OK from Washington Post to NY Times, Reuters, TheGuardian, CNN to ABC, the media is reporting that CIA reported that Russia's goal in leaking Clinton's e-mails was actively helping Trump to win the elections. So according to CIA, Russian hackers actually hacked both sides, but only leaked Clinton's to damage democrats. E-mail scandal was the biggest excuse shown to vote for Trump in some groups if I am not mistaken.
What's your take on this? Pushing for electoral college not to vote for him? Do you think this is real?
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/11/opinion/russias-hand-in-americas-election.html?_r=0
QuoteIt’s not hard to see why Russia would have been tempted to tip the scales in America’s presidential election. American defense officials have been warning about Russia’s capabilities and dangerous intentions, calling Moscow the gravest threat to the United States.
Hillary Clinton, the Democratic nominee, made it clear her administration would redouble efforts to punish and isolate Moscow for war crimes in Syria’s civil war and its aggression toward Ukraine and other neighbors. “I’ve stood up to Russia,†Ms. Clinton said during a debate in the fall. “I’ve taken Putin on and I would do that as president.â€
In Mr. Trump, the Russians had reason to see a malleable political novice, one who had surrounded himself with Kremlin lackeys. Mr. Trump bragged that the Russian president had once called him “brilliant.†In July, Mr. Trump said he hoped Russia would hack and divulge more of Mrs. Clinton’s emails, an astonishing invitation to a foreign power that appeared already to be meddling in an American election.
In recent days, the scope and intent of Russia’s suspected involvement in the election has come into sharper focus. New disclosures by American officials now reveal that intelligence agencies concluded with “high confidence†that a desire to undermine American faith in the electoral system morphed into an effort to hurt Mrs. Clinton’s chances. One critical piece of evidence for this assessment was that suspected Russian hackers broke into the computer networks of both the Republican and Democratic national committees, but only leaked damaging emails from the latter.
At the urging of Democratic lawmakers, President Obama has asked the director of national intelligence to conduct a “full review†of Russia’s hidden hand in the election, the White House announced Friday. The inquiry, which is to be completed before Mr. Trump is sworn in on Jan. 20, is an important, if belated, step.
Weeks before the election, Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority leader, expressed skepticism about the intelligence reports and warned the White House that publicizing them would amount to a partisan act. The Republicans, however, did not protest when James Comey, the F.B.I. director, disclosed in a letter to Congress that a stash of emails found on Anthony Weiner’s computer appeared relevant to the investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private server. By the time Mr. Comey said there was nothing new, the innuendo bomb against Mrs. Clinton had exploded and the damage was done.
In a Fox News interview on Sunday, Mr. Trump dismissed the intelligence assessment about Russian meddling with contempt, and accused Democrats of “putting it out because they suffered one of the greatest defeats in the history of politics in this country.â€
Some Republican lawmakers recognize the importance of standing up to Russia and taking steps to restore faith in the electoral system and institutions. A bipartisan group, led by Senator John McCain, a Republican, pledged Sunday to get to the bottom of Russia’s role, noting that the possibility that Moscow shaped the outcome of America’s election ought to alarm every American. “This cannot become a partisan issue,†said the statement, which was also supported by Senator Charles Schumer, the incoming leader of the Senate Democrats. Among the unanswered questions is whether anyone within Mr. Trump’s inner circle coordinated with the Kremlin and whether Moscow spread fake news to hurt Mrs. Clinton.
Revelations about Russian involvement will loom over many of Mr. Trump’s decisions, including his likely choice to lead the State Department, Rex Tillerson. Mr. Tillerson, the chief executive of Exxon Mobil, has cultivated a close and profitable relationship with Mr. Putin and has criticized American sanctions against Russia.
Mr. Trump should be leading the call for a thorough investigation, since it would be the only way to remove this darkening cloud from his presidency. Failing to resolve the questions about Russia would feed suspicion among millions of Americans that a dominant theme of his candidacy turned out to be true: The election was indeed rigged.
http://www.refinery29.com/2016/12/132617/russia-hacking-election-what-to-know#slide
QuoteA month after Donald Trump won the 2016 election, the CIA has concluded that Russia wanted to help him win the presidency.
According to a Washington Post report on December 9, a secret assessment from the CIA found that President Vladimir Putin wasn't just trying to undermine the U.S. election, but leave his mark on it. It was the first time that the agency said Russia was specifically trying to sway the outcome of this election to a specific candidate.
The CIA gave its latest evaluation to "key senators" in a closed-door meeting on Capitol Hill. The Washington Post reported that briefers told senators that it was now “quite clear†that Russia’s goal in leaking emails from Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Convention, and those in her campaign, was to get Trump elected. This information comes from officials who spoke to the paper on the condition of anonymity.
