Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?Booray said:How so?Oldbear83 said:No, I understand Irony well. Like how ironic that you ignore History, even as recent as 2016 ...Booray said:Old Bear just told me that liberals use words to attack and conservatives to reason. Irony escapes both of you.HashTag said:He probably needs to go scream at the sky to make himself feel better.. I would offer, but I'm fresh out of coloring books.Oldbear83 said:He lives in your head, you know ...Booray said:Right, POTUS never uses words as weapons. Good grief.Oldbear83 said:"Attack" is a perjorative word.Booray said:Sp you think it was a good idea to attack President Bush after he asked us to unite as a country and rise together? If that is bias and dislike, it is well-earned.Oldbear83 said:You speak only from bias and dislike.Booray said:Its not information, its an opinion.Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.
The information is provided by POTUS and is plain to see. The idea that he has to attack President Bush for saying lets be united is pretty damn telling in my book. I don't need the Atlantic to tell me that is dbaggery of the worst kind. We elected an a-hole President and 25% of the country wants to celebrate that fact. Its sick.
Sure, you have a right to your opinion, and I have the right to tell you your opinion is bilge.
Like most on the Left, you use words as weapons, not to discuss topics.
Trump really is full of ****, isn't he?
41,043 Views |
371 Replies |
Last: 5 yr ago by TexasScientist
From your last statement, you are ignoring the facts.Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:
Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?
But that's been normal for Democrats for at least the last 18 years ...
Which facts?Oldbear83 said:From your last statement, you are ignoring the facts.Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:
Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?
But that's been normal for Democrats for at least the last 18 years ...
Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?Booray said:How so?Oldbear83 said:No, I understand Irony well. Like how ironic that you ignore History, even as recent as 2016 ...Booray said:Old Bear just told me that liberals use words to attack and conservatives to reason. Irony escapes both of you.HashTag said:He probably needs to go scream at the sky to make himself feel better.. I would offer, but I'm fresh out of coloring books.Oldbear83 said:He lives in your head, you know ...Booray said:Right, POTUS never uses words as weapons. Good grief.Oldbear83 said:"Attack" is a perjorative word.Booray said:Sp you think it was a good idea to attack President Bush after he asked us to unite as a country and rise together? If that is bias and dislike, it is well-earned.Oldbear83 said:You speak only from bias and dislike.Booray said:Its not information, its an opinion.Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.
The information is provided by POTUS and is plain to see. The idea that he has to attack President Bush for saying lets be united is pretty damn telling in my book. I don't need the Atlantic to tell me that is dbaggery of the worst kind. We elected an a-hole President and 25% of the country wants to celebrate that fact. Its sick.
Sure, you have a right to your opinion, and I have the right to tell you your opinion is bilge.
Like most on the Left, you use words as weapons, not to discuss topics.
You are ignoring the double standard Dems grant themselves on a daily basis .
Booray said:Which facts?Oldbear83 said:From your last statement, you are ignoring the facts.Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:
Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?
But that's been normal for Democrats for at least the last 18 years ...
I am guessing whatever facts may support his view that the investigations were more directed at political theatre than fact finding.
For Congressional Democrats, it was an investigation designed to remove or damage a political opponent.
My concern is that some of that sentiment may have been present in our law enforcement agencies as well.
The primary investigation-the Mueller investigation-was done at the direction of people Donald Trump appointed. The Senate intelligence committee did its own investigation, controlled by the GOP. There was plenty of smoke there. And I am not certain that history will absolve the Trump campaign in the way he claims to have been absolved. So "political theater" staged by the Democrats goes to far.D. C. Bear said:Booray said:Which facts?Oldbear83 said:From your last statement, you are ignoring the facts.Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:
Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?
But that's been normal for Democrats for at least the last 18 years ...
I am guessing whatever facts may support his view that the investigations were more directed at political theatre than fact finding.
For Congressional Democrats, it was an investigation designed to remove or damage a political opponent.
My concern is that some of that sentiment may have been present in our law enforcement agencies as well.
But Old Bear's point is that somehow I am "ignoring" the fact that all this happened. I was pretty consistent during the investigation-let Robert Mueller do his job and then judge his report. I did and accepted Mueller's conclusions. I don't see how that is ignoring anything.
How so?Canada2017 said:Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?Booray said:How so?Oldbear83 said:No, I understand Irony well. Like how ironic that you ignore History, even as recent as 2016 ...Booray said:Old Bear just told me that liberals use words to attack and conservatives to reason. Irony escapes both of you.HashTag said:He probably needs to go scream at the sky to make himself feel better.. I would offer, but I'm fresh out of coloring books.Oldbear83 said:He lives in your head, you know ...Booray said:Right, POTUS never uses words as weapons. Good grief.Oldbear83 said:"Attack" is a perjorative word.Booray said:Sp you think it was a good idea to attack President Bush after he asked us to unite as a country and rise together? If that is bias and dislike, it is well-earned.Oldbear83 said:You speak only from bias and dislike.Booray said:Its not information, its an opinion.Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.
The information is provided by POTUS and is plain to see. The idea that he has to attack President Bush for saying lets be united is pretty damn telling in my book. I don't need the Atlantic to tell me that is dbaggery of the worst kind. We elected an a-hole President and 25% of the country wants to celebrate that fact. Its sick.
Sure, you have a right to your opinion, and I have the right to tell you your opinion is bilge.
Like most on the Left, you use words as weapons, not to discuss topics.
You are ignoring the double standard Dems grant themselves on a daily basis .
Booray said:The primary investigation-the Mueller investigation-was done at the direction of people Donald Trump appointed. The Senate intelligence committee did its own investigation, controlled by the GOP. There was plenty of smoke there. And I am not certain that history will absolve the Trump campaign in the way he claims to have been absolved. So "political theater" staged by the Democrats goes to far.D. C. Bear said:Booray said:Which facts?Oldbear83 said:From your last statement, you are ignoring the facts.Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:
Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?
But that's been normal for Democrats for at least the last 18 years ...
I am guessing whatever facts may support his view that the investigations were more directed at political theatre than fact finding.
For Congressional Democrats, it was an investigation designed to remove or damage a political opponent.
My concern is that some of that sentiment may have been present in our law enforcement agencies as well.
