American spies paid $100,000 to a Russian who wanted to sell material on Trump
53 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125165]Facts huh? Ok, I won't dispute it here.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, facts. Not every outlet that criticizes Trump has a stellar record of accuracy, but the most important ones do. I don't see why you wouldn't dispute it when that's the main point of your post.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125165]Quotes, well let it not be said that anything you say can and will be used against you, regardless of tone. [/QUOTE]
It has nothing to do with tone, it has to do with things he has said in the past directly contradicting things he is saying now. This is nothing more than another example of "this is what he really meant". You can't have it both ways; you can't criticize people for taking his statements out of context or twisting them, then try and re-interpret his statements to look less stupid/dictatorial.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125165]But because he won the election? To my knowledge, the press had been going after Trump since before he even won the Republican Primary. Though I will admit, there are legit issues to criticize Trump on. However, certain news outlets criticizing Trump over getting 2 scoops of Ice cream or how his wife Decorated the white house for Christmas, or even other non-issue reporting like that, It makes it hard for me to take those kinds of news outlets seriously.[/QUOTE]
I don't care about ice cream or Christmas decorations, and I care even less what you think are "legit issues". I want to know why you think the press is undermining our democracy. You made a bold claim and have yet to substantiate it with anything.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125165]Facts huh? Ok, I won't dispute it here.
Quotes, well let it not be said that anything you say can and will be used against you, regardless of tone.
But because he won the election? To my knowledge, the press had been going after Trump since before he even won the Republican Primary. Though I will admit, there are legit issues to criticize Trump on. However, certain news outlets criticizing Trump over getting 2 scoops of Ice cream or how his wife Decorated the white house for Christmas, or even other non-issue reporting like that, It makes it hard for me to take those kinds of news outlets seriously.[/QUOTE]
The press has been going after Trump because he was a constant car crash that piled onto itself infinitely. Before the Republican Primary he still had made a lot of statements and accusations that were loaded or entirely fabricated that he refused to retract and continued to restate.
If your problem is 'the media reporting over non-issues making it hard for you to take those outlets seriously' then why in the world are you in the bubble you're in to begin with. Fox News and Breitbart etc. were all talking about Obama's 'terrorist fist jabs' and daring to order grey poupon (to show how 'elite' he is or some horse-hockey), just barely biting back from calling him 'unamerican' on those utter nonissues to start with.
That's not even getting into the constant 'is Obama a secret muslim? Was he even born in the US?' stuff. Sounds to me like you're picking and choosing here what sources you feel are credible by whether or not they support your opinion - rather than their merits or good reporting as you seem to imply.
Also, I have the exact same opinion as Raidyr on this.
[quote=Raidyr]I want to know why you think the press is undermining our democracy. You made a bold claim and have yet to substantiate it with anything.[/quote]
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125165]Though I will admit, there are legit issues to criticize Trump on. However, certain news outlets criticizing Trump over getting 2 scoops of Ice cream or how his wife Decorated the white house for Christmas, or even other non-issue reporting like that, It makes it hard for me to take those kinds of news outlets seriously.[/QUOTE]
if petty reporting causes you to lose trust in a publication how can you still respect fox for going after obama's heinous mustard crimes
What's a mustard crime?
The Big things I remember Fox going after Obama for were everything that he passed without congress, that Trump was able to easily undo because they were done without congress, and the ACA also known as Obamacare (let's not argue about the name please, they're the same law.).
I have yet to hear any of the left leaning news outlets report anything positive about Trump, and I wind up having to put up with those news outlets in the break room at work. If anything, they've been avoiding the positive news as much as possible and stuff like the low unemployment rate wasn't even mentioned on those networks until during the State of the Union Address.
Heck, I'd go so far as to say they really want to believe that the Trump Dossier, that includes allegations of Russian Collusion, is true when nothing has even been able to prove a single allegation against Trump from it.