“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,†a senior U.S. official told the Washington Post. “That’s the consensus view."
The New York Times reported that the CIA based its conclusion on the Russia hacking, in part, on the fact that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee, but didn't release any information or emails. According to the paper, the agency had "high confidence" that the RNC had been hacked, despite previous reports that it hadn't.
Sean Spicer, a spokesman for the Republican National Committee, tweeted, "The RNC was not 'hacked.' The @nytimes was told and chose to ignore. Exhibit #1 in the fake news." Trump's chief of staff, Reince Priebus, also refuted this report on Meet The Press, saying, the "RNC was absolutely not hacked." He claims that the FBI was called in after the DNC hack and found no evidence of hacking in the RNC's computer system.
It should be noted that the CIA presentation on Russia's influence of the election did fall short of a formal U.S. assessment, which would include all 17 intelligence agencies. It was also reported by a senior official in attendance that there were "minor disagreements" among the intelligence officials due to the fact that there are still questions that need to be answered.
For now, here is what we do know.
I think it's real. I've said since election day that our system was hacked by the Russians to favor DT. Will anything be done about it? Probably not and that is real frightening to me.
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/12/fake_news_the_cia_says_russia_preferred_trump.html
QuoteIf it's true that the CIA concluded that Russia deliberately intervened in November's election to tilt it toward Donald Trump, that ought to worry Americans, but not because Trump is a Russian mole or Vladimir Putin's agents stuffed electronic ballot boxes. Rather, it is cause for concern that American intelligence analysts are either not very bright or politically corrupted enough to really believe such poppycock. Meanwhile, the Post and much of the mainstream media, in their mania to discredit Trump, will publish almost any sort of "news" nowadays, even if it's as fake as the nonsense that makes up much of the blogosphere.
Germany is catching up ... they are now saying there that "the evil Russians" are destroying Germany from within, using fluoride no less!
The Red Scare is real, and the coup de etat is not speculation. The CIA and FBI have been at war since WW II (when OSS created as predecessor to CIA). Who wins? Depends on if the DoD stays on the sideline, or the US goes full Banana Republic. Since I work for DoD .. this is very live for me. Sour grapes can lead to insurrection by the Right or worse. If the DoD backs the CIA, then the FBI will be ... sidelined. Or vice versa. In any case we are now open to assassination, civil war and dictatorship ... because people don't play fair when trillions of dollars are at risk. It was the NY FBI office that pushed for the Comey revelation just before the election. The CIA controls our domestic drug traffic for decades.
I sympathize with the Russians (particularly in Syria and Ukraine) and like Putin. The war party (Graham and McCain) are hell bent on starting WW III to implement Agenda 21 (aka Club of Rome).
This is very real ... will there even be a US on Jan 20? Will Obama institute a state of emergency, and become dictator? The Dems can't allow the Constitution to operate ... by allowing an uncompromised EC to meet on Dec 19 ... or by allowing the House to decide (as is right, not the SCOTUS). Unless of course they have already decided that McCain is our new President (because he is war party). Conservatives are both armed, and already have a new constitution planned, or to simply break up the US by peacefully ending the Federal government.
Don't pay attention to the usual MSM suspects ... they are CIA. Alt-media is the only place to get real reporting ... all else is Pravda. What Pravda wants is full on censorship of all media, aka China.
Information outside of the MSM, says that the DNC was an inside operation, and that the person responsible, may have already been eliminated (a Snowden type). The release of the Pedesta emails can take down the entire Dem leadership, as well as some of the Rep leadership ... as part of a worldwide pedophilia ring (this is more speculative) that is lead by Epstein and involved British royal family. And there is that Anthony Weiner laptop ;-((
What is rich, is that the Clinton Foundation taking millions in bribes from Qatar, Saudi, Norway, Australia etc ... isn't illegal foreign influence. The whole thing is so hypocritical, it simply is the Corleones against the other mob families. We are going back to Packard touring cars with Thompson sub-machine guns pointing out the windows, to control the drug traffic (the Internet being the most important drug, even more than TV).
Either way, it makes the US establishment look weak and stupid.
Quote from: pr126 on December 12, 2016, 05:46:41 AM
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/12/fake_news_the_cia_says_russia_preferred_trump.html
Ah so it's fake because some guy at americanthinker says so. Brilliant.
Quote from: Youssuf Ramadan on December 12, 2016, 07:31:31 AM
Either way, it makes the US establishment look weak and stupid.
No friend it's the American people looking weak and stupid right now. Even if thete were a video shot by the Russians documenting the hack step by step and including an interview with putin clearly spelling out Russian intent to tamper in an American election and people would still refuse to believe any of it because nobody has any grasp on what is real anymore.