But Old Bear's point is that somehow I am "ignoring" the fact that all this happened. I was pretty consistent during the investigation-let Robert Mueller do his job and then judge his report. I did and accepted Mueller's conclusions. I don't see how that is ignoring anything.
Someone on here said that Mueller's folks concealed exculpatory information on Flynn and lied about it in a legal setting. Is that accurate or not? Are you ignoring that fact? (Whether it is true it not, it is a factual question, not an opinion).
The Senate committee did not find collusion between the Russians and the Trump campaign, but you say "There was plenty of smoke there." Is the fact that they did not find collusion a fact that you are ignoring?
I would also point out that the Starr investigation was done at the direction of people President Clinton appointed. Have you ever complained about Ken Starr's investigation?
I've said before I'm not a Biden supporter. But I'm not going to join the cult and follow their leader either.HashTag said:"Maybe"? only just a "maybe"? Have you watched Biden at all? It's an open secret that Biden's mental faculties are seriously in question. This will be the first presidential election in my lifetime where the voters will be voting more for their VP candidate than their nominee for president - that's rich.TexasScientist said:Maybe. But have you watched Trump struggle to read and deliver every scripted speach he is given?HashTag said:Biden doesn't have the mental acuity to even quote what's written down on paper for himTexasScientist said:You give him too much credit. I don't believe Trump has the mental faculty to quote someone, much less Fouci.Oldbear83 said:So when the President quotes Dr. Fauci ... ?TexasScientist said:I'm not sure about Fouci. I don't recall him being caught in a lie. Trump lies about something just about every time he steps up to a podeum - and that is more than well documented.HashTag said:Well, if the President lied then so did Dr. Fauci and others when they said, at the beginning, that it was no big deal, including those on the democrat side like pelosi, biden, schumer, etc.... Don't forget the newspapers too...Waco1947 said:The President lied. You have no defense except to attack me.Oldbear83 said:Your malice blinds you, Waco.Waco1947 said:A flaw is "The President calls people names."Oldbear83 said:The same as you do, actually.Waco1947 said:How do you defend the President's lies?Oldbear83 said:
The OP continues to prove the malice and delusion of the Left, nothing more.
I am honest enough to admit the President's flaws, but you are not honest enough to credit the President's good works.
A lie is a moral issue -- "Anybody can get a test if they want a test." That lie is destructive. That lie raises false hope.
It's all you can see. All you love is hate.
wac47, you have a problem with only seeing what you believe.
I know you hate Trump and for the last 3.5 years, you've had a chronic case of the TDSies, but let's be honest here.... compared to Biden, Trump is a genius, a damn genius.
Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
The Crawford ranch is not a gigantic ranch either. We'd be far better off with W as president right now than the cult leader we have now.Booray said:Most of this is speculation.ValhallaBear said:
George W. Bush
- Lives in a fortress on a gigantic private ranch paid for by taxpayers, donors, and other crony connections he made through his daddy. He's not worrying how to pay the mortgage
- 24/7 armed protection provided for by the taxpayers
- I'm sure as soon as NY became a hot spot his daughter and her family were flown via private jet and escorted to the Crawford ranch
- has his own private mountain bike trail - I'm sure he has other high end fitness facilities
- I'm sure he has private chefs
- He doesn't have to worry about wearing masks and gloves and social distancing because he has people to do things like get and cook food for him
- If he or someone in his family gets sick the taxpayers will pay to have a world class medical team choppered to his ranch
- I'm sure Laura is not showing gray roots as she probably has access to personal stylists at her location
So yeah, he's all gung ho about the lockdown and unity and whatever because this isn't effecting his life in the least bit
Bush spends the majority of his time in Dallas rather than Crawford, not sure what he is doing during the lock down. In Dallas he is extremely accessible. Seems prety down to earth when he eats at the Coffee Shop in MacGregor or Casa de Castillo in Waco,
I was in a private mail store in Plano, there was a picture of him on the wall with someone on their bikes., Asked about it-the owner was biking around White Rock and out pops W. He was happy to do pictures and take time to shoot the s-- with him. I know folks who live on his street and they say he and Laura couldn't be nicer human beings. He walks the street around Christmas to talk to the neighbors and thank them fro putting up with living next to an ex-president.
My guess is that he could do without all the secret service stuff.
The man has been incredibly devoted to our vets, particularly the wounded ones. Gives of his time, money and talent.
So yes, the man is blessed in a variety of ways. Doesn't diminish the fact that he is a good human being. In fact, it might make it more remarkable.
So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
My point is that your version ignores the obvious political purpose of the Mueller committee and its clearly hostile composition to the President.Booray said:The primary investigation-the Mueller investigation-was done at the direction of people Donald Trump appointed. The Senate intelligence committee did its own investigation, controlled by the GOP. There was plenty of smoke there. And I am not certain that history will absolve the Trump campaign in the way he claims to have been absolved. So "political theater" staged by the Democrats goes to far.D. C. Bear said:Booray said:Which facts?Oldbear83 said:From your last statement, you are ignoring the facts.Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:
Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?
But that's been normal for Democrats for at least the last 18 years ...
I am guessing whatever facts may support his view that the investigations were more directed at political theatre than fact finding.
For Congressional Democrats, it was an investigation designed to remove or damage a political opponent.
My concern is that some of that sentiment may have been present in our law enforcement agencies as well.
But Old Bear's point is that somehow I am "ignoring" the fact that all this happened. I was pretty consistent during the investigation-let Robert Mueller do his job and then judge his report. I did and accepted Mueller's conclusions. I don't see how that is ignoring anything.
The fact that Mueller is a close personal friend of Jim Comey alone made him the wrong choice to lead an objective inquiry.
Pretending otherwise only proves your own hypocrisy.
This thread is way too long. A simple "Yes, yes he is," would have sufficed.
Only if you want to lie, which certainly is what Democrats have done for decades now.bear2be2 said:
This thread is way too long. A simple "Yes, yes he is," would have sufficed.
