They told you Trump colluded with Russia (false), Trump ignored Russian bounties on troops (false), Trump cleared Lafayette Park “for a photo op” (false), there’s no way COVID-19 could’ve come from the Wuhan Lab as Trump said (false)…
— Mark Meadows (@MarkMeadows) June 9, 2021
Let me know if you notice a pattern here.
Never ending Fake News
4,369 Views |
59 Replies |
Last: 2 yr ago by quash
And there will still be posters on here who claim that all remain true
Yes, it turns out the media gets some stuff about Trump wrong. Should we start bringing up all the stuff Trump got wrong, or is that rent free living in my head? I think I'm getting this game!
Lol this is y'alls guy? Cant imagine why the media, and a majority of the country, despises him.
Former US president says he still trusts Russia more than the government he once led. pic.twitter.com/5Wkwj8KOwZ
— Andrew Feinberg (@AndrewFeinberg) June 10, 2021
He needs to GTFO. He lost.HuMcK said:
Lol this is y'alls guy? Cant imagine why the media, and a majority of the country, despises him.Former US president says he still trusts Russia more than the government he once led. pic.twitter.com/5Wkwj8KOwZ
— Andrew Feinberg (@AndrewFeinberg) June 10, 2021
J.R. said:He needs to GTFO. He lost. What a sanctimonious ass!HuMcK said:
Lol this is y'alls guy? Cant imagine why the media, and a majority of the country, despises him.Former US president says he still trusts Russia more than the government he once led. pic.twitter.com/5Wkwj8KOwZ
— Andrew Feinberg (@AndrewFeinberg) June 10, 2021
The dude is a flaming turd. A douch-canoe. A truly despicable human. Saying you trust Russia more seems incredibly stupid on its face.
But, at this point, it's pretty obvious there was a coordinated effort to remove him from office or make him unelectable.
If nothing else it's a fascinating look at the power of the media/government. You can literally tell lies over and over and eventually people just sort of believe them. Anyone who disagrees you just paint them as some sort of "ist".
I think I would be tempted to try to take it to extremes and just see how stupid people are.
Joe Biden has secret White House lion that ate the White House dog! Like enquirer level stuff.
It's kind of brilliant really. There are no repercussions for telling the lies. Worse come to worse you print a retraction no one reads and the damage is done.
Never go to war with people who buy ink by the barrel.
But, at this point, it's pretty obvious there was a coordinated effort to remove him from office or make him unelectable.
If nothing else it's a fascinating look at the power of the media/government. You can literally tell lies over and over and eventually people just sort of believe them. Anyone who disagrees you just paint them as some sort of "ist".
I think I would be tempted to try to take it to extremes and just see how stupid people are.
Joe Biden has secret White House lion that ate the White House dog! Like enquirer level stuff.
It's kind of brilliant really. There are no repercussions for telling the lies. Worse come to worse you print a retraction no one reads and the damage is done.
Never go to war with people who buy ink by the barrel.
nein51 said:
If nothing else it's a fascinating look at the power of the media/government. You can literally tell lies over and over and eventually people just sort of believe them. Anyone who disagrees you just paint them as some sort of "ist".
Herr Goebbels approves:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
HuMcK said:
Lol this is y'alls guy? Cant imagine why the media, and a majority of the country, despises him.Former US president says he still trusts Russia more than the government he once led. pic.twitter.com/5Wkwj8KOwZ
— Andrew Feinberg (@AndrewFeinberg) June 10, 2021
Russia is both less interested and less capable of destroying America than Democrats. Trusting either is a mistake.
Refresh my memory. What were some of the things he got wrong? Better yet what were the things he got right?Porteroso said:
Yes, it turns out the media gets some stuff about Trump wrong. Should we start bringing up all the stuff Trump got wrong, or is that rent free living in my head? I think I'm getting this game!
Porteroso said:
Yes, it turns out the media gets some stuff about Trump wrong. Should we start bringing up all the stuff Trump got wrong, or is that rent free living in my head? I think I'm getting this game!
You should compare the media to the media, not the media to Trump. Did they make that many mistakes with Obama? Are they making that many mistakes with Biden?
Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
So what would you call it when a campaign manager has clandestine meetings with a man he knew to be Russian intel to share internal campaign data and discuss strategy? And doing it while Russia hacked Dem servers. Does that seem like normal campaigning to you?
The "collusion" trail led to Manafort, who ate heavy federal charges and waited in prison for a pardon instead of talking.
The "collusion" trail led to Manafort, who ate heavy federal charges and waited in prison for a pardon instead of talking.