Quote from: Nonsensei on December 12, 2016, 07:41:50 AM
Ah so it's fake because some guy at americanthinker says so. Brilliant.
It is inconceivable that a mainstream media outlet would publish lies, half truths, fake news or omit information from the public? Or have a political agenda?
You are conditioned to avoid certain publications, blogs, certain TV channels, books to reject information not approved by the leftist ideology.
Welcome to the Ministry of Truth. 1984 was a warning, not a blueprint.
I'm not saying the CIA is a saintly organization or that the mainstream media gets everything correct all the time, but the CIA's revelation is far from the only solid claim that Russia has interfered. This has been ongoing since the DNC hack occurred. Three independent cybersecurity firms agree:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/jul/31/what-we-know-about-russias-role-dnc-email-leak/
Let's not forget that Richard Nixon resigned for less with Watergate, but somehow Trump remains untouchable. I don't fucking get it. Whether or not Trump asked for Russia's help or whether these leaks actually helped Trump win the election remains to be seen,
but the fact that he was goading Russia on during the elections speaks volumes about the kind of man and American he is. I think the Trump party's casual dismissal of the claims is terrifying.
He's basically discrediting the CIA by suggesting that because the CIA was wrong about WMD in Iraq, therefore nothing they say is of any value. But somehow Trump should be trusted? He's the one who said "no" to a blind trust for his offshore business holdings in order to avoid a conflict of interest, so what will happen when he receives intelligence that should make him take security actions that conflict with his business dealings overseas?
Lucky there was no foul play when Obama was elected (or selected?). Twice.
Quote from: pr126 on December 12, 2016, 09:16:45 AM
It is inconceivable that a mainstream media outlet would publish lies, half truths, fake news or omit information from the public? Or have a political agenda?
I get the sarcasm, and I even agree with your point, but I think it's equally inconceivable when the government can assure us that there is no way for our votes to be tampered with, especially when using electronic devices. Now it appears that the government is saying the opposite, and they can be tampered with. It's inconceivable that mutually exclusive scenarios can both be true.
No politician tells the truth. The government is a collection of politicians. You can't put a bunch of politicians that don't tell the truth in charge of a country and expect a collective truth to magically emerge. I don't know if Trump actually won the electoral college or not. I'd think the same if Clinton won. In the end, what people believe to be true is irrelevant. Because we are bombarded with truths and untruths from the government and its propaganda outlets in the media. There is no reliable source of disclosure for us to even know the truth.
Quote from: SGOS on December 12, 2016, 09:49:07 AM
I get the sarcasm, and I even agree with your point, but I think it's equally inconceivable when the government can assure us that there is no way for our votes to be tampered with, especially when using electronic devices. Now it appears that the government is saying the opposite, and they can be tampered with. It's inconceivable that mutually exclusive scenarios can both be true.
No politician tells the truth. The government is a collection of politicians. You can't put a bunch of politicians that don't tell the truth in charge of a country and expect a collective truth to magically emerge. I don't know if Trump actually won the electoral college or not. I'd think the same if Clinton won. In the end, what people believe to be true is irrelevant. Because we are bombarded with truths and untruths from the government and its propaganda outlets in the media. There is no reliable source of disclosure for us to even know the truth.
I believe that Trump is not a plitician, but a succesful business man. That may be to the USA advantage.
I would give him the benefit of the doubt.
But the left is a sore loser. They are doing everything to throw the spanner in theworks.
Still 38 days left before inaguration.
Quote from: SGOS on December 12, 2016, 09:49:07 AMI don't know if Trump actually won the electoral college or not.
Well, they counted the votes and the results are pretty conclusive. Absent any evidence that the elections were fraudulent, I think we have to accept the results as genuine.
QuoteIn the end, what people believe to be true is irrelevant. Because we are bombarded with truths and untruths from the government and its propaganda outlets in the media. There is no reliable source of disclosure for us to even know the truth.
Not all sources are created equal. Alex Jones isn't as credible as Dan Rather, nor are Pr126's right-wing conspiracy-mongers compared to virtually anyone else.
Quote from: pr126 on December 12, 2016, 09:16:45 AM
It is inconceivable that a mainstream media outlet would publish lies, half truths, fake news or omit information from the public? Or have a political agenda?
You are conditioned to avoid certain publications, blogs, certain TV channels, books to reject information not approved by the leftist ideology.
Welcome to the Ministry of Truth. 1984 was a warning, not a blueprint.
I am conditioned to avoid "news" sources that reject the findings of the central intelligence agency as "poppycock" just because those findings make their president-elect look like he got the election handed to him by Moscow.
Don't talk to me about conditioning, pr. The only one here willing to believe assertions without evidence is you. If this twit at americanthinke can provide evidence to back his claims up then ill listen. But he wont. That isnt what americanthinker is about. American thinker is not written for me. Its witten for people who have confirmation bias to such a degree that it has become a disability.
