 AM
If Trump is as bad as his critic say, then Trump delenda est is entirely rational. To put Trump forth as a mortal threat to the Republic then not do everything you can to bring him down would be negligence.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 25, 2017, 01:18:02 PM
If Trump is as bad as his critic say, then Trump delenda est is entirely rational. To put Trump forth as a mortal threat to the Republic then not do everything you can to bring him down would be negligence.
We should be asking ourselves if he is that mortal threat though.  Were he a king, then yes.  I think he IS a mortal threat.  He's not though.  While I'm sure there is some value within the Republican party to have Trump be seen as the power mad villain they can later wash their hands of, it's not Trump's kingdom to rule alone. 

I think he's showing us the extent of his power and how much of a threat the wrong man can be in his position.  But a mortal threat to the Republic?  It's not worth tearing down our system (or even torturing / abusing it) just to rid ourselves of him prematurely.  Hold him to the law and use the tools of power already established, and we as a country can survive Trump.  We may even learn a thing or two in the process.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on July 25, 2017, 01:27:12 PM
Hold him to the law and use the tools of power already established, and we as a country can survive Trump.  We may even learn a thing or two in the process.

Sticking to the rule of law would solve this problem and many others. Neither side wants the rule of law, nor do they want the kind of transparency that ought to be in place to curtail certain kinds of corruption.

If the Congress is supposed to reign in the President and they are bought and owned then the first sign that anyone wants to reign in Trump ought to be a bipartisan movement for campaign finance reform. Bernie was the only one pushing for that, and - what a surprise - he was sidelined. But because each side embraces an ends justify the means approach to trying to defeat the other side they burn down the castle in order to sit on the throne.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: rightleft22 on July 25, 2017, 01:47:06 PM
I was watching an interview the intent of which was to understand the power of a president to pardon as well as some speculation/opinion on why the president might have in tweeted about pardons. (The opinion were clearly identified as such. )

The interview was not negative or positive IMO for the most part just informative, however it was labeled as negative and fake by many who reacted to it.

I’m concerned that for many including Trump himself any questioning of his statements and action is labeled as negative and that doing so closing the door to debate.

The definition of “fake news” also needs to be defined. A story that you don’t agree with or don’t like is not necessary fake.  There also seems to be an issue for many in discerning the deference between Opinion/Editorial presented within a news program and the news story it self. Resulting in the label fake being applied with a broad stroke that only obscures what facts there are. 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 25, 2017, 02:06:40 PM
Simple.  Anyone using "fake news" is,
A.  Lying to you.
B.  Attempting to refute an accusation of perpetrating "fake news".
C.  Is quoting our president.

A "legitimate" news medium will not phase it that way when pointing out a fabrication, mischaracterization or error.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: rightleft22 on July 25, 2017, 08:18:26 PM
So anyone reporting something I don't like is reporting fake news
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 25, 2017, 08:35:16 PM
Yes.  That is exactly it rightleft22.  Anyone who claims something is "Fake News", using those words, is only complaining that it's something they don't like.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on July 26, 2017, 08:58:36 AM
If Trump is as bad as his critic say, then Trump delenda est is entirely rational. To put Trump forth as a mortal threat to the Republic then not do everything you can to bring him down would be negligence.

I don't think Trump is a threat that must be destroyed at any cost(as my other posts reflect), that said, there is old maxim about people becoming that which they hate. The even more operative part about that, is they become what they believed they were hating.

So in that respect, Trump may be "dangerous" but not because of anything he, or anybody working for him will do, or is doing. But rather the danger Trump poses takes the form of what the opposition will turn itself into in response to his being President. That said, I don't think Snowflake demanding a corrective action be taken lest Snowflake turns into a big angry green guy full of rage is a solid bargaining position to operate from either.

But this also cycles back to my concerns about the (violent) anti-Trump efforts potentially paralleling the Nazi rise to power in Germany in the 1920's. Using hate(not to be confused with disapproval, non-acceptance, avoidance, etc) as a rhetorical device in general is a very dangerous path to venture down, and if runs long enough, it will turn violent. It actually is the reason why both asides agree about true hate speech being dangerous, because it isn't a question of if, but when it will lead to violence. The problem we have is the term "hate speech" has been appropriated by left-wingers, and getting anybody to agree on what truly is "hate speech" is now nearly impossible to achieve.

Certainly, speaking against a sitting white president doesn't qualify in legal context as "hate speech" and it never should on that grounds alone. That said, kind of like a certain ruling regarding pornography "I'll know it when I see it!" There are certain lines where it becomes plainly obvious as to where a person is either speaking from, or speaking to. The rhetoric of hate is very strong indeed within many segments of the left-wing organizations that support the Democratic Party. Maybe they're working through their stages of grief at this time and we'll reach a "bargaining" stage soonish, but I'm not holding my breath on that count. The powers that be have too much invested in keeping the pot stirred at this point.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 26, 2017, 09:29:47 AM
All this violence and hate going round from the left. 

It's a good thing they control the media!  It sure wouldn't fit with their public image...    ::)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on July 26, 2017, 09:36:11 AM
All this violence and hate going round from the left. 

It's a good thing they control the media!  It sure wouldn't fit with their public image...    ::)

What media they do control does a pretty good job of trying to whitewash it away.

You're not supposed to be concerned about their activities, it's those right-wingers that are dangerous!
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 26, 2017, 10:06:39 AM
Yes.  That is exactly it rightleft22.  Anyone who claims something is "Fake News", using those words, is only complaining that it's something they don't like.

