PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Little Joe on June 23, 2017, 05:38:25 AM
-
Obama knew about it but failed to take sufficient action.
This is a big breaking story by the Washington post. The only links are behind WaPo's pay wall and on the MicroSpin network. Google it or wait for more info to come out.
-
Fake news? Not sure why we're trusting this but not everything else.
-
Fake news? Not sure why we're trusting this but not everything else.
Because this has been my suspicion all along. Obama knew about this long before the election but didnt do anything substantial about it. And I see no mention of collusion by the Trump
Admin. Those allegations against Trump are the fake news.
-
Because this has been my suspicion all along. Obama knew about this long before the election but didnt do anything substantial about it. And I see no mention of collusion by the Trump
Admin. Those allegations against Trump are the fake news.
Yep. All of the focus has been on Trump when the real story was why the Obama Administration just sat back and did nothing. And with 17 days to go before leaving office, BHO changed the intelligence rules to encourage what we are seeing now.
Not to mention the Hillary campaign's actual Russian collusion and her campaign managers actual ties to Russia.
The swamp stinks to the high heavens right now with phony investigations, fake news, fake leaks.
-
Because this has been my suspicion all along. Obama knew about this long before the election but didnt do anything substantial about it. And I see no mention of collusion by the Trump
Admin. Those allegations against Trump are the fake news.
Sorry. I don't accept that reasoning, that the news isn't fake now because it fits your personal narrative.
-
Sorry. I don't accept that reasoning, that the news isn't fake now because it fits your personal narrative.
If someone tells you something that you don't believe, then by definition you think that is fake. On the other hand, if someone tells you something that you do believe, then you believe it.
I could be wrong. So could you. The problem is that we have been taught to distrust our government. This is validated by the WaPo article.
-
If someone tells you something that you don't believe, then by definition you think that is fake. On the other hand, if someone tells you something that you do believe, then you believe it.
No. If someone tells me something that I don't believe, and I take the source to be credible enough, then I may re-evaluate my beliefs. That's the tough part of it, right? Being humble enough to reconsider your views.
But I've heard time and again on this site that the MSM tells fake news. These are remarks that go to the credibility of the news organization, including WaPo. Until, apparently, they tell the fake news that agrees with your preconceived notions. That doesn't work for me.
-
No. If someone tells me something that I don't believe, and I take the source to be credible enough, then I may re-evaluate my beliefs. That's the tough part of it, right? Being humble enough to reconsider your views.
But I've heard time and again on this site that the MSM tells fake news. These are remarks that go to the credibility of the news organization, including WaPo. Until, apparently, they tell the fake news that agrees with your preconceived notions. That doesn't work for me.
I don't know about you, but I am not in a position to know for sure what is the truth. I can only go by my best judgement. All of the "news" services tell the truth, sometimes, and they lie sometimes, even if only by omission. Some are better or worse than others.
The Washington Post has some of the best investigative reporters in the world. They also have a definite political bias. I often read their stories and try to judge for myself what to believe. Or do you just propose that we just swallow what ever we are being fed?
-
The fake news is Trump collusion, not Russian attempting to mess with an election. Two very different things. Conservatives need to stop arguing moonbat's on their terms, force them to the truth instead.
-
The fake news is Trump collusion, not Russian attempting to mess with an election. Two very different things. Conservatives need to stop arguing moonbat's on their terms, force them to the truth instead.
I think that's what I said:
... I see no mention of collusion by the Trump Admin. Those allegations against Trump are the fake news.
-
I think that's what I said:
Yes you did, nice work.
-
I don't know about you, but I am not in a position to know for sure what is the truth. I can only go by my best judgement. All of the "news" services tell the truth, sometimes, and they lie sometimes, even if only by omission. Some are better or worse than others.
The Washington Post has some of the best investigative reporters in the world. They also have a definite political bias. I often read their stories and try to judge for myself what to believe. Or do you just propose that we just swallow what ever we are being fed?
What I'm trying to understand is how you guys can constantly blast WaPo's credibility as part of the fake news MSM, and then up pops a story from the same organization that happens to fit your narrative and all of a sudden we're golden. So far you've explained to me that the reason you believe this story and not others from the same organization is because this story fits what you believe. In my opinion, that is a dubious metric by which to judge the veracity of news information. What we believe is often wrong or incomplete.
-
Washington Post is pure trash. They have been caught in so many lies nothing they report can be substantive.
