Chicago Fanatics Message Board http://www.chicagofanatics.com/ |
|
Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars http://www.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=104403 |
Page 19 of 19 |
Author: | long time guy [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:40 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
chaspoppcap wrote: LTG, here is e difference. We don't know what Trump will do yet. Rember actions speak louder than words. My lord he has been in office for two days ,you know what the difference is between him and Obama at the same time? The repubs didn't t block every single cabinet appointment Obama made so he had an almost complete cabinet on day one,Trump has two. One of the guy if they fucked with probably would have kicked their asses for it. There isn't one instance of him "talking tough with the Russians" He also had gone out of his way to defend Putin. I don't know what he,will do but if the dreaded liberals had spoken as he has about Putin you would be screaming bloody murder. |
Author: | Chus [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:40 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
chaspoppcap wrote: leashyourkids wrote: JLN, this is like chas level bad false equivalency. If this were "Who You Crappin", you would have been shotgunned after the second sentence. First off, fuck you. Now to remain point. I thout you ass was quitting the board. Once again nothing but lies from the liberals around here. |
Author: | DannyB [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:40 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: long time guy wrote: DannyB wrote: long time guy wrote: chaspoppcap wrote: What was a bigger lie? You can keep your Doctor I had more people at my inauguration. I never addressed Russian hacking and I never said it cost her the election either. You are making stuff up as usual. The whole Russia thing really is funny though. You have a Presidential candidate and now a President who nearly every day attacks some mainstream US institution or another while defending, by name, a meddling former foreign power and its kleptocratic dictator. Obviously Russia presents no threat to the US in conventional terms, but these are not conventional times. Yet you have extreme tribalists on one side and the JORRs of the world who are intoxicated by the tough-talking authoritarian celebrity-daddy on the other, coming together to prevent people from even thinking about it. Very odd. If a Democrat had spoken about Putin in the glowing terms in which Trump has their patriotism would be questioned. What if a Democrat did nothing as Putin took Crimea? Hard to answer because the last Democrat to face that situation imposed diplomatic and economic sanctions on Russia that Comrade Trump himself has described has "devastating" and that Trump will most likely rescind. Said sanctions are the reason why Putin hates Odumbo and Shrillary so much, and are perhaps the reason your guy Trumpsky is President of the United States today. The only real foreign policy Trump discussed during his candidacy was Anti-NATO in nature. I suppose one could think about that in an effort to better understand what is going on everyone knows that time is better spent pondering the true meaning of the word "clog." |
Author: | chaspoppcap [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:44 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
long time guy wrote: chaspoppcap wrote: LTG, here is e difference. We don't know what Trump will do yet. Rember actions speak louder than words. My lord he has been in office for two days ,you know what the difference is between him and Obama at the same time? The repubs didn't t block every single cabinet appointment Obama made so he had an almost complete cabinet on day one,Trump has two. One of the guy if they fucked with probably would have kicked their asses for it. There isn't one instance of him "talking tough with the Russians" He also had gone out of his way to defend Putin. I don't know what he,will do but if the dreaded liberals had spoken as he has about Putin you would be screaming bloody murder. Okay, what should have been done to the Chinese who hacked the govt. Stole millions of govt employee sensitive data? Plus,why do we have to be adversaries with Russia? Why,do we have to be adversaries with anyone. There is not one country that can take us on. So why do we need to keep thinking in Cold War terms. I don't like the Russians never have never will,but it would be a much better would with us as friends than enemies don't you think? |
Author: | Chus [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 9:51 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
chaspoppcap wrote: long time guy wrote: chaspoppcap wrote: LTG, here is e difference. We don't know what Trump will do yet. Rember actions speak louder than words. My lord he has been in office for two days ,you know what the difference is between him and Obama at the same time? The repubs didn't t block every single cabinet appointment Obama made so he had an almost complete cabinet on day one,Trump has two. One of the guy if they fucked with probably would have kicked their asses for it. There isn't one instance of him "talking tough with the Russians" He also had gone out of his way to defend Putin. I don't know what he,will do but if the dreaded liberals had spoken as he has about Putin you would be screaming bloody murder. Okay, what should have been done to the Chinese who hacked the govt. Stole millions of govt employee sensitive data? Plus,why do we have to be adversaries with Russia? Why,do we have to be adversaries with anyone. There is not one country that can take us on. So why do we need to keep thinking in Cold War terms. I don't like the Russians never have never will,but it would be a much better would with us as friends than enemies don't you think? Put down the pipe, man. |