What nonsense.  I liked almost nothing that the Obama administration did and yet virtually none of it was fake news.  Disagreeing with a true story, is just disagreement. 

When the spin is reported more than the story, it starts pushing the envelope, see a difference in the below:

The Department of Education  redirects spending in economically depressed areas to public schools.  Versus, say:

In a political gift to reward its collusion with the Democratic party, the Democratic administration has instituted an unpaid for and unaffordable expansion in the mandatory payments to the teachers union, while starving non-public institutions that actually help children.  Versus, say:

Republicans prove they have no hearts as they oppose sending additional education resources to the needy.

And then you get into really fake news:

Democratic payments to the teacher's union, payback for teachers grooming children for politicians' sex parties.

Whether you like a story or not, has little to do with whether its fake or grossly misleading.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 26, 2017, 10:34:54 AM
To be clear, I'm criticizing the usage of "Fake News" as a conclusive proclamation.  One that requires no criticism of the points on what makes the news false.  No nuance about how it is "spin" on half truths or shows something that, may technically be factual, in a poor light.

I'm not suggesting there aren't false narratives out there.  Not suggesting there aren't planted stories from anonymous sources meant to get media to run them without verification.  Not obviously partisan stories which tell half truths in order to score points with their audience.  None of that is new.

What I'm claiming is, that anyone who uses "Fake News" as a dismissive utterance, and believes that nothing else need be said on the matter and one should just trust the person doing this proclaiming (such as President Trump for instance) instead of those he's accusing, is sufficient.

"Fake News" is a rhetorical weapon demanding you trust the user over the information presented.  It's not a criticism of a piece of reporting.  I have no problem with holding news reporters or companies to account when they publish false or misleading information, no matter what party it helps or harms.

Maybe I'm just railing against the sloganization of our casual speech?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 26, 2017, 10:36:53 AM
Except you posted it on a thread where people are bringing forward examples and actually walking through why, not a thread where people are just being dismissive.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 26, 2017, 10:49:40 AM
Let me do a tl;dr

I don't like it when reasonable, intelligent people use the phrase "Fake News".  Bah humbug.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 26, 2017, 11:06:08 AM
Declaring something fake news is like meta fake news in many cases, especially since different people have so many different criteria for it. Anything from focusing on the wrong events to the pictures used to portray an event can be used to decry it as fake.

My own criteria is "declaring something as a fact, when it is demonstrably untrue or unsubstantiated"

My criteria for bad news or bad reporting is much wider.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on July 26, 2017, 12:39:35 PM
I consider the brunt of 'fake news' to be one of two things:

1) Stories printed that state "facts" coming down from an anonymous source, where the reporter isn't vetting the facts themselves but is merely "reporting" on what the source is saying. Even if the source is known it comes to the same thing, where the fakeness of the news is that they are merely parotting what someone said rather than taking the lead as an opportunity to do journalistic investigation. There is no investigation most of the time, just a restatement of what the source said. I call that fake news, because it is the deliberate use of the news medium as a clearinghouse for random sources to disseminate whatever narratives they want. And if the info turns out to be fake there is no recourse because the source isn't a journalist, and the actual 'journalists' have 'done their jobs' by accurately reporting what the source said.

2) News reports where the spin of the information appears to be the crux of the report, rather then the information about the event itself. I call this 'fake news' because using a real event as a mere avenue through which to piggyback an unrelated (and ongoing) narrative is pure propaganda.

There is also blatantly false news where I believe deliberate lies are told, but those are usually constructed so that no particular party can be pinned down as the one who lied. In fact usually they are on subjects so remote from daily life that even proving the facts are false is essentially impossible. Good cases in point are stories coming out of Syria or other contested hotspots. I am quite certain that a lot of what's reported about what goes on there is flatly false, but I literally cannot prove it without resorting to what crazy investigative reporters used to do and go there myself undercover.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 26, 2017, 02:11:31 PM
Quote
Stories printed that state "facts" coming down from an anonymous source, where the reporter isn't vetting the facts themselves but is merely "reporting" on what the source is saying. Even if the source is known it comes to the same thing, where the fakeness of the news is that they are merely parotting what someone said rather than taking the lead as an opportunity to do journalistic investigation. There is no investigation most of the time, just a restatement of what the source said. I call that fake news, because it is the deliberate use of the news medium as a clearinghouse for random sources to disseminate whatever narratives they want. And if the info turns out to be fake there is no recourse because the source isn't a journalist, and the actual 'journalists' have 'done their jobs' by accurately reporting what the source said.

The problem with calling all anonymous sources "fake news" is that it kinda implies that the story is false. :)  And we know from Watergate, et al, that sometimes the only one actually telling the truth is the anonymous source.

Which is not to say that all anonymous sources are true or should be trusted.  But they should not be discounted off-hand, either.  Because often the facts that the anonymous source reveals cannot be found by any other means, such as what someone said behind closed doors.

 FiveThirtyEight had a good article on some criteria to help judge the reliability of anonymous sources (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/which-anonymous-sources-are-worth-paying-attention-to/), by analyzing what is usually meant by the labels the news media give to the source.  Which is how I believe we should all take such "fake news" by reliable news sources: tentatively true, but subject to change at any time.

Quote
News reports where the spin of the information appears to be the crux of the report, rather then the information about the event itself. I call this 'fake news' because using a real event as a mere avenue through which to piggyback an unrelated (and ongoing) narrative is pure propaganda.