So you prefer govt corruption, globalism, foreign military intervention and creating failed states.TexasScientist said:The Crawford ranch is not a gigantic ranch either. We'd be far better off with W as president right now than the cult leader we have now.Booray said:Most of this is speculation.ValhallaBear said:
George W. Bush
- Lives in a fortress on a gigantic private ranch paid for by taxpayers, donors, and other crony connections he made through his daddy. He's not worrying how to pay the mortgage
- 24/7 armed protection provided for by the taxpayers
- I'm sure as soon as NY became a hot spot his daughter and her family were flown via private jet and escorted to the Crawford ranch
- has his own private mountain bike trail - I'm sure he has other high end fitness facilities
- I'm sure he has private chefs
- He doesn't have to worry about wearing masks and gloves and social distancing because he has people to do things like get and cook food for him
- If he or someone in his family gets sick the taxpayers will pay to have a world class medical team choppered to his ranch
- I'm sure Laura is not showing gray roots as she probably has access to personal stylists at her location
So yeah, he's all gung ho about the lockdown and unity and whatever because this isn't effecting his life in the least bit
Bush spends the majority of his time in Dallas rather than Crawford, not sure what he is doing during the lock down. In Dallas he is extremely accessible. Seems prety down to earth when he eats at the Coffee Shop in MacGregor or Casa de Castillo in Waco,
I was in a private mail store in Plano, there was a picture of him on the wall with someone on their bikes., Asked about it-the owner was biking around White Rock and out pops W. He was happy to do pictures and take time to shoot the s-- with him. I know folks who live on his street and they say he and Laura couldn't be nicer human beings. He walks the street around Christmas to talk to the neighbors and thank them fro putting up with living next to an ex-president.
My guess is that he could do without all the secret service stuff.
The man has been incredibly devoted to our vets, particularly the wounded ones. Gives of his time, money and talent.
So yes, the man is blessed in a variety of ways. Doesn't diminish the fact that he is a good human being. In fact, it might make it more remarkable.
You are so wrong here on two counts.Oldbear83 said:My point is that your version ignores the obvious political purpose of the Mueller committee and its clearly hostile composition to the President.Booray said:The primary investigation-the Mueller investigation-was done at the direction of people Donald Trump appointed. The Senate intelligence committee did its own investigation, controlled by the GOP. There was plenty of smoke there. And I am not certain that history will absolve the Trump campaign in the way he claims to have been absolved. So "political theater" staged by the Democrats goes to far.D. C. Bear said:Booray said:Which facts?Oldbear83 said:From your last statement, you are ignoring the facts.Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:
Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?
But that's been normal for Democrats for at least the last 18 years ...
I am guessing whatever facts may support his view that the investigations were more directed at political theatre than fact finding.
For Congressional Democrats, it was an investigation designed to remove or damage a political opponent.
My concern is that some of that sentiment may have been present in our law enforcement agencies as well.
But Old Bear's point is that somehow I am "ignoring" the fact that all this happened. I was pretty consistent during the investigation-let Robert Mueller do his job and then judge his report. I did and accepted Mueller's conclusions. I don't see how that is ignoring anything.
The fact that Mueller is a close personal friend of Jim Comey alone made him the wrong choice to lead an objective inquiry.
Pretending otherwise only proves your own hypocrisy.
First, Mueller did the job he was appointed to do in about as apolitical way as possible. He ran a ship that was air tight as far as leaks. He didn't respond to repeated attacks on his character and motivation. And in the end he called them as he saw them, to the President's benefit in a general sense.
Second, if he was the wrong guy for the job, that was not the Democrats' fault. He was selected by a Trump appointee-the deputy AG--because another Trump appointee-the AG-recused himself. Once appointed, Trump praised Mueller as the absolute right man for job. Yet somehow the fact that it was Robert Mueller who was the special counsel is the Democrats' fault? Bizzarro world you live in.
Very DNC of you Booray, but I am right about the bias and the hostility.Booray said:You are so wrong here on two counts.Oldbear83 said:My point is that your version ignores the obvious political purpose of the Mueller committee and its clearly hostile composition to the President.Booray said:The primary investigation-the Mueller investigation-was done at the direction of people Donald Trump appointed. The Senate intelligence committee did its own investigation, controlled by the GOP. There was plenty of smoke there. And I am not certain that history will absolve the Trump campaign in the way he claims to have been absolved. So "political theater" staged by the Democrats goes to far.D. C. Bear said:Booray said:Which facts?Oldbear83 said:From your last statement, you are ignoring the facts.Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:
Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?
But that's been normal for Democrats for at least the last 18 years ...
I am guessing whatever facts may support his view that the investigations were more directed at political theatre than fact finding.
For Congressional Democrats, it was an investigation designed to remove or damage a political opponent.
My concern is that some of that sentiment may have been present in our law enforcement agencies as well.
But Old Bear's point is that somehow I am "ignoring" the fact that all this happened. I was pretty consistent during the investigation-let Robert Mueller do his job and then judge his report. I did and accepted Mueller's conclusions. I don't see how that is ignoring anything.
The fact that Mueller is a close personal friend of Jim Comey alone made him the wrong choice to lead an objective inquiry.
Pretending otherwise only proves your own hypocrisy.
First, Mueller did the job he was appointed to do in about as apolitical way as possible. He ran a ship that was air tight as far as leaks. He didn't respond to repeated attacks on his character and motivation. And in the end he called them as he saw them, to the President's benefit in a general sense.
Second, if he was the wrong guy for the job, that was not the Democrats' fault. He was selected by a Trump appointee-the deputy AG--because another Trump appointee-the AG-recused himself. Once appointed, Trump praised Mueller as the absolute right man for job. Yet somehow the fact that it was Robert Mueller who was the special counsel is the Democrats' fault? Bizzarro world you live in.
Tell yourself whatever helps you cope, though.
Prove "No alternative"curtpenn said:There is no alternative from the left that isn't worse. Sad state of affairs.Prove itTexasScientist said:
This article sums up everything Trump.
The President Is Unraveling
The country is witnessing the steady, uninterrupted intellectual and psychological decomposition of Donald Trump.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/president-unraveling/611146/
In case there was any doubt, the past dozen days have proved we're at the point in his presidency where Donald Trump has become his own caricature, a figure impossible to parody, a man whose words and actions are indistinguishable from an Alec Baldwin skit on Saturday Night Live.
President Trump's pice de rsistance came during a late April coronavirus task-force briefing, when he floated using "just very powerful light" inside the body as a potential treatment for COVID-19 and then, for good measure, contemplated injecting disinfectant as a way to combat the effects of the virus "because you see it gets in the lungs and does a tremendous number on them, so it'd be interesting to check that."