Same goes for the NYT, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC.
-
What I'm trying to understand is how you guys can constantly blast WaPo's credibility as part of the fake news MSM, and then up pops a story from the same organization that happens to fit your narrative and all of a sudden we're golden. So far you've explained to me that the reason you believe this story and not others from the same organization is because this story fits what you believe. In my opinion, that is a dubious metric by which to judge the veracity of news information. What we believe is often wrong or incomplete.
Well for one thing, the WP is prone to publish anything that smells anti-Trump, whether they have evidence or hearsay. But it takes overwhelming proof for them to publish a pro-Trump story, or a negative Obama story. If they publish a story that doesn't bash Trump, you can usually take it to the bank.
-
If they publish a story that doesn't bash Trump, you can usually take it to the bank.
Go right ahead.........Don't be surprised if the bank doesn't accept it.
-
Obama did know about it, that the Russians or someone posing as the Russians, were trying to mess with the elections, that was pretty well established in testimony after Trump won. That's not fake news, the link between Trump and the Russians, that's fake news.
-
Sorry. I don't accept that reasoning, that the news isn't fake now because it fits your personal narrative.
The truth is that you don't accept the truth because you refuse to admit that the entire Russia - Trumppmcharade was specifically to avoid people looking at The Obama regime and their colossal collusion with anyone that antied up cash.
The guidance systems that the midgit emporor is using with his never ending chase for nuke warheads was "gifted" to him by nine other than Bill Clinton in exchange for "campaign donation no" in the nineties. No democrat liberal progressive communist wants to examine all that either.
-
Didn't Comey testify under oath that Trump was never under investigation?
-
Didn't Comey testify under oath that Trump was never under investigation?
Yep, but facts never get in the way of progressive ideas.
-
So let's see if I have this right........
During the election of 2016 the Russians attempted to interfere......
During 2016 Barack Obama was President, and had knowledge of this.....
James Comey was the Director of the FBI and had knowledge of it....
Loretta Lynch was Attorney General and had knowledge of it...
John Kerry was Secretary of State, and had knowledge of it.....
James Clapper was Director of National Intelligence and had knowledge of it........
And Donald Trump took office on January 20, 2017.....And yet he is somehow responsible for this???
-
So let's see if I have this right........
During the election of 2016 the Russians attempted to interfere......
During 2016 Barack Obama was President, and had knowledge of this.....
James Comey was the Director of the FBI and had knowledge of it....
Loretta Lynch was Attorney General and had knowledge of it...
John Kerry was Secretary of State, and had knowledge of it.....
James Clapper was Director of National Intelligence and had knowledge of it........
And Donald Trump took office on January 20, 2017.....And yet he is somehow responsible for this???
They kept it quiet because they thought Hillary would win by a landslide and they didn't want her coronation tainted.
-
They kept it quiet because they thought Hillary would win by a landslide and they didn't want her coronation tainted.
Or,
they expected she would win and they could say she beat Trump in spite of Russian meddling. If this happened, she would be in a position to extort more money from Russia.
but, on the off chance Trump won, they could blame Trump and by association, all Republicans.
-
Or, this was never any kind of news at all. Russians attempting to influence American political machinations. Come on! Does anyone imagine this hasn't always been going on? That it's not daily business as usual at least since the end of WWII? Obama didn't do anything because it was nothing new. Yawn. Only when Trump won and the MSM and the left needed to make shit up (because there is no real shit there at all) did they take this old news and pretend it's new and try to weave it into a weapon to destroy Trump.
-
Or, this was never any kind of news at all. Russians attempting to influence American political machinations. Come on! Does anyone imagine this hasn't always been going on? That it's not daily business as usual at least since the end of WWII? Obama didn't do anything because it was nothing new. Yawn. Only when Trump won and the MSM and the left needed to make shit up (because there is no real shit there at all) did they take this old news and pretend it's new and try to weave it into a weapon to destroy Trump.
Yeah, that!
-
(http://www.cool-smileys.com/images/219.gif) (http://cool-smileys.com//smiley-that-says-yeah-right)
-
What Rush said x eleventy billion!
-
Or, there was nothing to be done. Rush has a valid point in that hacking has been a time honored activity since the beginning of the internet. I'm sure this isn't the first instance. Since none of us truly know the extent nor the details, it is pretty hard to determine what, if anything could be done after the fact.