Calling this "fake news" also kinda implies the story is false, when it is the presentation and conclusion, implied or stated, that is the problem.  The core story is true, and may be significant outside the narrative, too.  But when it is labeled "fake news," people tend to ignore the whole story, not just the way it is inserted into a narrative.

Especially when our President uses the term "fake news" to mean that whole organizations do nothing but publish fake stories, and that there is no factual content to those stories, I think you need a better term for your more nuanced meaning of "fake news."
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on July 26, 2017, 02:19:29 PM
FiveThirtyEight had a good article on some criteria to help judge the reliability of anonymous sources (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/which-anonymous-sources-are-worth-paying-attention-to/), by analyzing what is usually meant by the labels the news media give to the source.  Which is how I believe we should all take such "fake news" by reliable news sources: tentatively true, but subject to change at any time.

Inspecting the labels is all well and good, but you're basically talking about having to develop a system of analysis in order to parse how reliable the 'news' is. That already defines it as being fake news as far as I'm concerned. Listening to a fact report should not require cryptography skills.

Quote
Calling this "fake news" also kinda implies the story is false, when it is the presentation and conclusion, implied or stated, that is the problem.  The core story is true, and may be significant outside the narrative, too.  But when it is labeled "fake news," people tend to ignore the whole story, not just the way it is inserted into a narrative.

See previous comments about the difference between it being fake news because the facts are fake, versus because it's literally not news but in reality editorial content parading as "the facts". I am actually more concerned about the fact that news stations are not actually in the news business more so than I am about the veracity of the particulars of what they say. The conflicts of interest that have become evident in their work is the major problem.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 26, 2017, 02:22:51 PM
If you mean “bad reporting” or “not journalism” then say that.
If you mean “spin” or “miss-characterization” then say that.
If you mean “provably false” then prove it.
If however you want people to stop taking you serious (or continue not to) then use “fake news”.

Fake news is a nonsense label.  A tool, not a descriptor. 

Or it's twitter jargon and economy of character limits... and I'm just old. :(
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on July 26, 2017, 02:45:50 PM
The way I see it people are either trying to screw with your head, or they aren't. Sometimes when they mean well they'll make errors anyhow and screw with your head by accident, but such instances can involve retractions or corrections. When someone is screwing with me I'm not all that interested in categorizing the various methods of doing so and naming the ways in which I'm being messed with. If someone standing in front of me tried this I'd just walk away. I don't see news as being much different from where I sit. If they want to treat me with respect I'll be happy to overlook weaknesses in style or errors, if they mean well. If they don't I owe them no respect and am happy to move it all to the trash folder called Fake News. You're right, it's not a technical term at all, or even a useful one in diagnosing what's happening. It's more like a term for the general sense that the whole milieu stinks. Instead of "fake news" I'd be amenable to also calling it "ewww" or alternatively "not fit for consumption."
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 26, 2017, 03:43:23 PM
The problem with calling all anonymous sources "fake news" is that it kinda implies that the story is false. :)  And we know from Watergate, et al, that sometimes the only one actually telling the truth is the anonymous source.

Lol.  Yes, one time, the most famous time in journalism history, an anonymous source was so pivotal as to change the entire direction of a country.  But again, only because the anonymous source's information was not relied on but verified and confirmed and proved.

I'll even posit that thousands of anonymous sources have been useful in getting at the truth over time, when they have prompted investigations into situations that have revealed real facts.

You know what is totally different?   Using the anonymous source, rather than verification of the source, as "proof" in a story.  Effectively, just repeating unverified gossip, not to mention frequently over-selling what the source said, and what can reasonably be interpreted from it.  Not verifying things if they fit  a pre-conceived notion or story the "journalist" wants to be true, is literally not journalism.

Quote
Which is not to say that all anonymous sources are true or should be trusted.

Actually that's exactly what you say later.

Quote
But they should not be discounted off-hand, either.  Because often the facts that the anonymous source reveals cannot be found by any other means, such as what someone said behind closed doors.

They literally should be discounted off hand.  What's useful is a verification of the lead an anonymous source provides, not a repetition of a unverifiable claim.  What's damaging is claims that are not effectively refutable, like a "leak" of a conversation that happened behind closed doors.  When the administration denies it happened or refutes the claim, it only convinces people that it must be true (take a look at Trump and the Israeli leak for an example of that, where those at the meeting denied the specific accusations and that convinced people it really happened).

Quote
FiveThirtyEight had a good article on some criteria to help judge the reliability of anonymous sources (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/which-anonymous-sources-are-worth-paying-attention-to/), by analyzing what is usually meant by the labels the news media give to the source.

You mean like how we can trust a journalist more when they call themselves a fact checker?

There are no triggers or codes you can use to determine weight that those who write them will not be aware of and manipulate.  All they have to do, to make the news even more fake, is add a few changes on labels when they really want to make an impact.

Quote
Which is how I believe we should all take such "fake news" by reliable news sources: tentatively true, but subject to change at any time.

Lol.  No thanks, no interest in buying into pure propaganda on some kind of benefit of the doubt system.  Especially not when we know for a fact the purveyors have a deliberate bias.

While your at it, why not let government prosecutors use anonymous sources in court, convict you on circumstantial evidence and admit hearsay.  After all, you're probably guilty anyways unless you can prove otherwise.

Quote
Quote
News reports where the spin of the information appears to be the crux of the report, rather then the information about the event itself. I call this 'fake news' because using a real event as a mere avenue through which to piggyback an unrelated (and ongoing) narrative is pure propaganda.