I might be more willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if they would actually report on any of the good stuff he and his administration has done
Also Umbra, there's more to my bubble than just Fox and Brightbart. I'd go so far that it even includes a few youtube channels now. Like Mundane Matt.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125262]What's a mustard crime?
The Big things I remember Fox going after Obama for were everything that he passed without congress, that Trump was able to easily undo because they were done without congress, and the ACA also known as Obamacare (let's not argue about the name please, they're the same law.).
I have yet to hear any of the left leaning news outlets report anything positive about Trump, and I wind up having to put up with those news outlets in the break room at work. If anything, they've been avoiding the positive news as much as possible and stuff like the low unemployment rate wasn't even mentioned on those networks until during the State of the Union Address.
Heck, I'd go so far as to say they really want to believe that the Trump Dossier, that includes allegations of Russian Collusion, is true when nothing has even been able to prove a single allegation against Trump from it.
I might be more willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if they would actually report on any of the good stuff he and his administration has done
Also Umbra, there's more to my bubble than just Fox and Brightbart. I'd go so far that it even includes a few youtube channels now. Like Mundane Matt.[/QUOTE]
Nobody's called mustard a crime; Fox/Breitbart/etc. thinks it's unamerican/classist/showing-off to put Dijon Mustard on a burger. Those who called it a crime should be immediately discredited for calling it one with any sincerity.
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAvq12Sa3VE[/media]
Why you continue to listen to their network is a thing I don't understand when you're saying you're not wanting to listen to networks who are throwing stupid stories like that around.
The low unemployment rate can't even possibly be swung as 'something e: this President is responsible for' though. Not even in the slightest. That trend began [I]well[/I] before he arrived in office and has been on more or less the same trajectory since he's taken it.
Give me some positive things you think Trump's responsible for that you think the media should report on.
There've been four indictments and two guilty verdicts that've come out of the Special Counsel's probe. More are absolutely to come. [I]Nothing[/I] in the Dossier has been disproven - many things in it have been independently verified by the FBI.
YouTube is a horrible source of primary information. I'll restate that. [U][I]YouTube is a horrible source of primary information.[/I][/U] If you're not using YouTube to get information directly (or at most indirectly) from accredited sources (e.g. the news media) then you're basically just taking people's opinion for granted.
It doesn't matter what you add to your bubble if it's nothing but the same sorts of sources who're likely all feeding each other from the same sources. Inflating your bubble doesn't make it a less biased one.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125262]What's a mustard crime?[/QUOTE]
[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQYHHklRBtY[/media]
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;53125264]The low unemployment rate can't even possibly be swung as 'something the President is responsible for' though. Not even in the slightest.
Give me some positive things you think Trump's responsible for that you think the media should report on.
There've been four indictments and two guilty verdicts that've come out of the Special Counsel's probe. More are absolutely to come.
YouTube is a horrible source of primary information. I'll restate that. [U][I]YouTube is a horrible source of primary information.[/I][/U]
It doesn't matter what you add to your bubble if it's nothing but the same sorts of sources who're likely all feeding each other from the same sources.[/QUOTE]
First, Mundane Matt is not a Republican. He's a Democrat. (also I use Youtube as a Secondary source)
Second, the List:
the Repeal of the Individual Mandate to buy Health Insurance,
The Tax cuts,
the Reduction of Regulations
Approval of the Keystone pipeline (you don't hear about that pipeline anymore, do you?)
And this is just year 1.
EDIT:
when did Fox Call the Mustard thing a crime? I just watched the posted video and Hannity never said "Crime" even once. He just mocked Obama.
Mocking Obama for wanting mustard is not the same as calling it a crime.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125283]
EDIT:
when did Fox Call the Mustard thing a crime? I just watched the posted video and Hannity never said "Crime" even once. He just mocked Obama.