Quote from: Nonsensei on December 12, 2016, 07:48:24 AMNo friend it's the American people looking weak and stupid right now. Even if there was a video shot by the Russians documenting the hack step by step and including an interview with putin clearly spelling out Russian intent to tamper in an American election and people would still refuse to believe any of it because nobody has any grasp on what is real anymore.
Exactly.
And it's not like the US has been Russia's only target. Germany has also accused Russia of launching a disinformation campaign designed to manipulate its elections (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/08/world/europe/germany-russia-hacking.html).
QuoteIf this twit at americanthinke can provide evidence to back his claims up then ill listen. But he wont.
If the mainstream media can provide evidence to back up their claims then I believe it. But they wont.
So far it is conjecture, assumptions. Or as they call it, fake news. I call it propaganda.
Here we have the US media accusing Russia of having Hacked to change the US election.
How is that for foreign policy? Leave it at that, or declare hostilities?
Why is the president silent?
Quote from: pr126 on December 12, 2016, 11:10:53 AM
If the mainstream media can provide evidence to back up their claims then I believe it. But they wont.
So far it is conjecture, assumptions. Or as they call it, fake news. I call it propaganda.
Here we have the US media accusing Russia of having Hacked to change the US election.
How is that for foreign policy? Leave it at that, or declare hostilities?
Why is the president silent?
How is it conjecture and assumptions? Its from the fucking CIA.
Yes I know. It is not the preferred channel. Still, think about it.
https://youtu.be/_3EgJ7nIC0M
Well turnabout is fair play.
Trump is such a wild card, I don't know why the Russians would think his presidency would benefit them. Although given the events of the last few weeks, mostly through his appointments, I'm getting a clearer understanding of where Trump wants to take us. The one advantage to the Russians that I might consider is that the turmoil would hurt US credibility a bit.
Quote from: pr126 on December 12, 2016, 09:36:18 AM
Lucky there was no foul play when Obama was elected (or selected?). Twice.
And how would one know that? He clearly has dealings with the Arkansas Mafia (Clintons).
Quote from: Hydra009 on December 12, 2016, 10:43:26 AM
Exactly.
And it's not like the US has been Russia's only target. Germany has also accused Russia of launching a disinformation campaign designed to manipulate its elections (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/08/world/europe/germany-russia-hacking.html).
Thanks for the leak. But what of it? Every nation on Earth, has to interfere in American elections, because we are that special ;-) Oh ... and the CIA doesn't interfere in China or Russia? Oh, but we ubermenschen from Washington DC ... we are the one true faith.
Quote from: Nonsensei on December 12, 2016, 11:50:43 AM
How is it conjecture and assumptions? Its from the fucking CIA.
You will never see the actual report, any report from the CIA ... it is classified. You have to trust them ... which for my case ... I see less and less reason to, after over 45 years of being fairly adult vs politics. The CIA is required to lie ... and much more. Per the NDAA, it has been legal for the last 3 years, for the US government to completely bullshit the American people, for our own good ...
http://foreignpolicy.com/2013/07/14/u-s-repeals-propaganda-ban-spreads-government-made-news-to-americans/
Of course they have done this for many decades, but now it is legal for them to do it, and do it openly.
Quote from: SGOS on December 12, 2016, 01:00:09 PM
Trump is such a wild card, I don't know why the Russians would think his presidency would benefit them. Although given the events of the last few weeks, mostly through his appointments, I'm getting a clearer understanding of where Trump wants to take us. The one advantage to the Russians that I might consider is that the turmoil would hurt US credibility a bit.
What credibility? From the Vietnam war?
Quote from: Baruch on December 12, 2016, 01:08:42 PM
What credibility? From the Vietnam war?
Don't forget Iraq.
Quote from: SGOS on December 12, 2016, 01:12:35 PM
Don't forget Iraq.
But Hillary and Barak voted for that one, so it was good, yes?
Quote from: Nonsensei on December 12, 2016, 11:50:43 AM
How is it conjecture and assumptions? Its from the fucking CIA.
Look up "conformation bias".
Quote from: pr126 on December 12, 2016, 02:14:25 PM
Look up "conformation bias".
Oh god where is my fucking eyeroll emote.
You just said something to me that gave me the same reaction that I would have if you had said it about science.
"The Earth is round because sattelites say so? Sounds like confirmation bias."