I have seen no real evidence that the President himself has colluded with the Russians, personally believe that would have been a pretty stupid thing for him to do. As far as the remainder of the campaign staff, that isn't clear at all. Would have thought that if there is "nothing there" the President would have been eager and open to move the investigation as quickly as possible. Get the staff out there testifying under oath so everyone can see. But... that wasn't his strategy. The President admits that firing Comey, in his mind, relieved the pressure, bad move IMHO. While the President or his staff may not have actively colluded, it's pretty murky what they knew and whether they were aware and potentially encouraged such activity.
-
Would have thought that if there is "nothing there" the President would have been eager and open to move the investigation as quickly as possible. Get the staff out there testifying under oath so everyone can see. But... that wasn't his strategy.
Why go testify when there was nothing there to begin with?
The President admits that firing Comey, in his mind, relieved the pressure, bad move IMHO.
Comey was fired over incompetence. And after the Comey testimony it becomes even more evident of why he was fired.
Here's the thing, had Hillary won, Comey would have been fired. Remember the democrats screaming for his head just a few months ago?
So the President ask his Justice Dept how they felt about the job performance of Comey, and both the AG and Deputy AG report they feel he should be terminated. Trump terminates him and the Deputy AG then says we need a Special Prosecutor to look into why Trump fired Comey. A big "WTF" moment.
While the President or his staff may not have actively colluded, it's pretty murky what they knew and whether they were aware and potentially encouraged such activity.
How come no special prosecutor for Hillary Clinton and her Russian collusion? She signed off on the uranium deal while the Clinton Foundation was receiving million$ from the Russians, and then Slick Willy doubled his speaking fee in Russia from the same group.
And what about John Podesta's (Hillary's campaign manager) brother Tony, who actively lobbys for Sberbank, a Russian Bank, hey, lookie here, who has ties to the Hillary uranium deal!
-
Or, there was nothing to be done. Rush has a valid point in that hacking has been a time honored activity since the beginning of the internet. I'm sure this isn't the first instance. Since none of us truly know the extent nor the details, it is pretty hard to determine what, if anything could be done after the fact.
No, not just the Internet, since ever. Before the Internet they were trying to influence our elections by spreading disinformation about candidates, starting rumors, making stuff up, the KGB had a whole division dedicated to bringing down the U.S. through this kind of covert subversion. They tried to prevent Reagan's election through these means; they failed spectacularly.
-
Would have thought that if there is "nothing there" the President would have been eager and open to move the investigation as quickly as possible.
Yeah, that's what the Democrats that keep coming up with these frivolous charges think too. Distract the President and his staff from working or things like health care and tax reform, and plant the idea of corruption into a gullible public's head.
Unfortunately, it's working.
-
Some of you guys need to get your heads outta your asses. If you go back 20-25 years the conservative media has blasting the same crowd(he NYT, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and newcomer MSNBC) as fake news. Only back then it wasn't called fake news as known today. As far as the WaPo goes, Jeff Bezos owns it and he is ardently anti Trump. The Dimocrap party has had the MSM wrapped around it's dick. Only since the election have they gone bore with the Fake News crap. The MSM will print or say anything necessary to denigrate the Republican party and the Washington outsider that was elected POTUS because his agenda threatens their gummint control of the people of the USofA. Both Ds and Rs are scard shitless of him, because of the threat he poses, either real or imagined to destroy their power. The Repubics have control of the House, Senate, and White House. If they don't wake up, get nasty, and start doing what the people of the USofA elected them to do, I spect a bunch of them will get a big surprise come the mid-term elections.
Noah W
-
Both Ds and Rs are scard shitless of him, because of the threat he poses, either real or imagined to destroy their power. The Repubics have control of the House, Senate, and White House. If they don't wake up, get nasty, and start doing what the people of the USofA elected them to do, I spect a bunch of them will get a big surprise come the mid-term elections.
This is a real takeaway here. We sent a message electing Trump, if the congress doesn't get message, we need to send a stronger one mid-term. We CAN help drain the swamp.
-
Like the Loretta Lynch investigation, this will go nowhere.
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/06/23/republican-lawmakers-call-for-investigation-into-james-comey-and-robert-mueller/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social
-
What is Russia's motive to get Trump elected over Hillary, who is a fellow commie traveler?
Did they think he is weak? LOL!
-
What is Russia's motive to get Trump elected over Hillary, who is a fellow commie traveler?