Mocking Obama for wanting mustard is not the same as calling it a crime.[/QUOTE]
You're being purposefully obtuse here.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125283]First, Mundane Matt is not a Republican. He's a Democrat. (also I use Youtube as a Secondary source)
Second, the List:
the Repeal of the Individual Mandate to buy Health Insurance,
The Tax cuts,
the Reduction of Regulations
Approval of the Keystone pipeline (you don't hear about that pipeline anymore, do you?)
And this is just year 1.
also yes, the Low unempolyment rate can be swung as 'something the President is responsible for' because it happened under Trump's first year. Obama has no claim to it.[/QUOTE]
(1) Increases the amount of money people are going to pay at the end of the day and doesn't help coverage besides. Also, allows companies to wiggle out from the ACA's requirements to make the policies worth a damn.
(2) The Tax Cuts that primarily benefit the rich right now and by 2020 will almost exclusively only benefit the rich? The Tax cuts that CEOs and so forth have explicitly stated they're not going to use to 'put back into the economy' or 'hire more workers'? The [I]trillion dollar[/I] tax cut?
(3) Those Regulations were in key places such as preventing companies from putting chemicals into water tables and rivers; to prevent people from putting oil rigs up in national parks; to keep ISPs from effectively segregating the internet by class and race and however else they like. They were also to help people be able to hold their banks and credit card companies responsible should they basically commit fraud against them.
(4) A minor victory at best - and it came at a cost to many and it has already busted in several places several times. Not only was it not on time and dramatically over budget, it also was built shoddily and forced people off their land.
And that's just year one. Where's the good you're talking about?
While we're talking about things I should apparently be 'happy about' to have happened under Trump's admin, should I be mad that the media's not reporting how great it is that my information got leaked through Equifax and - not only that - but that that investigation has stalled and Trump shows no concern about that (because of course he wouldn't as you point out because he's very happy to reduce regulations)?
[quote]also yes, the Low unempolyment rate can be swung as 'something the President is responsible for' because it happened under Trump's first year. Obama has no claim to it.[/quote]
Give me a source, right now, from a credible person who studies unemployment (and I don't mean some guy writing on his blog) who states that the President has [U]caused[/U] the trend Obama created to continue - that without him it would've immediately climbed back up or destabilized. If you can't, withdraw that claim.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125283]The Tax cuts,
the Reduction of Regulations
Approval of the Keystone pipeline (you don't hear about that pipeline anymore, do you?)
And this is just year 1.[/QUOTE]
Obviously you won't see them reporting these as good things because those networks and their viewers believe these all to be explicitly bad things to begin with.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125283]when did Fox Call the Mustard thing a crime? I just watched the posted video and Hannity never said "Crime" even once. He just mocked Obama.
Mocking Obama for wanting mustard is not the same as calling it a crime.[/QUOTE]
is english your second language? i was using purposely overblown language to mock the fact that they cared about what kind of mustard he used. please read more goodly.
[QUOTE=Alice3173;53125292]Obviously you won't see them reporting these as good things because those networks and their viewers believe these all to be explicitly bad things to begin with.[/QUOTE]
They believe they are bad because they have [I]evidence[/I] that they are bad - unlike the assertion that 'no they're good' because 'trust us what's good for the bottom line of businesses is good for America'.
[QUOTE=Firgof Umbra;53125289](1) Increases the amount of money people are going to pay at the end of the day and doesn't help coverage besides. Also, allows companies to wiggle out from the ACA's requirements to make the policies worth a damn.
(2) The Tax Cuts that primarily benefit the rich right now and by 2020 will almost exclusively only benefit the rich?
(3) Those Regulations were in key places such as preventing companies from putting chemicals into water tables and rivers; to prevent people from putting oil rigs up in national parks; to keep ISPs from effectively segregating the internet by class and race and however else they like. They were also to help people be able to hold their banks and credit card companies responsible should they basically commit fraud against them.
(4) A minor victory at best - and it came at a cost to many and it has already busted in several places several times. Not only was it not on time and dramatically over budget, it also was built shoddily and forced people off their land.
And that's just year one. Where's the good you're talkign about?