You're essentially saying that the CIA, whose very function it is to detect and combat threats from abroad, is not a trustworthy source of information because they are currently saying something that you don't like. No proof required on your part. If they had said something that made Clinton look bad you would be singing their praises. Don's even attempt to utter the words confirmation OR bias in my direction you massive hypocrite.
pr, you just posted a series of videos on "Sweden will be a 3rd world country in 15 years and fall down below Libya" and a man screaming his head off with " 'Marxists' are taking over America" and you are blaming people with confirmation bias and the media with propaganda?
Quote from: SGOS on December 12, 2016, 01:00:09 PMTrump is such a wild card, I don't know why the Russians would think his presidency would benefit them.
Trump kinda freaked out our European allies (http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-russia-hillary-clinton-united-states-europe-516895), which isn't a good sign. And he has reportedly been pretty cozy with Putin (I think they stopped just short of third base) and has substantial business ties to Russia. Plus, there's the occasional gaffe (http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/31/politics/donald-trump-russia-ukraine-crimea-putin/) that kinda makes you wonder who's side he's on. The term "useful idiot" comes to mind.
Trump will do Putin's bidding, because there's money in it for him. Everything he does over the length of his upcoming reign (and I use that term literally), however short or long that may end up being, will be to enrich himself.
To any Americans who voted for Trump, or who lived in a battleground state and chose not to vote for Hillary, you are accountable. You, for one, must welcome our new Russian overlords. The rest of us will resist with all our might.
Quote from: SGOS on December 12, 2016, 01:12:35 PMDon't forget Iraq.
In fairness, some of the media was screaming that the Bush administration wasn't being completely honest about Iraq. It just got ignored by people dismissive of the "liberal media" yet credulous when it came to the Bush administration's claims. And a lot of the same people who were hoodwinked by Dubbya are making the exact same mistake with Trump.
Quote from: Hydra009 on December 12, 2016, 04:46:35 PM
Trump kinda freaked out our European allies (http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-russia-hillary-clinton-united-states-europe-516895), which isn't a good sign. And he has reportedly been pretty cozy with Putin (I think they stopped just short of third base) and has substantial business ties to Russia. Plus, there's the occasional gaffe (http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/31/politics/donald-trump-russia-ukraine-crimea-putin/) that kinda makes you wonder who's side he's on. The term "useful idiot" comes to mind.
According to a random youtube video I watched, Putin once gave Trump a handjob in the back of his Oldsmobile. So that probably means Marxist Muslims are about to complete their total take over of the American government.
I happen to agree with Victoria Nuland ... in this if nothing else ... "F* the EU".
Quote from: Nonsensei on December 12, 2016, 02:27:39 PM
Oh god where is my fucking eyeroll emote.
You just said something to me that gave me the same reaction that I would have if you had said it about science.
"The Earth is round because sattelites say so? Sounds like confirmation bias."
You're essentially saying that the CIA, whose very function it is to detect and combat threats from abroad, is not a trustworthy source of information because they are currently saying something that you don't like. No proof required on your part. If they had said something that made Clinton look bad you would be singing their praises. Don's even attempt to utter the words confirmation OR bias in my direction you massive hypocrite.
You are completely wrong (cough) about the purpose of the CIA ... or the US government. Go back to Civics 101 and don't forget your blankie.
Quote from: Shiranu on December 12, 2016, 05:37:13 PMAccording to a random youtube video I watched, Putin once gave Trump a handjob in the back of his Oldsmobile. So that probably means Marxist Muslims are about to complete their total take over of the American government.
Lol. And the sad part is about this is that the likes of Alex Jones and Pat Robertson are believed over actual journalists and relevant experts.
Have we really gotten to the point where some random loon's ravings are just as credible as expert opinion?
You mean like the ravings of the Continental Congress that they are thumb their nose at King George III? Now there was a meme, a mob action ... a loss of perfectly good tea too ;-)
Pat Robertson is a preacher ... enough said.
Alex Jones is an agent provocateur ... most likely CIA.
As far as any of those other "professional" reporters ... you mean like Brian Williams, who is going to take a lead on this very important investigation? ;-))
Quote from: Baruch on December 12, 2016, 07:44:59 PMAs far as any of those other "professional" reporters ... you mean like Brian Williams, who is going to take a lead on this very important investigation? ;-))
You're kinda making my point for me, though I doubt you realize it.
Over the course of his 23-year career with NBC, he did indeed fib about his helicopter getting hit by an RPG. He was put on suspension for it, his past statements have come under greater scrutiny by NBC, and his current statements are more vigorously fact-checked.
Alex Jones lies his ass off each and every day without the slightest consequence. He's not held to any sort of journalistic standard because he's not a journalist. His program isn't news. But tell that to his fanbase. A lot of these idiots believe his every word in part because his program has the appearance of news without the substance.
So which should I choose for my daily news, NBC or Infowars? Tough decision, huh?
Hey Brauch. Let's play a game. I call it pick the legit news source. Think of it as kinda like an IQ test.