Calling this "fake news" also kinda implies the story is false, when it is the presentation and conclusion, implied or stated, that is the problem.  The core story is true, and may be significant outside the narrative, too.  But when it is labeled "fake news," people tend to ignore the whole story, not just the way it is inserted into a narrative.

The story is false.  It's not an implication.  It's like a made for tv movie "based on true events," or on events "ripped from the headlines."  Even calling it a story acknowledges that.  Why not reference Law and Order episodes as proof as well.

All propaganda is based on a "core story" that has some truth to it.  That's why its so effective.

Quote
Especially when our President uses the term "fake news" to mean that whole organizations do nothing but publish fake stories, and that there is no factual content to those stories, I think you need a better term for your more nuanced meaning of "fake news."

I think the President means that certain organizations, CNN, for example, produce large amounts of fake news, specifically about the President.  Largely true by the way.  Not that they do "nothing but publish fake stories."

I don't think we need a better term, we need a better media.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 26, 2017, 03:51:05 PM
For that to happen, we need better consumers. 

Maybe we need an anti-propaganda / media interpretation / sourcing and research type class as a high school requirement?  (too late by then?)

You know, so kids can be prepared for all that liberal indoctrination in higher education.  For those who can afford to go anyway.    ;D
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on July 26, 2017, 04:06:30 PM
For that to happen, we need better consumers.

This might have been meant to be wry, but in fact I believe that consumers cannot keep up with technology and language shifts. I think it's unreasonable to put the burden of intellectual integrity on a general public that (a) isn't equipped to parse articles with a fine-tooth comb doing fact-checking, and (b) for the most part just want to know what things are going on in the world and do their jobs. When presented with junk food, though, people will tend to eat it, and the fault is in the person who put it on the table. Try eating healthy when someone is constantly putting candy and cookies in front of you throughout the day. Maybe some percentage of people aren't interested or can resist on a constant basis, but most will relent eventually and dig in. You may suggest that the public should try to divest itself of the taste for sugary foods, and there is something to that. But in the meantime the workable answer is to not have cookies and candy shoved in your face all the time.

We would like to think that people shape themselves and what they get is what they deserve. To an extent this can be true, but I think more often than not habits are shaped by environment; or at least daily heuristics are. It's my basic belief that group success requires improving the environment, which is why I prefer in politics to hope for systemic change like campaign finance reform rather than to hope for individual mavericks to show up and buck the system.

Quote
Maybe we need an anti-propaganda / media interpretation / sourcing and research type class as a high school requirement?

Sponsored by Coke and published by Time Warner :)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 26, 2017, 05:00:54 PM
Quote
Inspecting the labels is all well and good, but you're basically talking about having to develop a system of analysis in order to parse how reliable the 'news' is. That already defines it as being fake news as far as I'm concerned. Listening to a fact report should not require cryptography skills.

But, Fenring, haven't you been doing that for other news stories for years?  I mean, do you give equal weight to all studies?  Do you give equal weight to a story from World Net Daily and the BBC News Service?  Don't you have a system of analysis that gives you some indication of how reliable the news is?

These are just another few points to consider.

Quote
See previous comments about the difference between it being fake news because the facts are fake, versus because it's literally not news but in reality editorial content parading as "the facts". I am actually more concerned about the fact that news stations are not actually in the news business more so than I am about the veracity of the particulars of what they say. The conflicts of interest that have become evident in their work is the major problem.

Agreed.  That's why I always have to parse any story from Fox News, especially on their talk/opinion programs.  But you don't hear many people complaining about how Fox News is "fake news," do you? ;)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 26, 2017, 05:06:42 PM
Part of the problem is that editorial slant can't really be removed entirely without slicing off all the relevance. Explaining to a reader why they should care is important. Even in non-fiction, a theme is important. Nobody in the US seems to be clamoring for the press to be more fair to Kim Jong Un or ISIS.

Delving into when and why and how you accomplish appropriate fairness and maintain relevance is too complex an exercise for me. But I think you'd be hard pressed to have found a press that ever did this particularly well. This is why I try to read a variety of sources, both foreign and domestic. I've even started poking into Brietbart, just so I can have a different narrative. One that I rarely agree with, but necessary perspective.

As far as classwork, it should be a four hour seminar on google <item> +hoax

That would eliminate about half the garbage I find on Facebook. Things that fall into the "demonstrably untrue" category.

As it stands now, you could toss out an article that says "Trump tweet declares ethnic cleansing a good idea" and half the damned country would be quoting it as fact.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on July 26, 2017, 05:23:17 PM
I think that half my opposition to Trump is how badly he *censored*ed with my BS radar. 

Sometimes now it's: 
Surely he didn't REALLY say anything of the sort.  This is click bait nonsense...
Oh *censored*!  He DID say that!

:P
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 26, 2017, 06:06:18 PM
For that to happen, we need better consumers. 

Maybe we need an anti-propaganda / media interpretation / sourcing and research type class as a high school requirement?  (too late by then?)

The number one thing that could be done would be to make logic a required subject.  Symbolic as well as grammatical.  You can try to teach people how to recognize fact, but it's too easy to manipulate them, teach them how to think for themselves and its a different story.

Quote
You know, so kids can be prepared for all that liberal indoctrination in higher education.  For those who can afford to go anyway.    ;D

You joke about it, but so much of the propaganda we learn in college filters in below the level of your consciousness. 

Part of the problem is that editorial slant can't really be removed entirely without slicing off all the relevance. Explaining to a reader why they should care is important. Even in non-fiction, a theme is important.