But the burlesque show just keeps rolling on.
Take this past weekend, when former President George W. Bush delivered a three-minute video as part of The Call to Unite, a 24-hour live-stream benefiting COVID-19 relief.
Bush joined other past presidents, spiritual and community leaders, front-line workers, artists, musicians, psychologists, and Academy Award winning actors. They offered advice, stories, and meditations, poetry, prayers, and performances. The purpose of The Call to Unite (which I played a very minor role in helping organize) was to offer practical ways to support others, to provide hope, encouragement, empathy, and unity.
In his video, which went viral, Bushin whose White House I workednever mentioned Trump. Instead, he expressed gratitude to health-care workers, encouraged Americans to abide by social-distancing rules, and reminded his fellow Americans that we have faced trying times before.
"I have no doubt, none at all, that this spirit of service and sacrifice is alive and well in America," Bush said. He emphasized that "empathy and simple kindness are essential, powerful tools of national recovery." And America's 43rd president asked us to "remember how small our differences are in the face of this shared threat."
"In the final analysis," he said, "we are not partisan combatants; we are human beings, equally vulnerable and equally wonderful in the sight of God." Bush concluded, "We rise or fall together, and we are determined to rise."
That was too much for Trump, who attacked his Republican predecessor on (where else?) Twitter: "[Bush] was nowhere to be found in speaking up against the greatest Hoax in American history!"
So think about that for a minute. George W. Bush made a moving, eloquent plea for empathy and national unity, which enraged Donald Trump enough that he felt the need to go on the attack.
But there's more. On the same weekend that he attacked Bush for making an appeal to national unity, Trump said this about Kim Jong Un, one of the most brutal leaders in the world: "I, for one, am glad to see he is back, and well!"
Then, Sunday night, sitting at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial for a town-hall interview with Fox News, Trump complained that he is "treated worse" than President Abraham Lincoln. "I am greeted with a hostile press, the likes of which no president has ever seen," Trump said.
By Monday morning, the president was peddling a cruel and bizarre conspiracy theory aimed at MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, a Trump critic, with Trump suggesting in his tweet that a "cold case" be opened to look into the death of an intern in 2001.
I could have picked a dozen other examples over the past 10 days, but these five will suffice. They illustrate some of the essential traits of Donald Trump: the shocking ignorance, ineptitude, and misinformation; his constant need to divide Americans and attack those who are trying to promote social solidarity; his narcissism, deep insecurity, utter lack of empathy, and desperate need to be loved; his feelings of victimization and grievance; his affinity for ruthless leaders; and his fondness for conspiracy theories.
None of these traits are new in Trump; they are part of the reason why some of us were warning about him long before he won the presidency, even going back to 2011. But, more and more, those traits are defining his presidency, producing a kind of creeping paralysis.
We are witnessing the steady, uninterrupted intellectual and psychological decomposition of an American president. It's something the Trump White House cannot hideindeed, it doesn't even try to hide it anymore. There is not even the slightest hint of normalcy.
This will have ongoing ramifications for the remainder of Trump's first term and for his reelection strategy. More than ever, Trump will try to convince Americans that "what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening," to quote his own words in 2018.
That won't be easy in a pandemic, as the death toll mounts and the economy collapses and the failures of the president multiply. But that doesn't mean Trump won't try. It's all he has left, so Americans have to prepare for it.
Trump and his apparatchiks will not only step up their propaganda; they will increase their efforts to exhaust our critical thinking and to annihilate truth, in the words of the Russian dissident Garry Kasparov. We will see even more "alternative facts." We will see even more brazen attempts to rewrite history. We will hear even more crazy conspiracy theories. We will witness even more lashing out at reporters, more rage, and more lies.
"The real opposition is the media," Steve Bannon, the president's former chief strategist, once told the journalist Michael Lewis. "And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with *****"
We will see more extreme appeals to the fringe base of Trump's party, including right-wing militias. For example, after hundreds of protesters, many of them carrying guns, descended on the capitol in Lansing, Michigan, to protest Governor Gretchen Whitmer's stay-at-home order, Trump, summoning the ghosts of Charlottesville, described the protesters as "very good people." Some of these "very good people" carried signs saying tyrants get the rope and tyrant ***** and comparing the governor to Hitler.
We will see a more prominent role played by One America News (OAN), a pro-Trump network that the president has praised dozens of times. And we will see the right-wing media complex go to even more bizarre placesnot just people such as InfoWar's Alex Jones, who literally threatened to eat his own neighbors if the lockdown continued, but more mainstream figures such as Salem Radio Network's Dennis Prager, who declared the other day that the lockdown was "the greatest mistake in the history of humanity."
Watching formerly serious individuals on the right, including the Christian right, become Trump courtiers has been a painful and dispiriting thing for many of us to witness. In the process, they have reconfigured their own character, intellect, and moral sensibilities to align with the disordered mind and deformed ethical world of Donald Trump.
And we will see, as we have for the entire Trump presidency, the national Republican Party fall in line. Many are speaking out in defense of Trump while other timid souls who know better have gone sotto voce out of fear and cowardice that they have justified to themselves, and tried less successfully to justify to others.
What this means is that Americans are facing not just a conventional presidential election in 2020 but also, and most important, a referendum on reality and epistemology. Donald Trump is asking us to enter even further into his house of mirrors. He is asking us to live within a lie, to live within his lie, for four more years. The duty of citizenship in America today is to refuse to live within that lie.
"The simple step of a simple courageous man is not to partake in falsehood, not to support false actions," Alexandr Solzhenitsyn said in his mesmerizing 1970 Nobel lecture. "Let that enter the world, let it even reign in the worldbut not with my help."
Solzhenitsyn went on to say that writers and artists can achieve more; they can conquer falsehoods. "Falsehood can hold out against much in this world, but not against art," he said.
But art, as powerful as it is, is not the only instrument with which to fight falsehoods. There are also the daily acts of integrity of common men and women who will not believe the lies or spread the lies, who will not allow the foundation of truthfactual truth, moral truthto be destroyed, and who, in standing for truth, will help heal this broken land.