While we're talking about things I should apparently be 'happy about' to have happened under Trump's admin, should I be mad that the media's not reporting how great it is that my information got leaked through Equifax and - not only that - but that that investigation has stalled and Trump shows no concern about that (because of course he wouldn't as you point out because he's very happy to reduce regulations)?
Give me a source, right now, from a credible person who studies unemployment who states that the President has caused the trend Obama created to continue - that without him it would've immediately climbed back up or destabilized. If you can't, withdraw that claim.[/QUOTE]
1: Before the ACA I had a poloicy that met my needs, under the ACA I would have been punished for not having Insurance, and that's totalitarian.
2: Umbra, are you a US citisen or otherwise work in the US? if so, when was the last time you checked your pay check/stub? The Tax cuts JUST took effect. And Even I who work for almost Minimum Wage in my State am seeing more money in my paycheck as a result of those cuts. (Check the section for Federal Witholding)
3: Those regulations also drove companies out of the US and into others like Mexico and China.
4: To be honest, I haven't heard much of anything on the pipeline since it was approved.
(Unemployment)
Ok, I'll still believe it, but I'll take the clam back.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125262]What's a mustard crime?
The Big things I remember Fox going after Obama for were everything that he passed without congress, that Trump was able to easily undo because they were done without congress, and the ACA also known as Obamacare (let's not argue about the name please, they're the same law.).
I have yet to hear any of the left leaning news outlets report anything positive about Trump, and I wind up having to put up with those news outlets in the break room at work. If anything, they've been avoiding the positive news as much as possible and stuff like the low unemployment rate wasn't even mentioned on those networks until during the State of the Union Address.
Heck, I'd go so far as to say they really want to believe that the Trump Dossier, that includes allegations of Russian Collusion, is true when nothing has even been able to prove a single allegation against Trump from it.
I might be more willing to give them the benefit of the doubt if they would actually report on any of the good stuff he and his administration has done
Also Umbra, there's more to my bubble than just Fox and Brightbart. I'd go so far that it even includes a few youtube channels now. Like Mundane Matt.[/QUOTE]
Complaining that news organizations aren't biased enough in favor of Trump is the most hilarious thing I've read today.
[editline]11th February 2018[/editline]
Mainstream media don't show respect for my president! Unlike fox news which boosted the birther conspiracy for years.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125307]1: Before the ACA I had a poloicy that met my needs, under the ACA I would have been punished for not having Insurance, and that's totalitarian.
2: Umbra, are you a US citisen or otherwise work in the US? if so, when was the last time you checked your pay check/stub? The Tax cuts JUST took effect. And Even I who work for almost Minimum Wage in my State am seeing more money in my paycheck as a result of those cuts.
3: Those regulations also drove companies out of the US and into others like Mexico and China.
4: To be honest, I haven't heard much of anything on the pipeline since it was approved.[/quote]
1: Before the ACA (aka "Obamacare") I [I]couldn't afford insurance[/I]. Most people couldn't. Those who even had insurance were very much on their parent's plan or were on their company's plan. Companies are now dodging giving out insurance with every fiber of their being in the lower rungs of the job industry. Even if I [I]could[/I] have afforded said insurance there were no guarantees that your policy would amount to anything because of pre-existing condition declarations (and, later, 'network restrictions' which is its own separate layer of bullshit). Insurance companies were abusing their position to unilaterally decide who they'd pay for and who they wouldn't - effectively deciding who would live and who would die. [I]That's[/I] totalitarian. Requiring people to pay into a societal need - because it [I]is[/I] a need as you [I]will[/I] get sick/disabled and need medical care - is as 'totalitarian' as the Government taking a quarter out of your wages to pay for the maintenance of local roads and highways; for ten cents to pay to ensure that there are trained firemen who are on call and ready to save your house should it catch fire, who you won't need to debate with when they arrive over how much your house is worth to them as they wait for you to pay them (which is where we were before that industry was regulated in an, as you I think would characterize, 'totalitarian' manner).