Explaining why something is important is not terribly difficult, it does not require that you try and force the reader to reach your own preferred conclusion. 

Quote
Nobody in the US seems to be clamoring for the press to be more fair to Kim Jong Un or ISIS.

Kim Jong is a fascinating example.  You probably would get greater than average name recognition in the US of him, particularly if you linked him to North Korea when asking about him.  You'd almost certainly get a high degree of identifying him as crazy or evil among those who recognize him.

Now let me ask you.  How many of those people could name even one thing he actually did?  Maybe right now you'd get some who referenced Otto (though that's bigger than just Kim), maybe some would recall the assasination of his brother, but any actual policies?  Any thing he specifically did as opposed to what his father did?   I kind of doubt it.

What does it mean that we have a common media derived view that he is evil and crazy without any media provided facts to support it?

Quote
Delving into when and why and how you accomplish appropriate fairness and maintain relevance is too complex an exercise for me. But I think you'd be hard pressed to have found a press that ever did this particularly well. This is why I try to read a variety of sources, both foreign and domestic. I've even started poking into Brietbart, just so I can have a different narrative. One that I rarely agree with, but necessary perspective.

The best thing to me about using multiple sources is you have a greater chance of being exposed to a story at all.  The MSM definitely buries things that they don't want to cover, and blows up things purely for ratings.  The worst thing is that exposure to conflicting spin doesn't help you find the truth in the middle, it only makes you believe that you have.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 26, 2017, 06:29:53 PM
Quote
Kim Jong is a fascinating example.  You probably would get greater than average name recognition in the US of him, particularly if you linked him to North Korea when asking about him.  You'd almost certainly get a high degree of identifying him as crazy or evil among those who recognize him.

Now let me ask you.  How many of those people could name even one thing he actually did?  Maybe right now you'd get some who referenced Otto (though that's bigger than just Kim), maybe some would recall the assasination of his brother, but any actual policies?  Any thing he specifically did as opposed to what his father did?   I kind of doubt it.

What does it mean that we have a common media derived view that he is evil and crazy without any media provided facts to support it?

Probably a large majority of people have this shared opinion based on late night comedy, standup, and outright fictions like Team America and the Interview.

Primarily for me, I think of him as evil. His human rights record, tight control on dissidents, warmongering statements. The standard of living for North Koreans overall. I could probably only cough up a few very specific examples. And, its not like he's lightyears from other countries in that regard.

The crazy part comes from some of the stories about his desire for adulation, some of his quotes (which admittedly could be mistranslations), probably less basis for this perception.

But I would say many people base their opinions on comedy or satire. There has been demonstrated confusion between what Palin said and what Fey said in character to the point where Snopes even had to put stuff up. It's probably a lot more effective than anything that CNN or FOX have attempted.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 26, 2017, 06:39:38 PM
Also, as I did somewhat, the public probably doesn't quite realize that Kim Jung Un and his father Kim Jung Il are different people. Kim Jung Il has a lot more evidence for acting in a bizarre way, and making wild boasts. But then most Americans also couldn't point out North Korea on a map, and don't realize there are two major branches of Islam that don't really care for each other.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Fenring on July 27, 2017, 10:46:59 AM
But, Fenring, haven't you been doing that for other news stories for years?  I mean, do you give equal weight to all studies?  Do you give equal weight to a story from World Net Daily and the BBC News Service?  Don't you have a system of analysis that gives you some indication of how reliable the news is?

*I* have been doing this. And I mean no egotism when I say that I don't expect most people to do what I do, and I don't even do it nearly as rigorously as I should. I'm sort of a lazy detective except for sometimes when I really want to go after a particular issue and do a lot of research.

Quote
Agreed.  That's why I always have to parse any story from Fox News, especially on their talk/opinion programs.  But you don't hear many people complaining about how Fox News is "fake news," do you? ;)

Actually that's all I heard from people about FOX news for the first 10+ years it was on the air. Before calling out fake news was ever a thing people would relentlessly say how biased and unreliable FOX news was. Maybe no one objects to FOX news with that level of vehemence any more because it was assumed for so long to be biased that now liberals just take it for granted and don't need to make the argument overtly. However CNN had a reputation for a long time as being reliable and it's only recently been challenged seriously. If FOX is any indication of how long it takes to rail against a station before people begin to take its bias for granted then CNN is in for many more years of this :)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 27, 2017, 11:11:45 AM
Agreed.  That's why I always have to parse any story from Fox News, especially on their talk/opinion programs.  But you don't hear many people complaining about how Fox News is "fake news," do you? ;)

How did I miss that gem? 

Pretty sure that I've heard, and you've heard Fox News referred to as Faux News.  And didn't the Obama administration itself state that Fox was not a real news network?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on July 27, 2017, 11:20:46 AM
Agreed.  That's why I always have to parse any story from Fox News, especially on their talk/opinion programs.  But you don't hear many people complaining about how Fox News is "fake news," do you? ;)

How did I miss that gem? 

Pretty sure that I've heard, and you've heard Fox News referred to as Faux News.  And didn't the Obama administration itself state that Fox was not a real news network?

Oops.  :-[  You're right, Seriati.  I should have qualified that statement.