Did they think he is weak? LOL!
They dealt with Hillary while she was SecState, and they learned that they couldn't trust her. And they just plain didn't like her. I can fully understand that.
-
They dealt with Hillary while she was SecState, and they learned that they couldn't trust her. And they just plain didn't like her. I can fully understand that.
I believe this is the case, just couldn't stand to deal with her, just like I couldn't stand the idea of hearing her screeching voice for four or eight years if she had been elected. Remember, the USSR interfered to try to NOT get Reagan elected. Why would they now be trying to GET Trump (the Republican) elected? It's not a matter of Republican hard on communism, Democrat easy on communism, although that is true, the world is a whole lot more complex than basic ideology. Nobody complies with their own ideology completely; you have incentive to work with other nations on many levels, to further your own interests, and the personality of your contact point is very relevant, and the ability to negotiate a deal WAY more relevant than basic ideology. I think Russia sees Trump as someone with whom they can negotiate, for better or worse, and Hillary as a nutcase.
-
Some of you guys need to get your heads outta your asses. If you go back 20-25 years the conservative media has blasting the same crowd(he NYT, CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, and newcomer MSNBC) as fake news. Only back then it wasn't called fake news as known today. As far as the WaPo goes, Jeff Bezos owns it and he is ardently anti Trump. The Dimocrap party has had the MSM wrapped around it's dick. Only since the election have they gone bore with the Fake News crap. The MSM will print or say anything necessary to denigrate the Republican party and the Washington outsider that was elected POTUS because his agenda threatens their gummint control of the people of the USofA. Both Ds and Rs are scard shitless of him, because of the threat he poses, either real or imagined to destroy their power. The Repubics have control of the House, Senate, and White House. If they don't wake up, get nasty, and start doing what the people of the USofA elected them to do, I spect a bunch of them will get a big surprise come the mid-term elections.
^^^^^This. Spot on. The Media has been the enemy of the American people for several decades. All they care about is their Progressive agenda.
-
Agreed. Not much of a peep about feeling the Bern
http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89ae8247abe8493fae24405546e9a1aa/Article_2017-06-26-US--Bernie%20Sanders-Wife-Investigation/id-aeabb68c09ac45dfbba33fa4ea294a4e (http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89ae8247abe8493fae24405546e9a1aa/Article_2017-06-26-US--Bernie%20Sanders-Wife-Investigation/id-aeabb68c09ac45dfbba33fa4ea294a4e)
-
Agreed. Not much of a peep about feeling the Bern
http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89ae8247abe8493fae24405546e9a1aa/Article_2017-06-26-US--Bernie%20Sanders-Wife-Investigation/id-aeabb68c09ac45dfbba33fa4ea294a4e (http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89ae8247abe8493fae24405546e9a1aa/Article_2017-06-26-US--Bernie%20Sanders-Wife-Investigation/id-aeabb68c09ac45dfbba33fa4ea294a4e)
Yep, while it's been acknowledged and verified Trump has never been under investigation, it is a FACT that Bernie Sanders is being investigated, as well as Hillary Clinton's past investigations. But the MSM did their best to make it look like Trump was who they were after.
Interesting times indeed.
-
Agreed. Not much of a peep about feeling the Bern
http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89ae8247abe8493fae24405546e9a1aa/Article_2017-06-26-US--Bernie%20Sanders-Wife-Investigation/id-aeabb68c09ac45dfbba33fa4ea294a4e (http://hosted2.ap.org/APDEFAULT/89ae8247abe8493fae24405546e9a1aa/Article_2017-06-26-US--Bernie%20Sanders-Wife-Investigation/id-aeabb68c09ac45dfbba33fa4ea294a4e)
If it's true what she did that's pretty bad. Last year I happened to get seated next to a guy on a flight who turned out to be from the Sanders' home town. The campaign was in full swing and for some reason we started talking about it despite it being risky to bring up politics to a complete stranger on an airplane flight. Anyway, he said he knew the Sanderses personally and that they are so corrupt, I wouldn't believe.
-
Yep, while it's been acknowledged and verified Trump has never been under investigation, it is a FACT that Bernie Sanders is being investigated, as well as Hillary Clinton's past investigations. But the MSM did their best to make it look like Trump was who they were after.
Interesting times indeed.
Not only is the media biased, but a lot of their bias shows by what the DON'T say.