(https://newspaperdeals.com/images/newspaperimages/Washington-Post-newspaper.jpg)
(http://16004-presscdn-0-50.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/obama-kenya-mayor-575x345.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/2490112356/y6fc605fnfgsfqai6gu0.jpeg)
Quote from: Hydra009 on December 12, 2016, 09:29:50 PM
Hey Brauch. Let's play a game. I call it pick the legit news source. Think of it as kinda like an IQ test.
(https://newspaperdeals.com/images/newspaperimages/Washington-Post-newspaper.jpg)
(http://16004-presscdn-0-50.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/obama-kenya-mayor-575x345.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/2490112356/y6fc605fnfgsfqai6gu0.jpeg)
All three are false ... because that is how the State roles ... and every corporation ... but don't worry, my PR firm says ... I am New & Improved. Some newspapers are free, some you have to pay for. If you pay for one at all, you are paying too much ;-)
Quote from: Hydra009 on December 12, 2016, 09:13:43 PM
You're kinda making my point for me, though I doubt you realize it.
Over the course of his 23-year career with NBC, he did indeed fib about his helicopter getting hit by an RPG. He was put on suspension for it, his past statements have come under greater scrutiny by NBC, and his current statements are more vigorously fact-checked.
Alex Jones lies his ass off each and every day without the slightest consequence. He's not held to any sort of journalistic standard because he's not a journalist. His program isn't news. But tell that to his fanbase. A lot of these idiots believe his every word in part because his program has the appearance of news without the substance.
So which should I choose for my daily news, NBC or Infowars? Tough decision, huh?
False dichotomy. Neither, both are shit ... NBC, ABC, CBS are totally State agents, going back to WW II and the Cold War. Are you still looking to kill VietCong? Gloria Steinem was CIA. I bet you still trust Dan Rather though ;-) But I would tell anyone, learn to be your own bullshit detector ... nobody else will do it for you. If a politician's mouth is open, he is lying, especially George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. Funny how people get all hot and bothered about which liar they prefer, yes?
As to what will happen tomorrow, nobody knows ... but everyone has an opinion, until Mike Tyson (aka reality) hits them in the mouth. If I comment on anything ... it is something that already happened or is presently happening ... interpretations of that may vary. But President Hillary will do this or President Trump will do that ... is pure drivel.
PS ... I voted for Obama twice. But not because I thought he was Black or a Democrat. He is a dark complected Republican ... just as Bill and Hillary are light completed Republicans. Bernie is a Democrat ... but like Warren, is a sellout.
Quote from: Baruch on December 12, 2016, 09:32:18 PMAll three are false
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MwDfXW0sGpM/Ucs4wSTLJdI/AAAAAAAANgY/pSjyk6vUnlA/w1200-h630-p-nu/cringe.gif)
I give up. Have fun in La-la land.
Quote from: Hydra009 on December 12, 2016, 09:50:22 PM
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-MwDfXW0sGpM/Ucs4wSTLJdI/AAAAAAAANgY/pSjyk6vUnlA/w1200-h630-p-nu/cringe.gif)
I give up. Have fun in La-la land.
Don't run away, because you believe half of the bullshit out there ... you disbelieve in half of it already, go the rest of the way! I voted for Obama, because he was a dark complected Republican changeling. But I regretted it, because he was Bush Jr 3rd and 4th terms. Cornel West is the real thing. Hillary is simply too slimy, more like a salamander, a frog who can't quite complete the metamorphosis into a human being ... I would have had to disinfected myself if I came into contact with her or her husband. I am not a Trump supporter, not a Republican. Don't try to corner me as one, because I don't fit that profiling.
(http://www.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2016-12/197558_5_.jpeg)
Quote from: pr126 on December 13, 2016, 12:01:20 AM
(http://www.americanthinker.com/images/bucket/2016-12/197558_5_.jpeg)
Aw it's okay, I am sure there is someone out there who loves you.
Quote from: Shiranu on December 13, 2016, 01:50:30 AM
Aw it's okay, I am sure there is someone out there who loves you.
I am liking pr126 more these days ... should I start a love offensive? Or just be offensive? So few gays post here these days.
The once trusted sources of news have probably lost some shine, as many responsible journalists seem to have drifted toward quoting what the government says, without asking the hard questions that might expose outright lies or be embarrassing enough to prevent politicos from appearing on programs that may not properly gush over them. But there is a difference in news sources, and we shouldn't be too quick to lump them all in with Rush Limbaugh (who has even admitted that he considers himself entertainment and not actual news).