PETER WEHNER is a contributing writer at The Atlantic, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and Egan visiting professor at Duke University. He writes widely on political, cultural, religious, and national-security issues, and he is the author of The Death of Politics: How to Heal Our Frayed Republic After Trump.
Prove "The left"
Prove "worse"
Each is a story made up; otherwise known as as a strawman. Any rebuttal?
As usual, Waco cannot defend his opinion, he can only sneer and deride.
A minister of Hell, he is.
A minister of Hell, he is.
the obvious political purpose of the Mueller committee" Prove political purpose. It's not obviousOldbear83 said:My point is that your version ignores the obvious political purpose of the Mueller committee and its clearly hostile composition to the President.Booray said:The primary investigation-the Mueller investigation-was done at the direction of people Donald Trump appointed. The Senate intelligence committee did its own investigation, controlled by the GOP. There was plenty of smoke there. And I am not certain that history will absolve the Trump campaign in the way he claims to have been absolved. So "political theater" staged by the Democrats goes to far.D. C. Bear said:Booray said:Which facts?Oldbear83 said:From your last statement, you are ignoring the facts.Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:
Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?
But that's been normal for Democrats for at least the last 18 years ...
I am guessing whatever facts may support his view that the investigations were more directed at political theatre than fact finding.
For Congressional Democrats, it was an investigation designed to remove or damage a political opponent.
My concern is that some of that sentiment may have been present in our law enforcement agencies as well.
But Old Bear's point is that somehow I am "ignoring" the fact that all this happened. I was pretty consistent during the investigation-let Robert Mueller do his job and then judge his report. I did and accepted Mueller's conclusions. I don't see how that is ignoring anything.
The fact that Mueller is a close personal friend of Jim Comey alone made him the wrong choice to lead an objective inquiry.
Pretending otherwise only proves your own hypocrisy.
Only to the deliberately blind.Waco1947 said:the obvious political purpose of the Mueller committee" Prove political purpose. It's not obviousOldbear83 said:My point is that your version ignores the obvious political purpose of the Mueller committee and its clearly hostile composition to the President.Booray said:The primary investigation-the Mueller investigation-was done at the direction of people Donald Trump appointed. The Senate intelligence committee did its own investigation, controlled by the GOP. There was plenty of smoke there. And I am not certain that history will absolve the Trump campaign in the way he claims to have been absolved. So "political theater" staged by the Democrats goes to far.D. C. Bear said:Booray said:Which facts?Oldbear83 said:From your last statement, you are ignoring the facts.Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:
Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?
But that's been normal for Democrats for at least the last 18 years ...
I am guessing whatever facts may support his view that the investigations were more directed at political theatre than fact finding.
For Congressional Democrats, it was an investigation designed to remove or damage a political opponent.
My concern is that some of that sentiment may have been present in our law enforcement agencies as well.
But Old Bear's point is that somehow I am "ignoring" the fact that all this happened. I was pretty consistent during the investigation-let Robert Mueller do his job and then judge his report. I did and accepted Mueller's conclusions. I don't see how that is ignoring anything.
The fact that Mueller is a close personal friend of Jim Comey alone made him the wrong choice to lead an objective inquiry.
Pretending otherwise only proves your own hypocrisy.
You are one of the very, very few posters here I can't be bothered to respond to in a meaningful, time consuming way. Pointless case of pearls before swine. Have a nice weekend.Waco1947 said:Prove "No alternative"curtpenn said:There is no alternative from the left that isn't worse. Sad state of affairs.Prove itTexasScientist said:
This article sums up everything Trump.
The President Is Unraveling
The country is witnessing the steady, uninterrupted intellectual and psychological decomposition of Donald Trump.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/president-unraveling/611146/
In case there was any doubt, the past dozen days have proved we're at the point in his presidency where Donald Trump has become his own caricature, a figure impossible to parody, a man whose words and actions are indistinguishable from an Alec Baldwin skit on Saturday Night Live.
President Trump's pice de rsistance came during a late April coronavirus task-force briefing, when he floated using "just very powerful light" inside the body as a potential treatment for COVID-19 and then, for good measure, contemplated injecting disinfectant as a way to combat the effects of the virus "because you see it gets in the lungs and does a tremendous number on them, so it'd be interesting to check that."
But the burlesque show just keeps rolling on.
Take this past weekend, when former President George W. Bush delivered a three-minute video as part of The Call to Unite, a 24-hour live-stream benefiting COVID-19 relief.
Bush joined other past presidents, spiritual and community leaders, front-line workers, artists, musicians, psychologists, and Academy Award winning actors. They offered advice, stories, and meditations, poetry, prayers, and performances. The purpose of The Call to Unite (which I played a very minor role in helping organize) was to offer practical ways to support others, to provide hope, encouragement, empathy, and unity.
In his video, which went viral, Bushin whose White House I workednever mentioned Trump. Instead, he expressed gratitude to health-care workers, encouraged Americans to abide by social-distancing rules, and reminded his fellow Americans that we have faced trying times before.
"I have no doubt, none at all, that this spirit of service and sacrifice is alive and well in America," Bush said. He emphasized that "empathy and simple kindness are essential, powerful tools of national recovery." And America's 43rd president asked us to "remember how small our differences are in the face of this shared threat."
"In the final analysis," he said, "we are not partisan combatants; we are human beings, equally vulnerable and equally wonderful in the sight of God." Bush concluded, "We rise or fall together, and we are determined to rise."
That was too much for Trump, who attacked his Republican predecessor on (where else?) Twitter: "[Bush] was nowhere to be found in speaking up against the greatest Hoax in American history!"
So think about that for a minute. George W. Bush made a moving, eloquent plea for empathy and national unity, which enraged Donald Trump enough that he felt the need to go on the attack.
But there's more. On the same weekend that he attacked Bush for making an appeal to national unity, Trump said this about Kim Jong Un, one of the most brutal leaders in the world: "I, for one, am glad to see he is back, and well!"
Then, Sunday night, sitting at the foot of the Lincoln Memorial for a town-hall interview with Fox News, Trump complained that he is "treated worse" than President Abraham Lincoln. "I am greeted with a hostile press, the likes of which no president has ever seen," Trump said.