Author: | Rod [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:45 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
DannyB wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: long time guy wrote: DannyB wrote: long time guy wrote: chaspoppcap wrote: What was a bigger lie? You can keep your Doctor I had more people at my inauguration. I never addressed Russian hacking and I never said it cost her the election either. You are making stuff up as usual. The whole Russia thing really is funny though. You have a Presidential candidate and now a President who nearly every day attacks some mainstream US institution or another while defending, by name, a meddling former foreign power and its kleptocratic dictator. Obviously Russia presents no threat to the US in conventional terms, but these are not conventional times. Yet you have extreme tribalists on one side and the JORRs of the world who are intoxicated by the tough-talking authoritarian celebrity-daddy on the other, coming together to prevent people from even thinking about it. Very odd. If a Democrat had spoken about Putin in the glowing terms in which Trump has their patriotism would be questioned. What if a Democrat did nothing as Putin took Crimea? Hard to answer because the last Democrat to face that situation imposed diplomatic and economic sanctions on Russia that Comrade Trump himself has described has "devastating" and that Trump will most likely rescind. Said sanctions are the reason why Putin hates Odumbo and Shrillary so much, and are perhaps the reason your guy Trumpsky is President of the United States today. The only real foreign policy Trump discussed during his candidacy was Anti-NATO in nature. I suppose one could think about that in an effort to better understand what is going on everyone knows that time is better spent pondering the true meaning of the word "clog." Putin did whatever he wanted while Obama was president. You seem to be attempting to rewrite history. Trump is president today because the Democrats ran a criminal as their candidate and the American people outside of a few urban centers didn't go for it. |
Author: | Rod [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 6:47 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
FavreFan wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Who do you think he has gotten killed with a lie? I have no clue. An employee, a mistress, a business rival. Whoever. I don't put anything past this piece of shit, and he's a billionaire. That seems an odd allegation to make absent any evidence. And yeah, I guess in this instance I am "defending" Trump. |
Author: | Kirkwood [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:53 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Putin did whatever he wanted while Obama was president. You seem to be attempting to rewrite history. Trump is president today because the Democrats ran a criminal as their candidate and the American people outside of a few urban centers didn't go for it. What did you want Obama to do to Putin? |
Author: | veganfan21 [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 9:58 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: See, I view it in kind of the opposite way. Many of Trump's statements are so obviously just cheerleading for himself and so vague that they can't really be taken seriously as any sort of real commentary on policy. Whereas a lot of bad lies were used to sell Obamacare and the war in Iraq, for example. As we talked about last week, I am concerned by some of the things Gingrich said regarding the relationship between the president and the press and specifically access. Trump is nothing if not ham-handed, but let's not kid ourselves that Obama didn't groom friendly members of the media, which ultimately has the same result in "controlling" what is assumed to be a free press. Look at this quote from the article you posted: "Karen Tumulty of the Washington Post said Spicer's assertion about 'what you guys should be writing' was 'chilling'." That's the epitome of the overwrought post-Trump hysteria we've been seeing from many on the left. What would be chilling is if all of you guys wrote about how chilling Trump's treatment of the press was and then you suddenly disappeared. But I have the feeling Tumulty and MANY others are going to be around for the next four years exercising their right to slam Trump at every turn. And I find this just as troubling: "The CNN television network made a choice not to broadcast the Spicer statement live. Instead, the statement was monitored and then reported on after the fact." So now we have a major network making the call that because of who the president is, a press conference isn't worthy of being covered live. I disagree with the premise