I should have said that you don't hear many people who complain about "fake news" complaining about Fox News, do you? :)

Especially our Fauxer-in-Chief. :)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 27, 2017, 11:34:23 AM
Quote
I should have said that you don't hear many people who complain about "fake news" complaining about Fox News, do you? :)

Especially our Fauxer-in-Chief. :)

Don't worry, he'll turn on them like Jeff Sessions as soon as they do anything that he mildly dislikes.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Crunch on July 27, 2017, 11:36:00 AM

I should have said that you don't hear many people who complain about "fake news" complaining about Fox News, do you? :)

I don't hear the people complaining about Fox News having any concern whatsoever over MSNBC, CBS, ABC, NBC, CNN, NY Times, etc, etc, etc. Maybe there are some, a small minority.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on July 27, 2017, 11:45:01 AM
I'll claim that minority in the case of CNN. I've been public about it IRL and on this board. The only one on your list that I'd support is NYT, but my support of them isn't as iron clad as it was.

ABC, NBC, CBS - who ever quotes them any more anyway?

The reality is that people are quick to call out false reporting only when they don't agree with it. The desire would be for everyone to hold the same critical thinking dispassionately, but that's asking too much.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 27, 2017, 01:18:04 PM
I should have said that you don't hear many people who complain about "fake news" complaining about Fox News, do you? :)

Sure do, where are you looking?  I suggest that you can, in the comments section at Fox News, find posters claiming that virtually any positive story about the admin is fake news.

You can also find it, in the comments section at the NYT on occasion, and in virtually every left leaning unmoderated forum.

So, where are you looking that you don't see it?

Quote
Especially our Fauxer-in-Chief. :)

Well, I agree, he's not likely to tweet about fake news that is favorable to him.  But then, neither does anyone else.  Luckily for him, or rather really unluckily, the Press coverage has been overwhelming and excessively negative.  I literally don't think there is any action, including where he has to act on binary choices, where CNN won't write a negative article about it.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on July 28, 2017, 03:59:33 PM
Anyone know what it takes to get the job as White House Press Secretary, I think I'd have a lot of fun with it.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: godsblackestcrow on August 18, 2017, 04:03:16 AM
Pete:
Quote
The classic sophists such as Gorgias would respond that integrity itself is a "bias."
Caw caw caw!

So concur crows (bad eggs and all): such is sooth--truth can be tricked out of any true sophistry! But (by the bends of our beak!) the bit to get in this ‘course’s carry-on is the bent to the bights. You see, we might agree that words will interweave veracity with mendacity as a rule (such is the Crow’s confabulatory Law, of courpse, caw caw), but (tautologically speaking), while yer yarn holding how twisting lines of logic can increase a thread’s capacity for carrying tension seems strung together well enough to hold true, one nonetheless can’t truly twine twain open-ended lines of logic into that closed kind of loop which is purported to be the tautest logical knot…

...the knot which one can pull apart needs not Occam's razor to cut through...
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on August 24, 2017, 01:15:55 PM
More advice on how to avoid fake news.

How to Avoid Falling for a Fake Poll (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/how-to-avoid-falling-for-a-fake-poll/) from FiveThirtyEight.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on September 19, 2017, 01:18:51 PM
Except not even the republican you are taking about is making a claim that bold.

Quote
On Friday, Nunes walked further away from Trump's position.

"There was no wiretapping of Trump Tower," he said. "That didn't happen. ... It looks like this was all legal surveillance, from what I can tell," the chairman said, alluding to the mysterious evidence. That's not a different stance than he took on Wednesday, but it is a blunter one.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/24/521367161/paul-manafort-to-testify-on-russia-as-house-intel-committee-drama-continues (http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/03/24/521367161/paul-manafort-to-testify-on-russia-as-house-intel-committee-drama-continues)

So it seems likely Trump appointees were recorded while speaking with Russian officials (or other foreign nationals) that the CIA/NSA were monitoring.  Unless there is something shocking in those transcripts there is really no news here.

Update:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/09/18/politics/paul-manafort-government-wiretapped-fisa-russians/index.html

Quote
US investigators wiretapped former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort under secret court orders before and after the election, sources tell CNN, an extraordinary step involving a high-ranking campaign official now at the center of the Russia meddling probe.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: velcro on September 25, 2017, 07:23:03 PM
Going back to the OP-

Quote
Over the past 10 years (2007-2016), domestic extremists of all kinds have killed at least 372 people in the United States. Of those deaths, approximately 74% were at the hands of right-wing extremists, about 24% of the victims were killed by domestic Islamic extremists, and the remainder were killed by left-wing extremists.

From the Anti-Defamation League (https://www.adl.org/education/resources/reports/murder-and-extremism-in-the-united-states-in-2016)

I couldn't find the raw data, but is seems like they are calling Islamic terrorists correctly, e.g. Pulse.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on November 07, 2017, 02:10:14 PM
Sorry to resurrect this old post, but I was reminded today of the power the media wields by ignoring real stories as well.  It was pointed out to me that the trial of Robert Menendez, a sitting Senator, for corruption has received zero evening news coverage on NBC, CBS and ABC.  How is that even possible?  There is absolutely no chance, that if Menendez was a Republican and not a Democrat that it wouldn't have been on multiple times a week, and that's true without regard to whether Trump is in the Whitehouse or Obama was in the Whitehouse.

How can we have anything other than a manipulated understanding of the world when the press absolutely refuses to even try to cover things on a fair basis?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: D.W. on November 07, 2017, 02:37:03 PM
Forgive the snark, but I find that anyone still watches evening news even more outlandish.  :P

I've seen this one pop up on my news feeds, though I'll agree it's not getting tons of attention and your suggestion that it would be a huge deal if the party were reversed to be a likely one.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on November 07, 2017, 06:00:50 PM
It was pointed out to me that the trial of Robert Menendez, a sitting Senator, for corruption has received zero evening news coverage on NBC, CBS and ABC. 