Both liberals and conservatives feed off of sources of outright propaganda that provide the extremes with confirmation bias. FOX News is counter balanced by MSNBC. MSNBC is a bit less one sided, however, because it also hosts Joe Scarborough. I also think Chris Matthews has some very conservative opinions. But then FOX also sponsors the Simpsons. Like Rush Limbaugh, neither of these are news. They are commentary, which today, seems to be limited to "bashing" the opposing view.
There is a place for actual journalistic commentary, however. And I would actually appreciate some additional thoughtful commentary and analysis from actual news sources. All news sources act as outlets for government propaganda. Maybe half of the news we get is some sort of government propaganda, because what the government does affects us all in profound ways. We want to hear what these Bozos have to say, because these Bosos can help or harm us on a whim. But its up to us to evaluate the propaganda, rather than simply digest it.
The alternative is to simply throw out all the mail, including the dividend checks and the bills, along with the junk. Granted there is a lot of junk, but it's not all junk, and occasionally even the junk might be something we are looking for at the moment.
But I think it's a mistake to classify all news sources as junk mail or even worse. CNN doesn't always pass as news, but it's not as fake as FOX. I haven't watched the network news for years, because I got rid of TV, so I probably shouldn't comment on those.
Quote from: Baruch on December 13, 2016, 06:36:55 AM
I am liking pr126 more these days ... should I start a love offensive? Or just be offensive? So few gays post here these days.
Thank you Baruch.
But be careful associating with a
persona non grata on this forum. You might get tainted.
Quote from: pr126 on December 13, 2016, 07:12:34 AM
Thank you Baruch.
But be careful associating with a persona non grata on this forum. You might get tainted.
There are a few people on this forum who are dismissed because of who or what they are. That's not you. You are dismissed because of the things you say, and the flatly incorrect and blatamtly biased viewpoints you promote.
If you are persona non grata it's because you.put in the hard work necessary to earn that status.
Quote from: Nonsensei on December 13, 2016, 09:11:40 AM
There are a few people on this forum who are dismissed because of who or what they are. That's not you. You are dismissed because of the things you say, and the flatly incorrect and blatamtly biased viewpoints you promote.
If you are persona non grata it's because you.put in the hard work necessary to earn that status.
I don't have to work hard at it at all. Just having a different political view from the rest of you.
Turning Europe and America into a third world disaster area is not what I approve of.
This is what leftist politics does
https://youtu.be/6MJJu8q_FrM
I think this is the man who said 'if he loses, I'll get my musket', right? Now, he is acussing him with treason.
Leading Trump Mouthpiece TURNS On TrumpQuote
Former Congressman Joe Walsh is a huge fan of Donald Trump. He has made that clear throughout the election. Elected during the 2010 Tea Party wave, Walsh is about as right-wing as they come. However, despite his ardent support for Trump, it seems that Trump’s actions since becoming president-elect are a bridge too far even for Walsh. Appearing on CNN on Monday, Walsh lit into Trump, saying to host Brooke Baldwin:
“I’m outraged at the lack of outrage, especially on my side, the Republican side. I get that the country is divided, but my god: a foreign government interfered with our election. That should piss everybody off.â€
“It’s like because our guy won, Trump won, we’re going to keep our mouths shut. I mean that’s just so wrong.â€
Walsh continued on, saying that there is “no debate†that Russia had its thumb on the scale of the 2016 election, and that the scale was deliberately tilted for Trump. Walsh then lit into Trump himself, saying:
“It’s a fact. And then for Donald Trump … to call it ridiculous and not believe it, he ought to be ashamed of himself.â€
Walsh then went full-on nuclear on Trump, and echoed former CIA Acting Director Michael Morell’s statement that what Russia did is like a political 9/11, and shouted:
“I don’t think he fully gets it, Brooke. I mean we’re Americans! This is a foreign government got involved in our election. I mean, I agree with Mike Morell, that’s like Russia attacked us.â€
Walsh then went in for the kill, and accused Trump of treason live on the air:
“For Donald Trump to come out and attack our men and women in the CIA, that’s almost treasonous. Russia attacks us and Trump attacks the CIA. He ought to be the one calling for an investigation.â€
I never thought I’d be saying this, but Joe Walsh is a million percent correct. Instead of attacking the CIA, Trump and transition team should be heading up the effort to get to the bottom what actually happened. If it goes deep enough, he should call for another election.
Don’t hold your breath on that one, though. All such suggestions have earned Joe Walsh is having Trump block him on Twitter and carry on with his undermining of our American democracy.
https://youtu.be/vBNor5NSMUo
Quote from: pr126 on December 13, 2016, 09:45:24 AM
I don't have to work hard at it at all. Just having a different political view from the rest of you.
Turning Europe and America into a third world disaster area is not what I approve of.
This is what leftist politics does
https://youtu.be/6MJJu8q_FrM
In a time when right wing politics is having a devestating effect on the western world? The left is not in power right now. How will you be able to blame the left when our world slides into the shitter even faster than ever before?