that some of Trump's statements can't be taken seriously. His politics and statements about politics became tremendously serious the minute he became the nominee, and even more so when he became president elect. So when an emasculated press secretary wants to dictate to the press what they should write because his boss, who is president, wants to distribute alternative facts, then yeah it's pretty serious. Everything he utters is to be taken seriously, and I'm not willing to grant a 70 year old man a steep learning curve when it comes to making distinctions between what not to say and what to say when you're president, or even a nominee. It's more than just the impression of being "presidential," it's also about being a fucking grown ass man who understands his responsibilities. Deliberate or not, his undisciplined style has already pissed off nation states. It's not hyperbole to suggest a foreign government may decide to take preemptive action within their own country or region to preserve their interests in light of threatening comments Trump may make against those interests. I don't dispute that the WH and press try to curry favor with one another. That's a hallmark of our current media and it's not ideal. Greenwald has hammered this point home for years now. I think it's great if someone wants to call out the press for being biased, but you have to have credibility to be taken seriously, and when Trump disparages news outlets without cause, on top of blatantly lying, then his arguments lose all credibility. Again those goes back to the point many have made, including lyk, FF, and others: Trump invites a lot of this shit because he's a fucking liar. The two issues (lying and critical coverage) are inextricably linked. Is there more to it? Perhaps. But the shaping examples you cited (dark dreary day for Trump's inauguration, not so with Obama, etc), while clearly slanted and therefore condemnable, are not equivalent to the equivocations and blantant lies by the president of the country, and the disinformation that occurs as a result of those lies. Remember, this is a guy who campaigned as a populist, railing against bankers and special interests, and then appointed those same people after his hoodwinking was complete. He's a huckster - he forces you to be skeptical of everything he says due to the nature of his personality. That's going to have consequences in an open society. |
Author: | Rod [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:03 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Kirkwood wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Putin did whatever he wanted while Obama was president. You seem to be attempting to rewrite history. Trump is president today because the Democrats ran a criminal as their candidate and the American people outside of a few urban centers didn't go for it. What did you want Obama to do to Putin? The U.S. certainly didn't have to allow Russia to take Crimea. Ukraine may not be an official NATO country but they've flirted with membership, have many NATO alliances, and it's not in U.S. interests to allow Putin to run roughshod over Eastern Europe in an attempt to reform the Soviet Union. Obama also allowed Putin to take charge in Syria. Do you think that's a good thing? So I would ask, what do you want Trump to do to Putin? And however he handles him, how do you think the results will be worse than Obama's? On second thought, please don't answer that. I don't want to talk politics today. I feel too good, let me have my way. |
Author: | Kirkwood [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 10:08 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Kirkwood wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Putin did whatever he wanted while Obama was president. You seem to be attempting to rewrite history. Trump is president today because the Democrats ran a criminal as their candidate and the American people outside of a few urban centers didn't go for it. What did you want Obama to do to Putin? The U.S. certainly didn't have to allow Russia to take Crimea. Ukraine may not be an official NATO country but they've flirted with membership, have many NATO alliances, and it's not in U.S. interests to allow Putin to run roughshod over Eastern Europe in an attempt to reform the Soviet Union. Obama also allowed Putin to take charge in Syria. Do you think that's a good thing? So I would ask, what do you want Trump to do to Putin? And however he handles him, how do you think the results will be worse than Obama's? On second thought, please don't answer that. I don't want to talk politics today. I feel too good, let me have my way. Words are easier than actions you propose. Fantasyland. Obama found out the hard way when he wanted a reset. Putin is a soulless fuck. |
Author: | leashyourkids [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 12:19 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