It didn't take me very long to determine that this is not true. 

How much coverage on the nightly news on those networks was there?  It wasn't zero, that much was easy.  But I don't have a handy, exhaustive list of the stories that they DID run, so I don't know.  Why did you believe it was zero? How did you confirm that?

Why is this the benchmark we're using?  I have a feeling it's because someone wanted to find an angle that demonstrated the bias of the mainstream news media, and not the outcome of dispassionate analysis.

We also have two mass shootings, one of which was the worst ever, in the same time frame, the aftermath of some of the most destructive hurricanes ever, and a president who doesn't stop generating news - from simple gaffes to international incidents - on a daily basis even if we exclude everything Russia.

If that's not enough, how about you recall that there's also ubiquitous coverage of scandals involving HRC and the DNC.

I'm afraid your case isn't very persuasive. 
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDeamon on November 07, 2017, 07:49:51 PM
Forgive the snark, but I find that anyone still watches evening news even more outlandish.  :P

I know someone who does, but they're retired and collecting Social Security while enjoying their 70's. ???
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on November 07, 2017, 08:24:49 PM
Sorry to resurrect this old post, but I was reminded today of the power the media wields by ignoring real stories as well.  It was pointed out to me that the trial of Robert Menendez, a sitting Senator, for corruption has received zero evening news coverage on NBC, CBS and ABC.  How is that even possible?  There is absolutely no chance, that if Menendez was a Republican and not a Democrat that it wouldn't have been on multiple times a week, and that's true without regard to whether Trump is in the Whitehouse or Obama was in the Whitehouse.

How can we have anything other than a manipulated understanding of the world when the press absolutely refuses to even try to cover things on a fair basis?

May I suggest you listen to NPR more, I've heard them talk about the trial several times in my commute (20 min one way) to and from work in the last couple weeks.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: TheDrake on November 08, 2017, 11:18:44 AM
I think it was more prominent when the indictments were being handed out.

But by comparison, do you really think that Republican Bob McDonnell was covered so much more?

And Blagojevich (D) was splattered all over the news for an extended period of time by virtually all media outlets, late night comedy, etc.

Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on November 08, 2017, 06:22:36 PM
It was pointed out to me that the trial of Robert Menendez, a sitting Senator, for corruption has received zero evening news coverage on NBC, CBS and ABC. 

It didn't take me very long to determine that this is not true.

How exactly did you do so? 

There's a bunch of articles on the issue, but they all source back to the Media Research Center.  The Media Research Center is pretty conservative in their position pieces, but when they do this kind of coverage, they just sit there with stop watches.  Seems fairly reliable. 

Quote
How much coverage on the nightly news on those networks was there?  It wasn't zero, that much was easy.

https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/mike-ciandella/2017/10/31/mueller-focused-evening-shows-still-havent-covered-bob-menendez (https://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/mike-ciandella/2017/10/31/mueller-focused-evening-shows-still-havent-covered-bob-menendez)

http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/07/media-fails-in-coverage-of-sen-menendez-corruption-trial/ (http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/07/media-fails-in-coverage-of-sen-menendez-corruption-trial/)

Just a couple by the way.  I'm pretty sure they all have the same source, but I'm not aware of any other group that does the same kind of analysis.  In any event the original article  I saw had claimed zero coverage on the nightly news on ABC, CBS and NBC through  Oct 31st.  The first link above, says they did cover on Sept 6, but not since.  The updated versions haven't shown much of an increase in coverage.

Quote
But I don't have a handy, exhaustive list of the stories that they DID run, so I don't know.  Why did you believe it was zero? How did you confirm that?

Because that's virtually all the MRC does, time stories and look for bias.  Do you have a reason to doubt their measures on something that can obviously be measured on an objective basis?

Quote
Why is this the benchmark we're using?  I have a feeling it's because someone wanted to find an angle that demonstrated the bias of the mainstream news media, and not the outcome of dispassionate analysis.

Because network evening news has a LOT of viewers and, in my view, they're more passive than other news consumers.  They are the most persuadable, because they are the least likely to be active consumers of news, and it's it been my specific thesis all along that the media distorts the world to support the left and pull down the right.  Choosing to ignore a Senator's corruption trial because of party, when it would be on every night if the parties were reversed is good evidence of that.  I think the comparison between the Bridgegate coverage and the non-coverage here was really on point.  Christie's impact on the country on a national basis, is it really so much more than a Senator's that one would get hours of coverage and the other zero?  I don't think you can make a reasonable argument that the NJ governor is more of a national issue than a senator at all, but it gets really tough to claim he's FAR more.

Quote
We also have two mass shootings, one of which was the worst ever, in the same time frame, the aftermath of some of the most destructive hurricanes ever, and a president who doesn't stop generating news - from simple gaffes to international incidents - on a daily basis even if we exclude everything Russia.

I see.  Your argument is that in 2 months, there wasn't any time to cover the first trial of sitting senator for corruption since the 80's   Really?  Not enough time for a one minute update?  Lol.

Take a look at the stories they found time to cover.

Quote
If that's not enough, how about you recall that there's also ubiquitous coverage of scandals involving HRC and the DNC.

It's true, and more the half the time, people are on this board and everywhere else claiming that coverage is nothing but a "distraction" from Trump and the "real" story.  Lol.

Maybe you would cite how much coverage Hillary gets on the evening news.  Ubiquitous is not the right test for us, everyone here consumes news deliberately.  I might read Hillary all day, you might read Trump, but what you pulled isn't the same as what was pushed.