But that's not really relevant. You said you have a different political view than the rest of us. Carefully selected words used to lend yourself some legitimacy and suggest you views are in equal footing with any other viewpoint.
In reality, you saying that us like Trump's new education secretary describing creationism as "just a different viewpoint from evolution". When she does that she implicitly implies creationism is on equal footing with evolution but we all know how unbelievably false that is.
It's the same with your political views. Bias and hatred laden nonsense spewed on these forums in the most opinionated and fact free format possible, but if anyone calls you out on it, suddenly it's all because you are persona non grata?
How does it feel to engage in the victimhood nerrative right wing dipshits so often accuse liberals of using?
People don't dismiss you because you hold a different view. They dismiss you because your views have as few anchors in reality as they can have without totally disintegrating into nonsensical drivel.
Quote from: Nonsensei on December 13, 2016, 10:39:05 AM
But that's not really relevant. You said you have a different political view than the rest of us. Carefully selected words used to lend yourself some legitimacy and suggest you views are in equal footing with any other viewpoint.
It's the same with your political views. Bias and hatred laden nonsense spewed on these forums in the most opinionated and fact free format possible, but if anyone calls you out on it, suddenly it's all because you are persona non grata?
How does it feel to engage in the victimhood nerrative right wing dipshits so often accuse liberals of using?
People don't dismiss you because you hold a different view. They dismiss you because your views have as few anchors in reality as they can have without totally disintegrating into nonsensical drivel.
Well said. I gave up listening to pr126 a long time ago, just like I no longer bother engaging the man on the corner who screams about chemtrails. He has all the evidence in the world too; too bad it's all shit wrapped up in an argument that only holds water in his version of reality. There comes a point when you just have to stop trying to reason with delusional. But you're right again that so many delusional people try to slip their delusions into the mainstream by saying "I'm entitled to my opinion" or "we just think differently."
Ghandi thought very differently than I do. So did Joseph Stalin. Saying "we just think differently" is usually pretty benign, but it's also sometimes used as an excuse to shelter beliefs that should have ended up on the scrap heap of history. And having the opinion that Muslims are dangerous or that the alt-right are the saviors of our generation is also an opinion, but the sad part is a lot of people form those opinions based on facts which aren't facts at all. Not all opinions are entitled to be treated as actual candidates for the truth simply because someone believes them. I'm sure I can find news sources which prove Obama is nothing more than an alien lizard man wearing a human costume. So what?
Why wouldn't Putin help the guy willing to blow him?
Quote from: widdershins on December 13, 2016, 11:46:07 AM
Why wouldn't Putin help the guy willing to blow him?
Jealous much? Once you have tried Stroganoff, there is no going back ;-)
Quote from: Baruch on December 13, 2016, 12:47:09 PM
Jealous much? Once you have tried Stroganoff, there is no going back ;-)
Getting blown by an Oompa Loompa with acromegaly doesn't do it for me.
Quote from: pr126 on December 12, 2016, 05:46:41 AM
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/12/fake_news_the_cia_says_russia_preferred_trump.html
Meanwhile, the Post and much of the mainstream media, in their mania to discredit Trump, will publish almost any sort of "news" nowadays, even if it's as fake as the nonsense that makes up much of the blogosphere.
So, the mainstream media couldn't do enough to get Chump put into the office, now they can't do enough to discredit him? Our country is indeed schizophrenic.
Quote from: Youssuf Ramadan on December 12, 2016, 07:31:31 AM
Either way, it makes the US establishment look weak and stupid.
That's because the US establishment is weak and stupid...
Quote from: widdershins on December 13, 2016, 03:21:52 PM
Getting blown by an Oompa Loompa with acromegaly doesn't do it for me.
But didn't I see you doing Obama ... that is Kenyan for Oompa ...
Quote from: Baruch on December 12, 2016, 01:20:10 PM
But Hillary and Barak voted for that one, so it was good, yes?
No, nobody is saying anything like that. What kind of a reasoning is that, if it is some sort of a reasoning at all.
Quote from: drunkenshoe on December 14, 2016, 01:20:19 AM
No, nobody is saying anything like that. What kind of a reasoning is that, if it is some sort of a reasoning at all.
A response to a rhetorical question ... which requires no answer. They voted to destroy Iraq, based on false evidence, provided by the same PoS intelligence community we still have.
I don't know anyone here, who thinks after the fact, that destroying Iraq (both before and after 2003) was a clever idea.
However there are cult of personality partisans and ideologues ... who support certain pols who support US intervention in Syria, in the Ukraine, and war with Russia. Are you comfortable with this policy direction, or the pols who push it? Not just Hillary, but John McCain.