veganfan21 wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: See, I view it in kind of the opposite way. Many of Trump's statements are so obviously just cheerleading for himself and so vague that they can't really be taken seriously as any sort of real commentary on policy. Whereas a lot of bad lies were used to sell Obamacare and the war in Iraq, for example. As we talked about last week, I am concerned by some of the things Gingrich said regarding the relationship between the president and the press and specifically access. Trump is nothing if not ham-handed, but let's not kid ourselves that Obama didn't groom friendly members of the media, which ultimately has the same result in "controlling" what is assumed to be a free press. Look at this quote from the article you posted: "Karen Tumulty of the Washington Post said Spicer's assertion about 'what you guys should be writing' was 'chilling'." That's the epitome of the overwrought post-Trump hysteria we've been seeing from many on the left. What would be chilling is if all of you guys wrote about how chilling Trump's treatment of the press was and then you suddenly disappeared. But I have the feeling Tumulty and MANY others are going to be around for the next four years exercising their right to slam Trump at every turn. And I find this just as troubling: "The CNN television network made a choice not to broadcast the Spicer statement live. Instead, the statement was monitored and then reported on after the fact." So now we have a major network making the call that because of who the president is, a press conference isn't worthy of being covered live. I disagree with the premise that some of Trump's statements can't be taken seriously. His politics and statements about politics became tremendously serious the minute he became the nominee, and even more so when he became president elect. So when an emasculated press secretary wants to dictate to the press what they should write because his boss, who is president, wants to distribute alternative facts, then yeah it's pretty serious. Everything he utters is to be taken seriously, and I'm not willing to grant a 70 year old man a steep learning curve when it comes to making distinctions between what not to say and what to say when you're president, or even a nominee. It's more than just the impression of being "presidential," it's also about being a fucking grown ass man who understands his responsibilities. Deliberate or not, his undisciplined style has already pissed off nation states. It's not hyperbole to suggest a foreign government may decide to take preemptive action within their own country or region to preserve their interests in light of threatening comments Trump may make against those interests. I don't dispute that the WH and press try to curry favor with one another. That's a hallmark of our current media and it's not ideal. Greenwald has hammered this point home for years now. I think it's great if someone wants to call out the press for being biased, but you have to have credibility to be taken seriously, and when Trump disparages news outlets without cause, on top of blatantly lying, then his arguments lose all credibility. Again those goes back to the point many have made, including lyk, FF, and others: Trump invites a lot of this shit because he's a fucking liar. The two issues (lying and critical coverage) are inextricably linked. Is there more to it? Perhaps. But the shaping examples you cited (dark dreary day for Trump's inauguration, not so with Obama, etc), while clearly slanted and therefore condemnable, are not equivalent to the equivocations and blantant lies by the president of the country, and the disinformation that occurs as a result of those lies. Remember, this is a guy who campaigned as a populist, railing against bankers and special interests, and then appointed those same people after his hoodwinking was complete. He's a huckster - he forces you to be skeptical of everything he says due to the nature of his personality. That's going to have consequences in an open society. Clean up in aisle five. |
Author: | Chus [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 12:41 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: On second thought, please don't answer that. I don't want to talk politics today. I feel too good, let me have my way. |
Author: | GoldenJet [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 12:47 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Quote: Sean Spicer: Lying to media not acceptable On January 4, 2017, Sean Spicer, the new White House press secretary, said he could not do his job if he had to lie because it would hurt his credibility with the press. http://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/ ... sot-rs.cnn |
Author: | Chus [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:07 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
GoldenJet wrote: Quote: Sean Spicer: Lying to media not acceptable On January 4, 2017, Sean Spicer, the new White House press secretary, said he could not do his job if he had to lie because it would hurt his credibility with the press. http://edition.cnn.com/videos/politics/ ... sot-rs.cnn Sphincter didn't tell lies. They were alternative facts. |