Quote
I'm afraid your case isn't very persuasive.

I'm not sure you've responded to my "case".  Like I said, as far as I can tell, the lack of coverage is just a fact, an objective fact, not a your facts/my facts fact.

If you don't know what's covered on the nightly news how can you have an opinion that they aren't pushing an agenda?
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: velcro on November 28, 2017, 09:09:05 PM
Seriati said
Quote
So Trump made an unsupported claim about Obama wire tapping Trump tower, and the left made an unsupported claim about Trump and Russia colluding.   Why is the first on the order in the MSM of a crime against humanity and the latter allowed to continually run as true without any evidence?

Where to start.

First of all, this is "whataboutism".  Go ahead, impeach "the left" for their horrible behavior.  But while you are at it, address the fact that Trump lied through his teeth about the whole issue.

Trump is the President of the United States.  His words carry a lot of weight.  He did not make a claim.  He made a very specific accusation of a felony, and said he had proof. (He produced none, other than general intelligence gathering of conversations his staff had with foreign nationals.  Nothing about his phones, or his office).  And just so you know, nobody in any intelligence agency has come forward with any hint of evidence to support Trump's claims.  Those who have commented said that it did not happen.

"The left", whatever that means, did not make definite claims.  They are raising issues, and investigating.  About half a dozen members of the Trump campaign had meetings with Russians who offered help on the campaign.

Nobody said Trump lying about wiretapping is a crime against humanity, except you.
Nobody with any position of responsibility on "the left" said that Trump unequivocally colluded with Russia, and that they have proof which they never provide, and that Trump is a bad (or sick) guy because he colluded with Russia.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: yossarian22c on November 28, 2017, 09:46:15 PM
... and that Trump is a bad (or sick) guy because he colluded with Russia.

Plenty of people on the left say Trump is a bad guy. I say it because he is a narcissistic, pathological liar, and serial harasser of women. I know different reason but, figured I would through this up there before someone else purposely ignored the because in your statement in a rebuttal.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on November 29, 2017, 10:58:17 AM
In case anyone else is curious, Seriati's quote comes from the first page of the thread.  (It took me a couple of minutes to search for it.)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: scifibum on November 29, 2017, 04:46:44 PM
Quote
How exactly did you do so? 

I used google for something like 60 seconds and found a clip from the time frame and sources that were supposed to have completely neglected the trial.  The clip was about the trial.

So the claim you posted was false, easily disprovable, and doesn't speak well to the reliability of the MRC if they are the source of the claim.

Quote
Because that's virtually all the MRC does, time stories and look for bias.  Do you have a reason to doubt their measures on something that can obviously be measured on an objective basis?

Yeah, I doubt them because the claim was easy to disprove.  The claim was zero coverage on nightly news programs on ABC, CBS, and NBC.  That's not true. 

Quote
Because network evening news has a LOT of viewers and, in my view, they're more passive than other news consumers.  They are the most persuadable, because they are the least likely to be active consumers of news, and it's it been my specific thesis all along that the media distorts the world to support the left and pull down the right.  Choosing to ignore a Senator's corruption trial because of party, when it would be on every night if the parties were reversed is good evidence of that.

What I was asking you is why the benchmark is MENENDEZ.  The MRC cherry picks its data if this is the measurement taken in isolation from other stories that are about the same type of thing, like the supposed corruption in the Clinton foundation. 

Quote
I see.  Your argument is that in 2 months, there wasn't any time to cover the first trial of sitting senator for corruption since the 80's   Really?  Not enough time for a one minute update?  Lol.

As I pointed out, this is a false straw man, and you still apparently haven't checked whether it's true.

Quote
the lack of coverage is just a fact, an objective fact

Yeah, how much coverage there was is an objective fact, but what that means is not.  MRC is not out to provide objective analysis, they are out to prove a conclusion that they formed decades ago. 

In my opinion, much of what is termed "liberal bias" is actually a more informed point of view.  "Conservative" viewpoints include creationism, widespread voter fraud, Trump isn't an embarrassing disaster, and a bunch of other erroneous positions based on ignorance.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on November 30, 2017, 12:22:04 PM
Which source please?  I'm interested.
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on January 31, 2018, 02:37:55 PM
Lol, just to update, while apparently Menendez's trial was barely worthy of covering on CNN, the DOJ's decision not retry him after a mistrial is front page news!

https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/31/politics/menendez-charges-dismiss/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2018/01/31/politics/menendez-charges-dismiss/index.html)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Wayward Son on February 01, 2018, 12:22:34 PM
Out of curiosity, how did you determine that CNN thought Menendez's trial was "barely worthy of covering?"

Doing a search of the CNN site, I found what looks like well over a hundred links (https://www.google.com/search?q=%22bob+menendez%22+trial+site:cnn.com&safe=active&ei=Fj9zWsG9HMykjwOgxKvQCg&start=110&sa=N&biw=1439&bih=249) to the trial and accusations, dating back to at least 2015.

Sure, Fox News will tell you (http://insider.foxnews.com/2017/09/08/mainstream-media-ignores-democrat-senator-bob-menendez-trial) that no one else is covering it at all, but they're biased.  Remember, they'll tell you they are the "fair and balanced" network, too.  ::)
Title: Re: The Fake News Lie that makes Trump look like a Boy Scout in compariso
Post by: Seriati on February 01, 2018, 02:05:12 PM
Fair enough, CNN did more than I remembered.