By Monday morning, the president was peddling a cruel and bizarre conspiracy theory aimed at MSNBC's Joe Scarborough, a Trump critic, with Trump suggesting in his tweet that a "cold case" be opened to look into the death of an intern in 2001.
I could have picked a dozen other examples over the past 10 days, but these five will suffice. They illustrate some of the essential traits of Donald Trump: the shocking ignorance, ineptitude, and misinformation; his constant need to divide Americans and attack those who are trying to promote social solidarity; his narcissism, deep insecurity, utter lack of empathy, and desperate need to be loved; his feelings of victimization and grievance; his affinity for ruthless leaders; and his fondness for conspiracy theories.
None of these traits are new in Trump; they are part of the reason why some of us were warning about him long before he won the presidency, even going back to 2011. But, more and more, those traits are defining his presidency, producing a kind of creeping paralysis.
We are witnessing the steady, uninterrupted intellectual and psychological decomposition of an American president. It's something the Trump White House cannot hideindeed, it doesn't even try to hide it anymore. There is not even the slightest hint of normalcy.
This will have ongoing ramifications for the remainder of Trump's first term and for his reelection strategy. More than ever, Trump will try to convince Americans that "what you're seeing and what you're reading is not what's happening," to quote his own words in 2018.
That won't be easy in a pandemic, as the death toll mounts and the economy collapses and the failures of the president multiply. But that doesn't mean Trump won't try. It's all he has left, so Americans have to prepare for it.
Trump and his apparatchiks will not only step up their propaganda; they will increase their efforts to exhaust our critical thinking and to annihilate truth, in the words of the Russian dissident Garry Kasparov. We will see even more "alternative facts." We will see even more brazen attempts to rewrite history. We will hear even more crazy conspiracy theories. We will witness even more lashing out at reporters, more rage, and more lies.
"The real opposition is the media," Steve Bannon, the president's former chief strategist, once told the journalist Michael Lewis. "And the way to deal with them is to flood the zone with *****"
We will see more extreme appeals to the fringe base of Trump's party, including right-wing militias. For example, after hundreds of protesters, many of them carrying guns, descended on the capitol in Lansing, Michigan, to protest Governor Gretchen Whitmer's stay-at-home order, Trump, summoning the ghosts of Charlottesville, described the protesters as "very good people." Some of these "very good people" carried signs saying tyrants get the rope and tyrant ***** and comparing the governor to Hitler.
We will see a more prominent role played by One America News (OAN), a pro-Trump network that the president has praised dozens of times. And we will see the right-wing media complex go to even more bizarre placesnot just people such as InfoWar's Alex Jones, who literally threatened to eat his own neighbors if the lockdown continued, but more mainstream figures such as Salem Radio Network's Dennis Prager, who declared the other day that the lockdown was "the greatest mistake in the history of humanity."
Watching formerly serious individuals on the right, including the Christian right, become Trump courtiers has been a painful and dispiriting thing for many of us to witness. In the process, they have reconfigured their own character, intellect, and moral sensibilities to align with the disordered mind and deformed ethical world of Donald Trump.
And we will see, as we have for the entire Trump presidency, the national Republican Party fall in line. Many are speaking out in defense of Trump while other timid souls who know better have gone sotto voce out of fear and cowardice that they have justified to themselves, and tried less successfully to justify to others
What this means is that Americans are facing not just a conventional presidential election in 2020 but also, and most important, a referendum on reality and epistemology. Donald Trump is asking us to enter even further into his house of mirrors. He is asking us to live within a lie, to live within his lie, for four more years. The duty of citizenship in America today is to refuse to live within that lie.
"The simple step of a simple courageous man is not to partake in falsehood, not to support false actions," Alexandr Solzhenitsyn said in his mesmerizing 1970 Nobel lecture. "Let that enter the world, let it even reign in the worldbut not with my help."
Solzhenitsyn went on to say that writers and artists can achieve more; they can conquer falsehoods. "Falsehood can hold out against much in this world, but not against art," he said.
But art, as powerful as it is, is not the only instrument with which to fight falsehoods. There are also the daily acts of integrity of common men and women who will not believe the lies or spread the lies, who will not allow the foundation of truthfactual truth, moral truthto be destroyed, and who, in standing for truth, will help heal this broken land.
PETER WEHNER is a contributing writer at The Atlantic, a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center, and Egan visiting professor at Duke University. He writes widely on political, cultural, religious, and national-security issues, and he is the author of The Death of Politics: How to Heal Our Frayed Republic After Trump.
Prove "The left"
Prove "worse"
Each is a story made up; otherwise known as as a strawman. Any rebuttal?
Yes, I am blind. Help me out with proof.Oldbear83 said:Only to the deliberately blind.Waco1947 said:the obvious political purpose of the Mueller committee" Prove political purpose. It's not obviousOldbear83 said:My point is that your version ignores the obvious political purpose of the Mueller committee and its clearly hostile composition to the President.Booray said:The primary investigation-the Mueller investigation-was done at the direction of people Donald Trump appointed. The Senate intelligence committee did its own investigation, controlled by the GOP. There was plenty of smoke there. And I am not certain that history will absolve the Trump campaign in the way he claims to have been absolved. So "political theater" staged by the Democrats goes to far.D. C. Bear said:Booray said:Which facts?Oldbear83 said:From your last statement, you are ignoring the facts.Booray said:Yes I do. They investigated the Trump campaign for possible improper conduct based on Russian interference and impeached him for influence peddling in the Ukraine. What am I ignoring?Oldbear83 said:
Surely you know how the Democrats responded to their election loss in 2016?
But that's been normal for Democrats for at least the last 18 years ...
I am guessing whatever facts may support his view that the investigations were more directed at political theatre than fact finding.
For Congressional Democrats, it was an investigation designed to remove or damage a political opponent.
My concern is that some of that sentiment may have been present in our law enforcement agencies as well.
But Old Bear's point is that somehow I am "ignoring" the fact that all this happened. I was pretty consistent during the investigation-let Robert Mueller do his job and then judge his report. I did and accepted Mueller's conclusions. I don't see how that is ignoring anything.
The fact that Mueller is a close personal friend of Jim Comey alone made him the wrong choice to lead an objective inquiry.
Pretending otherwise only proves your own hypocrisy.