2: I've already looked at how my paycheck changes. This year I get a small bonus of some $230 which is great. My health insurance is looking to go up [B]410.[/B] Why should I be excited again?
Also, in 2 years [B]that 230 almost entirely goes away for me.[/B] Again, why should I be excited?
e: If you think that the 'tax cuts are great' for minimum wage workers like yourself, I will state without any hint of irony or ill-will towards you: [I][U]You have been hoodwinked.[/U][/I] The tax cuts for the wealthy are [U]permanent[/U]. The tax cuts for you, me, and 95% of America [I]expire[/I] in two years. That tiny bump you're getting now in income? It's going away. Meanwhile, your insurance rates are going to skyrocket - as they always were going to but which the ACA more or less delayed for a short while as it was hoped it would be replaced by a better system before those hiked rates had a chance to go back up and in the meantime at least made sure that the insurance you did get was guaranteed to do something. You are gaining 5 cents now (and then not even getting 5 cents later) to lose two dollars for effectively ever at this time; that is not a good trade - whoever is telling you that it is is lying to you.
3: That's a frightening position to hold, I have to tell you. 'So what if these policies make us dramatically more unsafe, make our individual capital far more volatile, and reduce our options to even seek restitution from major players in the financial industry should they decide to screw us over -- at least they've decided not to leave the US!' Also, I have to correct you there that the regulations aren't the big reason those companies are leaving - it's because you can find slave labor for cheap elsewhere.
If you want America to compete with those countries directly, you'd like us to have wages that start at - literally - 25 cents an hour? Because that would keep those e: companies in America. How much are you willing to sacrifice for companies who only want to exploit you and weren't acting ethically to begin with?
4: Because your bubble doesn't like to report bad news.
[quote]
(Unemployment)
Ok, I'll still believe it, but I'll take the clam back.[/QUOTE]
You'll [I]believe it[/I] in spite of [U]being unable to find evidence to support that?[/U]
That says all it needs to, I think. I'm not going to debate your unsubstantiated opinions; I'm here to debate facts and fact-based opinions. Since we're talking about the facts, though, allow me to spread some regarding your specific claim.
[quote=Valerie Wilson, director of the program on Race, Ethnicity and the Economy at the Economic Policy Institute -- a professional economist]“Recovery was well underway before (Trump) came into office,” she said. “All he had to do was not do anything to reverse the process.”[/quote]
So there's a source for you that not only disputes but states that the opposite is true - that not only is Trump not responsible but that his inaction is actually the reason why it is how it is now.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125262]What's a mustard crime?
I have yet to hear any of the left leaning news outlets report anything positive about Trump, and I wind up having to put up with those news outlets in the break room at work. If anything, they've been avoiding the positive news as much as possible and stuff like the low unemployment rate wasn't even mentioned on those networks until during the State of the Union Address.
[/QUOTE]
This is blatantly false. You really need to stop listening to Trump and stop taking your terrible sources of information at their word.
CNN: So many articles I can't pick one, just google "cnn unemployment rate
WaPo: [URL]https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-economy-added-200000-jobs-in-january/2018/02/02/7109f4e8-07a2-11e8-8777-2a059f168dd2_story.html?utm_term=.c03ebe87e147[/URL]
NYT: [URL]https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/02/business/economy/jobs-report.html?mtrref=www.google.com&gwh=27AAA3CAF3962B17EB9C9991D2E125BD&gwt=pay[/URL]
MSNBC: [URL]http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/us-nonfarm-payrolls-totaled-242000-feb-versus-190000-estimate[/URL]
CNBC: [URL]https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/02/nonfarm-payrolls-jan-2018.html[/URL]
CBS: [URL]https://www.cbsnews.com/news/african-american-unemployment-hits-record-low/[/URL]
It took me 45 seconds and Google to find these. You have no excuse.