Author: | good dolphin [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 1:59 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Kirkwood wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Putin did whatever he wanted while Obama was president. You seem to be attempting to rewrite history. Trump is president today because the Democrats ran a criminal as their candidate and the American people outside of a few urban centers didn't go for it. What did you want Obama to do to Putin? The U.S. certainly didn't have to allow Russia to take Crimea. Ukraine may not be an official NATO country but they've flirted with membership, have many NATO alliances, and it's not in U.S. interests to allow Putin to run roughshod over Eastern Europe in an attempt to reform the Soviet Union. Obama also allowed Putin to take charge in Syria. Do you think that's a good thing? So I would ask, what do you want Trump to do to Putin? And however he handles him, how do you think the results will be worse than Obama's? On second thought, please don't answer that. I don't want to talk politics today. I feel too good, let me have my way. Crimea was the end(?) of a few weak moves in Eastern Europe by Obama. You let Russia take and the will take. It's been that way for the entire existence of the Rus. |
Author: | Kirkwood [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:01 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
good dolphin wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Kirkwood wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Putin did whatever he wanted while Obama was president. You seem to be attempting to rewrite history. Trump is president today because the Democrats ran a criminal as their candidate and the American people outside of a few urban centers didn't go for it. What did you want Obama to do to Putin? The U.S. certainly didn't have to allow Russia to take Crimea. Ukraine may not be an official NATO country but they've flirted with membership, have many NATO alliances, and it's not in U.S. interests to allow Putin to run roughshod over Eastern Europe in an attempt to reform the Soviet Union. Obama also allowed Putin to take charge in Syria. Do you think that's a good thing? So I would ask, what do you want Trump to do to Putin? And however he handles him, how do you think the results will be worse than Obama's? On second thought, please don't answer that. I don't want to talk politics today. I feel too good, let me have my way. Crimea was the end(?) of a few weak moves in Eastern Europe by Obama. You let Russia take and the will take. It's been that way for the entire existence of the Rus. Obama deserves blame but the gutless Western Europeans deserve far more blame. Take some responsibility of your own backyard. |
Author: | Rod [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Kirkwood wrote: Obama deserves blame but the gutless Western Europeans deserve far more blame. Take some responsibility of your own backyard. Now you sound like anti-NATO Trump. |
Author: | Regular Reader [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:05 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
good dolphin wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Kirkwood wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Putin did whatever he wanted while Obama was president. You seem to be attempting to rewrite history. Trump is president today because the Democrats ran a criminal as their candidate and the American people outside of a few urban centers didn't go for it. What did you want Obama to do to Putin? The U.S. certainly didn't have to allow Russia to take Crimea. Ukraine may not be an official NATO country but they've flirted with membership, have many NATO alliances, and it's not in U.S. interests to allow Putin to run roughshod over Eastern Europe in an attempt to reform the Soviet Union. Obama also allowed Putin to take charge in Syria. Do you think that's a good thing? So I would ask, what do you want Trump to do to Putin? And however he handles him, how do you think the results will be worse than Obama's? On second thought, please don't answer that. I don't want to talk politics today. I feel too good, let me have my way. Crimea was the end(?) of a few weak moves in Eastern Europe by Obama. You let Russia take and the will take. It's been that way for the entire existence of the Rus. What happened in former Soviet Georgia under W.? I'll wait for my answer. |
Author: | good dolphin [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:09 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Regular Reader wrote: good dolphin wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Kirkwood wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Putin did whatever he wanted while Obama was president. You seem to be attempting to rewrite history. Trump is president today because the Democrats ran a criminal as their candidate and the American people outside of a few urban centers didn't go for it. What did you want Obama to do to Putin? The U.S. certainly didn't have to allow Russia to take Crimea. Ukraine may not be an official NATO country but they've flirted with membership, have many NATO alliances, and it's not in U.S. interests to allow Putin to run roughshod over Eastern Europe in an attempt to reform the Soviet Union. Obama also allowed Putin to take charge in Syria. Do you think that's a good thing? So I would ask, what do you want Trump to do to Putin? And however he handles him, how do you think the results will be worse than Obama's? On second thought, please don't answer that. I don't want to talk politics today. I feel too good, let me have my way. Crimea was the end(?) of a few weak moves in Eastern Europe by Obama. You let Russia take and the will take. It's been that way for the entire existence of the Rus. What happened in former Soviet Georgia under W.? I'll wait for my answer. I don't answer questions until FavreFan demands that I answer them. |