What is your point, you think that the media got thingswrong more often with Trump, and so....JXL said:Porteroso said:
Yes, it turns out the media gets some stuff about Trump wrong. Should we start bringing up all the stuff Trump got wrong, or is that rent free living in my head? I think I'm getting this game!
You should compare the media to the media, not the media to Trump. Did they make that many mistakes with Obama? Are they making that many mistakes with Biden?
Really think it was an accident ?Porteroso said:What is your point, you think that the media got thingswrong more often with Trump, and so....JXL said:Porteroso said:
Yes, it turns out the media gets some stuff about Trump wrong. Should we start bringing up all the stuff Trump got wrong, or is that rent free living in my head? I think I'm getting this game!
You should compare the media to the media, not the media to Trump. Did they make that many mistakes with Obama? Are they making that many mistakes with Biden?
Porteroso said:What is your point, you think that the media got thingswrong more often with Trump, and so....JXL said:Porteroso said:
Yes, it turns out the media gets some stuff about Trump wrong. Should we start bringing up all the stuff Trump got wrong, or is that rent free living in my head? I think I'm getting this game!
You should compare the media to the media, not the media to Trump. Did they make that many mistakes with Obama? Are they making that many mistakes with Biden?
Did they make as many mistakes with other presidents, or did they not?
JXL said:Porteroso said:What is your point, you think that the media got thingswrong more often with Trump, and so....JXL said:Porteroso said:
Yes, it turns out the media gets some stuff about Trump wrong. Should we start bringing up all the stuff Trump got wrong, or is that rent free living in my head? I think I'm getting this game!
You should compare the media to the media, not the media to Trump. Did they make that many mistakes with Obama? Are they making that many mistakes with Biden?
Did they make as many mistakes with other presidents, or did they not?
You're not getting it. I don't know the answer to that, I think the foxes and cnns of the world aren't worth bothering with. I'm asking, if what you say is true, so what? What does that mean, or what should people do?
Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
What if The Truth suddenly emerges overnight, all over the world.with no lies, biases, agendas? Suddenly, all media, newspapers, radio and tv broadcasters, social media spoke The Truth.
We couldn't handle it.
We couldn't handle it.
Any Trump
2024
“And if you do-oo.....” - Lt. Hauk
2024
“And if you do-oo.....” - Lt. Hauk
REvansBU71 said:
What if The Truth suddenly emerges overnight, all over the world.with no lies, biases, agendas? Suddenly, all media, newspapers, radio and tv broadcasters, social media spoke The Truth.
We couldn't handle it.
What? What is even going on? Plenty of people strive to report the truth. Most journalists are doing their very best. Finding out the truth relies heavily upon people answering questions truthfully, and guess how likely that is when a journalist interviews a politician?
I remember that time when the clinton's paid for a dossier. written by a foreign national. that was fake.Booray said:Is that the standard we need to expect? It is not illegal?Volunteer said:Not illegal to meet with a foreign national. Remember the Mueller Commission after months of research and millions of dollars found no evidence of collusion.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
And I remember there was no evidence of collusion. There was evidence of a willingness to collude; that the Trump campaign would accept any help the Russian government would give them. I don't care if that is illegal, it is wrong.
Yeah, good times.
The "facts" are not associated with the inferences they are intended to create. That's how deception works. Sprinkle in enough truth for plausibility and build the lie. Even the inference of intent was a lie. A lie that was damaging enough to initiate spying on US citizens using, sadly ironic, doctored Russian Intel.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
ATL Bear said:The "facts" are not associated with the inferences they are intended to create. That's how deception works. Sprinkle in enough truth for plausibility and build the lie. Even the inference of intent was a lie. A lie that was damaging enough to initiate spying on US citizens using, sadly ironic, doctored Russian Intel.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
Lol then what do those facts "associate with" in your mind? Is that what y'all are reduced to, can't deny the existence of the evidence at this stage, so you just stubbornly disagree with "the inferences"? I seriously don't understand your compulsive need to paint the evidence as something different than what it is. His campaign manager knowingly met with a Russian spy to discuss campaign strategy, that's not an inference it's an admission, and it isn't really up for any interpretation.
Ironically the GOP led Senate Intel committee ended up generating the most useful report on the matter, although the committee's Republican members (like you) tried to tell people their eyes lie and the evidence didn't show what it shows when they presented it to the public:
"The Committee found that Manafort's presence on the Campaign and proximity to
Trump created opportunities for the Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and
acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign. The Committee assesses that
Kilimnik likely served as a channel to Manafort for Russian intelligence services, and that those
services likely sought to exploit Manafort's access to gain insight info the Campaign. Taken as a
whole, Manafort's high-level access and willingness to share information with individuals
closely affiliated with the Russian intelligence services, particularly Kilimnik, represented a
grave counterintelligence threat."
And since you've brought up spying on Americans, I guess I must have missed your criticism of the revelation that Trump's DoJ spied on members of the House Intel Committee and one of their minor children hunting leaks. Leaks of information that was totally made up of course, according to you.
Guess what? There was a multi-million dollar 3-year investigation into the very suspicions stated in your post, and it found Trump committed no criminal activity.HuMcK said:
So what would you call it when a campaign manager has clandestine meetings with a man he knew to be Russian intel to share internal campaign data and discuss strategy? And doing it while Russia hacked Dem servers. Does that seem like normal campaigning to you?
Of course, you're so hyper-partisan I am sure no one could convince you the sky is blue if the Dems told you it was green.
Mothra said:Guess what? There was a multi-million dollar 3-year investigation into the very suspicions stated in your post, and it found Trump committed no criminal activity.HuMcK said:
So what would you call it when a campaign manager has clandestine meetings with a man he knew to be Russian intel to share internal campaign data and discuss strategy? And doing it while Russia hacked Dem servers. Does that seem like normal campaigning to you?
Of course, you're so hyper-partisan I am sure no one could convince you the sky is blue if the Dems told you it was green.
Thats a neat talking point, but you're a lawyer, so I know that you understand what you just wrote isn't true, which makes me question why you are engaging in such bad faith analysis.
Mueller's report very specifically did not say it found Trump innocent, it said his campaign manager committed a litany of financial crimes and got caught dealing with a Russian spy (along with Don Jr and Kushner), but those men were careful to conceal their communications using encryption apps and Manafort went silent while he waited in prison for his pardon that everyone knew was coming. The report also laid out the case for charging Trump with Obstruction of Justice, which Mueller explained he likely would have done if not for DoJ policy against charging a sitting President with crimes. Mueller's report is also old news, the Senate Intel report was far more thorough and damning.
Forget legality for a second, are you at peace with the fact that the upper echelon of Trump's campaign was so willing to work with enemies of the US (i.e. damn near treason) to win power? You can't even muster a token criticism of such shady activities? Did you ever stop and ask yourself why it is that our Russian "friends" so obviously preferred to have Trump as President and worked to make it happen? Or you just don't care because "socialism" or whatever else bullsht Tucker tells you to be scared of?
As you well know, obstruction of justice and conspiracy are two very different things. There was a years long multi-million dollar investigation that found zero evidence of conspiracy.HuMcK said:Mothra said:Guess what? There was a multi-million dollar 3-year investigation into the very suspicions stated in your post, and it found Trump committed no criminal activity.HuMcK said:
So what would you call it when a campaign manager has clandestine meetings with a man he knew to be Russian intel to share internal campaign data and discuss strategy? And doing it while Russia hacked Dem servers. Does that seem like normal campaigning to you?
Of course, you're so hyper-partisan I am sure no one could convince you the sky is blue if the Dems told you it was green.
Thats a neat talking point, but you're a lawyer, so I know that you understand what you just wrote isn't true, which makes me question why you are engaging in such bad faith analysis.
Mueller's report very specifically did not say it found Trump innocent, it said his campaign manager committed a litany of financial crimes and got caught dealing with a Russian spy (along with Don Jr and Kushner), but those men were careful to conceal their communications using encryption apps and Manafort went silent while he waited in prison for his pardon that everyone knew was coming. The report also laid out the case for charging Trump with Obstruction of Justice, which Mueller explained he likely would have done if not for DoJ policy against charging a sitting President with crimes. Mueller's report is also old news, the Senate Intel report was far more thorough and damning.
Forget legality for a second, are you at peace with the fact that the upper echelon of Trump's campaign was so willing to work with enemies of the US (i.e. damn near treason) to win power? You can't even muster a token criticism of such shady activities? Did you ever stop and ask yourself why it is that our Russian "friends" so obviously preferred to have Trump as President and worked to make it happen? Or you just don't care because "socialism" or whatever else bullsht Tucker tells you to be scared of?
Like I said, I know you're going to continue to tout the sky is green in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. You are a hyper-partisan, and that's what you guys do.
Y'all are the ones that made safeguarding US democracy from hostile foreign influence a partisan position, not me. Y'all have managed to make ethics and integrity partisan as well, congrats. And all of it in service to an infamously terrible reality TV grifter, couldn't have picked a more appropriate symbol to sell your souls for.
Don't you have an appointment to scream at the sky?HuMcK said:
Y'all are the ones that made safeguarding US democracy from hostile foreign influence a partisan position, not me. Y'all have managed to make ethics and integrity partisan as well, congrats. And all of it in service to an infamously terrible reality TV grifter, couldn't have picked a more appropriate symbol to sell your souls for.
Having a campaign manager share private campaign data with proxies for an adversarial foreign government and having insiders say they would welcome any help from that same government raise severely negative inferences. Period; you can't paint it any other way.ATL Bear said:The "facts" are not associated with the inferences they are intended to create. That's how deception works. Sprinkle in enough truth for plausibility and build the lie. Even the inference of intent was a lie. A lie that was damaging enough to initiate spying on US citizens using, sadly ironic, doctored Russian Intel.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
Whether those acts or statements raise inferences that should generate surveillance of, and later a criminal investigation into, that campaign is a different question; a question that IMHO can be fairly debated. But in no circumstance should the candidate be allowed to brush off that conduct-the American people deserve an explanation for it.
There was never much attention paid to this kind of thing until lately. Chinagate was an exception, but Clinton was able to brush that off. There's nothing necessarily wrong with getting information from a foreign source. The activities of both the Trump and Hillary campaigns have highlighted the counter-intelligence risks, however.Booray said:Having a campaign manager share private campaign data with proxies for an adversarial foreign government and having insiders say they would welcome any help from that same government raise severely negative inferences. Period; you can't paint it any other way.ATL Bear said:The "facts" are not associated with the inferences they are intended to create. That's how deception works. Sprinkle in enough truth for plausibility and build the lie. Even the inference of intent was a lie. A lie that was damaging enough to initiate spying on US citizens using, sadly ironic, doctored Russian Intel.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
Whether those acts or statements raise inferences that should generate surveillance of, and later a criminal investigation into, that campaign is a different question; a question that IMHO can be fairly debated. But in no circumstance should the candidate be allowed to brush off that conduct-the American people deserve an explanation for it.
Sam Lowry said:There was never much attention paid to this kind of thing until lately. Chinagate was an exception, but Clinton was able to brush that off. There's nothing necessarily wrong with getting information from a foreign source. The activities of both the Trump and Hillary campaigns have highlighted the counter-intelligence risks, however.Booray said:Having a campaign manager share private campaign data with proxies for an adversarial foreign government and having insiders say they would welcome any help from that same government raise severely negative inferences. Period; you can't paint it any other way.ATL Bear said:The "facts" are not associated with the inferences they are intended to create. That's how deception works. Sprinkle in enough truth for plausibility and build the lie. Even the inference of intent was a lie. A lie that was damaging enough to initiate spying on US citizens using, sadly ironic, doctored Russian Intel.Booray said:Volunteer said:What's really sad is you actually believe this.HuMcK said:
I hear what you are saying, even though I strongly disagree with your characterization of the stories about Trump as "lies", but I think your message about unjust attacks on character would be better received if we weren't talking about the last holdout proponent of birtherism. I also think you are somewhat attributing cable news sensationalism to print media, which is far more credible.
Trump didn't even get treated as badly as he treated others. The Russia story wasn't made up, they legit caught his campaign manager coordinating with Russian intel and his son accepting offers of help from Russians. And then his next campaign manager (Bannon) was eventually arrested coming off the yacht of a Chinese billionaire before getting a pardon, but that's neither here not there.
He picked fights with the media as a deliberate strategy, so his supporters could dismiss reporting about him as biased "lies" or Fake News (tm). Sad thing is, it mostly worked.
And you still believe the Russia story was factual. Astonishing.
Do you understand that the two things he said about the Russia story actually did happen? As in they are 100% true facts?
Whether those acts or statements raise inferences that should generate surveillance of, and later a criminal investigation into, that campaign is a different question; a question that IMHO can be fairly debated. But in no circumstance should the candidate be allowed to brush off that conduct-the American people deserve an explanation for it.
That's different from establishing a two-way exchange of info, especially when one of the parties is engaging in a criminal espionage campaign to obtain their info. Just accepting information from a nefarious source is one thing, Trump was more than happy to do that by featuring Wikileaks heavily in their campaigning. A campaign manager strategizing with an actual state-sponsored spy is far beyond anything we've seen before.
The Chinese gave Dems money, which is bad enough. The Russians hacked and published the entire Dem party's comms and strategy, and used info provided to them by the Trump campaign to target propaganda at US voters. Then they tried something similar in 2020 with Giuliani as the conduit and Hunter Biden as the target.
At some point you have to ask yourself, what is it about this Trump guy in particular that Russia likes so much? Personally I think we saw the pretty obvious answer throughout Trump's Presidency, culminating on Jauary 6. The threat of that happening again, but much worse, will remain at least as long as Trump(ism) is around.