[editline]11th February 2018[/editline]
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125307]
2: Umbra, are you a US citisen or otherwise work in the US? if so, when was the last time you checked your pay check/stub? The Tax cuts JUST took effect. And Even I who work for almost Minimum Wage in my State am seeing more money in my paycheck as a result of those cuts. (Check the section for Federal Witholding)
[/QUOTE]
Which state do you live in? I'm in Florida and I'm saving about $1.53 a week. That's fucking [I]nothing[/I].
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125283]
Second, the List:
the Repeal of the Individual Mandate to buy Health Insurance,
The Tax cuts,
the Reduction of Regulations
Approval of the Keystone pipeline (you don't hear about that pipeline anymore, do you?)
And this is just year 1.
[/QUOTE]
The media reported on all of these.
[editline]11th February 2018[/editline]
You also still haven't substantiated the claim that the press is trying to undermine our democracy.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;53125335] Which state do you live in? I'm in Florida and I'm saving about $1.53 a week. That's fucking [I]nothing[/I].[/QUOTE]
I'm in Michigan
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125369]I'm in Michigan[/QUOTE]
Will you or won't you substantiate your claim that the press is trying to undermine our democracy? Or is that yet another thing that you don't have (credible) proof of but choose to believe in regardless - in other words a baseless assertion entirely without merit?
I don't know if it's worth trying to argue with glaber. He's still peddling the same sorts of stuff he was years ago. He's just gonna go right back to his echo chamber where he gets swaddled by comfortable lies which continue which tell him he's right and to be conservative is correct, just and american. Maybe he'll change and show a modicum of self awareness but I'm not holding my breath over it.
The closest I've come to making my impression a claim was the use of that poll. I have not substantiated my impression because I have no concrete evidence. Just a load of anti-Trump Derangement that fed into my impression.
But you know what, how about this. Since I can't cite anything to really make my impression a full on Claim, how about I just leave the topic?
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125415]The closest I've come to making my impression a claim was the use of that poll. I have not substantiated my impression because I have no concrete evidence. Just a load of anti-Trump Derangement that fed into my impression.
But you know what, how about this. Since I can't cite anything to really make my impression a full on Claim, how about I just leave the topic?[/QUOTE]
I mean, you could also defend your position with concrete facts and sources rather than just keel over and fall back into your already self-recognized bubble. But hey, who needs objectivity when you have everything you want to hear already?
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125415]The closest I've come to making my impression a claim was the use of that poll. I have not substantiated my impression because I have no concrete evidence. Just a load of anti-Trump Derangement that fed into my impression.
But you know what, how about this. Since I can't cite anything to really make my impression a full on Claim, how about I just leave the topic?[/QUOTE]
Basically ever poll out there has Trump below majority approval. Even Rasmussen, which is one of the more conservative polling companies out there hasn't had him above 50% approval since march. Maybe your feeling of Trump doing good things is misplaced. Maybe Trump is a bad president who deserves his unpopularity.
But see you around next time, since you can't seem to get over your own biases.
[QUOTE=Glaber;53125415]The closest I've come to making my impression a claim was the use of that poll. I have not substantiated my impression because I have no concrete evidence. Just a load of anti-Trump Derangement that fed into my impression.
But you know what, how about this. Since I can't cite anything to really make my impression a full on Claim, how about I just leave the topic?[/QUOTE]
Nobody is keeping you here, but it speaks pretty poorly of your claim when you have no evidence to support it and you opt to simply leave the thread rather than back it up.
This thread has thoroughly convinced me that your perspective is whatever narrative is spoon fed to you in the conservative media you consume. I don't know why you choose to consume media from these sources, but having a healthy media diet isn't hearing "both sides" on an issue. It means finding sources that corroborate the info stories, provide little in the way of biased wording or omissions of fact, and whose stories are published throughout other media outlets. It also means getting rid of or avoiding the ones that do, like Fox, Breitbart, HuffPo, etc.
so, spies got conned and someone is laughing with easy 100k ?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.