Hardly. It appears anything but Fox, OAN, ore Alex Jones is left in you're book. You may should consider your sources for information. When you confine your sources of information, you begin to get a skewed vision of the world.Oldbear83 said:So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
Amusing, The trick of 'set-up-a-site-to"face check" anyone-we-want-to-trash' has been around for years now, and is painfully obvious.TexasScientist said:Hardly. It appears anything but Fox, OAN, ore Alex Jones is left in you're book. You may should consider your sources for information. When you confine your sources of information, you begin to get a skewed vision of the world.Oldbear83 said:So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
I don't watch OAN or Alex Jones or Fox by the way, but since you missed everything else in your post it's no shock you got that wrong too.
My mistake. I should have known you ascribe to QAnon.Oldbear83 said:Amusing, The trick of 'set-up-a-site-to"face check" anyone-we-want-to-trash' has been around for years now, and is painfully obvious.TexasScientist said:Hardly. It appears anything but Fox, OAN, ore Alex Jones is left in you're book. You may should consider your sources for information. When you confine your sources of information, you begin to get a skewed vision of the world.Oldbear83 said:So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
I don't watch OAN or Alex Jones or Fox by the way, but since you missed everything else in your post it's no shock you got that wrong too.
Another swing and a miss.TexasScientist said:My mistake. I should have known you ascribe to QAnon.Oldbear83 said:Amusing, The trick of 'set-up-a-site-to"face check" anyone-we-want-to-trash' has been around for years now, and is painfully obvious.TexasScientist said:Hardly. It appears anything but Fox, OAN, ore Alex Jones is left in you're book. You may should consider your sources for information. When you confine your sources of information, you begin to get a skewed vision of the world.Oldbear83 said:So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
I don't watch OAN or Alex Jones or Fox by the way, but since you missed everything else in your post it's no shock you got that wrong too.
No. Knocked it out of the park.Oldbear83 said:Another swing and a miss.TexasScientist said:My mistake. I should have known you ascribe to QAnon.Oldbear83 said:Amusing, The trick of 'set-up-a-site-to"face check" anyone-we-want-to-trash' has been around for years now, and is painfully obvious.TexasScientist said:Hardly. It appears anything but Fox, OAN, ore Alex Jones is left in you're book. You may should consider your sources for information. When you confine your sources of information, you begin to get a skewed vision of the world.Oldbear83 said:So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
I don't watch OAN or Alex Jones or Fox by the way, but since you missed everything else in your post it's no shock you got that wrong too.
Only in your misfocused imaginationTexasScientist said:No. Knocked it out of the park.Oldbear83 said:Another swing and a miss.TexasScientist said:My mistake. I should have known you ascribe to QAnon.Oldbear83 said:Amusing, The trick of 'set-up-a-site-to"face check" anyone-we-want-to-trash' has been around for years now, and is painfully obvious.TexasScientist said:Hardly. It appears anything but Fox, OAN, ore Alex Jones is left in you're book. You may should consider your sources for information. When you confine your sources of information, you begin to get a skewed vision of the world.Oldbear83 said:So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
I don't watch OAN or Alex Jones or Fox by the way, but since you missed everything else in your post it's no shock you got that wrong too.
Where do you hear/read Qanon, anyway? I only found vague references when I Googled him after your post. I guess you pay a lot more attention to the fringe than I do.
It's on 8chan and another dark site. It's all over Facebook. Go to Facebook and type in QAnon on the search bar, and you'll find memes and links to where Florda hangs out. It's viral and extensive and completely over the top. So much so that I don't see how it is not at least partially driven by a state actor i.e. Russia or China or both. You'd be surprised how many people are buying into this tripe.Oldbear83 said:Only in your misfocused imaginationTexasScientist said:No. Knocked it out of the park.Oldbear83 said:Another swing and a miss.TexasScientist said:My mistake. I should have known you ascribe to QAnon.Oldbear83 said:Amusing, The trick of 'set-up-a-site-to"face check" anyone-we-want-to-trash' has been around for years now, and is painfully obvious.TexasScientist said:Hardly. It appears anything but Fox, OAN, ore Alex Jones is left in you're book. You may should consider your sources for information. When you confine your sources of information, you begin to get a skewed vision of the world.Oldbear83 said:So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
I don't watch OAN or Alex Jones or Fox by the way, but since you missed everything else in your post it's no shock you got that wrong too.
Where do you hear/read Qanon, anyway? I only found vague references when I Googled him after your post. I guess you pay a lot more attention to the fringe than I do.
It's kind of funny that according to Pew Research, more libbies and dumocrats have heard of Qanon and more familiar with it/him/her/they?.... than Republicans.TexasScientist said:It's on 8chan and another dark site. It's all over Facebook. Go to Facebook and type in QAnon on the search bar, and you'll find memes and links to where Florda hangs out. It's viral and extensive and completely over the top. So much so that I don't see how it is not at least partially driven by a state actor i.e. Russia or China or both. You'd be surprised how many people are buying into this tripe.Oldbear83 said:Only in your misfocused imaginationTexasScientist said:No. Knocked it out of the park.Oldbear83 said:Another swing and a miss.TexasScientist said:My mistake. I should have known you ascribe to QAnon.Oldbear83 said:Amusing, The trick of 'set-up-a-site-to"face check" anyone-we-want-to-trash' has been around for years now, and is painfully obvious.TexasScientist said:Hardly. It appears anything but Fox, OAN, ore Alex Jones is left in you're book. You may should consider your sources for information. When you confine your sources of information, you begin to get a skewed vision of the world.Oldbear83 said:So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
I don't watch OAN or Alex Jones or Fox by the way, but since you missed everything else in your post it's no shock you got that wrong too.
Where do you hear/read Qanon, anyway? I only found vague references when I Googled him after your post. I guess you pay a lot more attention to the fringe than I do.
I must admit, I had to look it up after your posted about it... didn't read too much.... too wacky for me.
I'm not much of a Facebook guy, and have never used sites like 8chan. But it sounds like the emotional sibling of any number of left-wing conspiracy sites.TexasScientist said:It's on 8chan and another dark site. It's all over Facebook. Go to Facebook and type in QAnon on the search bar, and you'll find memes and links to where Florda hangs out. It's viral and extensive and completely over the top. So much so that I don't see how it is not at least partially driven by a state actor i.e. Russia or China or both. You'd be surprised how many people are buying into this tripe.Oldbear83 said:Only in your misfocused imaginationTexasScientist said:No. Knocked it out of the park.Oldbear83 said:Another swing and a miss.TexasScientist said:My mistake. I should have known you ascribe to QAnon.Oldbear83 said:Amusing, The trick of 'set-up-a-site-to"face check" anyone-we-want-to-trash' has been around for years now, and is painfully obvious.TexasScientist said:Hardly. It appears anything but Fox, OAN, ore Alex Jones is left in you're book. You may should consider your sources for information. When you confine your sources of information, you begin to get a skewed vision of the world.Oldbear83 said:So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
I don't watch OAN or Alex Jones or Fox by the way, but since you missed everything else in your post it's no shock you got that wrong too.
Where do you hear/read Qanon, anyway? I only found vague references when I Googled him after your post. I guess you pay a lot more attention to the fringe than I do.
No reason to focus on the outliers.
It's definitely not left wing. It is way far to the extreme right. Pro Trump. They essentially believe: Trump is their political and existential savior. Trump will vanquish the Hollywood elite. and other elites like Bill Gates, Tom Hanks, the Bushes, the Clintons and other members of the illuminati, who kidnap children around the world, hide them in tunnels, torture them to collect and drink adrenochrome - other beliefs like Fauci and Gates are planning to inject the world with vaccines that will give them control over people. Trump is aligned with military special forces who are waiting for the right moment to arrest all of these people and execute them. Trump and his allies give clues in his speaches, and clues, signs, and other hints over the internet and through other means of what is going to occur.Oldbear83 said:I'm not much of a Facebook guy, and have never used sites like 8chan. But it sounds like the emotional sibling of any number of left-wing conspiracy sites.TexasScientist said:It's on 8chan and another dark site. It's all over Facebook. Go to Facebook and type in QAnon on the search bar, and you'll find memes and links to where Florda hangs out. It's viral and extensive and completely over the top. So much so that I don't see how it is not at least partially driven by a state actor i.e. Russia or China or both. You'd be surprised how many people are buying into this tripe.Oldbear83 said:Only in your misfocused imaginationTexasScientist said:No. Knocked it out of the park.Oldbear83 said:Another swing and a miss.TexasScientist said:My mistake. I should have known you ascribe to QAnon.Oldbear83 said:Amusing, The trick of 'set-up-a-site-to"face check" anyone-we-want-to-trash' has been around for years now, and is painfully obvious.TexasScientist said:Hardly. It appears anything but Fox, OAN, ore Alex Jones is left in you're book. You may should consider your sources for information. When you confine your sources of information, you begin to get a skewed vision of the world.Oldbear83 said:So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
I don't watch OAN or Alex Jones or Fox by the way, but since you missed everything else in your post it's no shock you got that wrong too.
Where do you hear/read Qanon, anyway? I only found vague references when I Googled him after your post. I guess you pay a lot more attention to the fringe than I do.
No reason to focus on the outliers.
That's what the Q signs people hold up, or wear on t-shirts, and ball caps at Trump rallies is all about. Check it out. I know a little about it because a high school friend of my wife has gotten caught up in this, and believes it whole heartedly. It's a significant following in terms of numbers of people, which I find very disturbing that many people believe it.
You really don't bother to read, TS. I wrote that this is obviously the 'emotional sibling' of the other extreme sites.TexasScientist said:It's definitely not left wing. It is way far to the extreme right. Pro Trump. They essentially believe: Trump is their political and existential savior. Trump will vanquish the Hollywood elite. and other elites like Bill Gates, Tom Hanks, the Bushes, the Clintons and other members of the illuminati, who kidnap children around the world, hide them in tunnels, torture them to collect and drink adrenochrome - other beliefs like Fauci and Gates are planning to inject the world with vaccines that will give them control over people. Trump is aligned with military special forces who are waiting for the right moment to arrest all of these people and execute them. Trump and his allies give clues in his speaches, and clues, signs, and other hints over the internet and through other means of what is going to occur.Oldbear83 said:I'm not much of a Facebook guy, and have never used sites like 8chan. But it sounds like the emotional sibling of any number of left-wing conspiracy sites.TexasScientist said:It's on 8chan and another dark site. It's all over Facebook. Go to Facebook and type in QAnon on the search bar, and you'll find memes and links to where Florda hangs out. It's viral and extensive and completely over the top. So much so that I don't see how it is not at least partially driven by a state actor i.e. Russia or China or both. You'd be surprised how many people are buying into this tripe.Oldbear83 said:Only in your misfocused imaginationTexasScientist said:No. Knocked it out of the park.Oldbear83 said:Another swing and a miss.TexasScientist said:My mistake. I should have known you ascribe to QAnon.Oldbear83 said:Amusing, The trick of 'set-up-a-site-to"face check" anyone-we-want-to-trash' has been around for years now, and is painfully obvious.TexasScientist said:Hardly. It appears anything but Fox, OAN, ore Alex Jones is left in you're book. You may should consider your sources for information. When you confine your sources of information, you begin to get a skewed vision of the world.Oldbear83 said:So, the lefty site likes the lefty site.TexasScientist said:Oldbear83 said:
The Atlantic is no more trustworthy to speak regarding President Trump, than was Breitbart to speak regarding President Obama.
If this is what you are using for your information, small wonder you cannot reach sound conclusions, TS.https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-atlantic/
- Overall, we rate The Atlantic Left-Center Biased due to editorial positions and High for factual reporting based on excellent sourcing of information.
That all you got?
I don't watch OAN or Alex Jones or Fox by the way, but since you missed everything else in your post it's no shock you got that wrong too.
Where do you hear/read Qanon, anyway? I only found vague references when I Googled him after your post. I guess you pay a lot more attention to the fringe than I do.
No reason to focus on the outliers.
That's what the Q signs people hold up, or wear on t-shirts, and ball caps at Trump rallies is all about. Check it out. I know a little about it because a high school friend of my wife has gotten caught up in this, and believes it whole heartedly. It's a significant following in terms of numbers of people, which I find very disturbing that many people believe it.
Funny how you obsess on only one end of extremists.