Author: | Kirkwood [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:20 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Kirkwood wrote: Obama deserves blame but the gutless Western Europeans deserve far more blame. Take some responsibility of your own backyard. Now you sound like anti-NATO Trump. That's an odd interpretation. I would like NATO participants to step up which we agree Trump has said. Though, whereas I want a stronger NATO we have Trump treating the alliance where 4 roomates are splitting an apartment. Where he's hinted at leaving if our allies to not increase their contributions. Publicly treating a 60 year alliance as a financial transaction is mind boggling. |
Author: | Seacrest [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 2:38 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Kirkwood wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: Kirkwood wrote: Obama deserves blame but the gutless Western Europeans deserve far more blame. Take some responsibility of your own backyard. Now you sound like anti-NATO Trump. That's an odd interpretation. I would like NATO participants to step up which we agree Trump has said. Though, whereas I want a stronger NATO we have Trump treating the alliance where 4 roomates are splitting an apartment. Where he's hinted at leaving if our allies to not increase their contributions. Publicly treating a 60 year alliance as a financial transaction is mind boggling. It's a position that trump appears to have co-opted from Bernie Sanders. |
Author: | W_Z [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:16 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: The U.S. certainly didn't have to allow Russia to take Crimea. Did they take Crimea River? |
Author: | Seacrest [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 4:59 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
W_Z wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: The U.S. certainly didn't have to allow Russia to take Crimea. Did they take Crimea River? |
Author: | Peoria Matt [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 5:55 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
W_Z wrote: Joe Orr Road Rod wrote: The U.S. certainly didn't have to allow Russia to take Crimea. Did they take Crimea River? That's good. |
Author: | Nas [ Tue Apr 04, 2017 6:02 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Fake news Anti-Trump story also starring liars |
Nas wrote: Juice's Lecture Notes wrote: Nas wrote: Juice's Lecture Notes wrote: veganfan21 wrote: See your point but I think the next sentence or two is sufficient: Quote: But the timing raises questions, especially in light of Putin's decision not to respond to the U.S. retaliatory moves. No one can conduct foreign policy, except for the current U.S. government. If someone did, they would be in violation of the Logan Act Which is followed by this: Quote: Others, including Reuters and Ignatius are reporting or have reported that there were multiple phone calls between Flynn and the Russian ambassador the day the sanctions were announced. NPR has not confirmed those contacts. The same weasel-like maneuver used to bootstrap the Trump "dossier" into legitimacy by presenting the unconfirmed reporting of others as tacit confirmation of the matter asserted. This guy knows the doubt he cast on the content of the messages between Trump's team and the ambassador is weak as hell (the general proximity of the call to the day sanctions were announced), so he has to go to the "others are reporting" well in a feeble attempt to bolster his point. Unethical, fake-newsy, bullshit. This is beyond stupid. I guess "MANY people are saying" (without listing who those people are) would have been a bettee move than quoting reliable news organizations. The reporting about the 1 conversation and the lying about the timing of it was verified. Have those other news outlets confirmed multiple calls? They have, if you call this "confirmation": Reuters wrote: The three sources stressed to Reuters that they did not know who initiated the five calls between Flynn, a former three-star Army general who headed the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency under Obama, and Kislyak. Nor did they know the contents of the conversations, and declined to say how they learned of them. There's a reason double confirmation used to be the standard, and why even one "unnamed source" substituted created an ethical shitstorm. Maybe you're fine with this kind of reporting (because it just so happens to conform to your ideology, imagine that!), but this is buuullllshit. I'm beyond even caring whether multiple calls took place and whether foreign policy was actually discussed. Either there are ethics in journalism, or there aren't. This is just wrong. I believe that 3 is more than 2 but I could be wrong. It looks like Reuters was able to confirm with 3 sources that 5 phone calls were made. Reuters just couldn't confirm who made each phone call. The days of FAKE NEWS left and were replaced by THAT MAY BE ILLEGAL. I guess somewhere in all of this there is some acknowledgement that Trump's inner circle was doing something with the Russians. Sad! |
Page 19 of 19 | All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |