Donald Trump

[cloggypop]

I'd expect evidence. Stuff like "I've heard it around" doesn't count by the way.

[cloggypop]

We are discussing Trump here but if you really want to do Hillary Clinton, debate questions and fake news

 

http://www.snopes.com/clinton-received-debate-questions-week-before-debate/

 

This, however, was true

 

http://www.snopes.com/donna-brazile-leaves-cnn/

[njackets]

It would be one thing if the leaked information was false, but it isn't.

 

He's acknowledged the leaks are real but then tries to say that the reporting of them is fake news. What he's asserting is ridiculous.

 

It's not just the press he's lashing out at, it's anyone who contradicts his world view - judges, senators, comedians, the leaders of other countries. This is what it would look like if Veruca Salt grew up and became president. Except it's real. And it isn't Veruca Salt, it's Donald Trump.

Another good thing, someone is leaking info to the press (classified info) which he's highlighting and looks like he's putting a stop too. I couldn't tell you how it's being reported but maybe with a bias slant?

 

It appears to me admittedly I'm not following this that closely, he's being a hell of a lot more transparent than your average president and PM. Rightly calling out the political dirty tricks, dodgy politics and press and being lambasted for it because people don't agree with his politics.

[cloggypop]

Where do you stand on the transparency of him being the first president in 40 years not to release his tax returns?

[Anubis]

He's not being transparent. He's blatantly lying. In today's (yesterday's ?) performance, for instance, he said he'd had the best electoral collage result since Reagan - something he's clearly obsessing about. He was pulled on it by a reporter who pointed out Clinton twice, Obama twice, and Bush (and another I can't recall) had all done better.

[cloggypop]

Harward says no to national security adviser role

 

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/02/16/politics/harward-says-no-to-national-security-adviser-role/index.html

[njackets]

[polymerpunkah]

The number of outrageous lies Trump has told over the past decade makes the idea of him as some sort of champion of truth laughable.

 

He's doing just what Nixon did during Watergate--attack those press outlets who print things that challenge him.

 

Trump's New York Times is Nixon's Washington Post.

 

Note he's not attacking Fox News, even though no news outlet in the USA is more biased, because they support him.

 

His problem now is that he has to make decisions that have real and obvious consequences, and he's not going to be able to back away from them as he did during the campaign.

[Red Phoenix]

Oh for fuck's sake.
 
These posts :
 

You post something like this on an almost weekly basis.

Mad.

 

234 words
18 uses of the personal pronoun "I", with a couple of "me"s thrown in for good measure.

Can I suggest reining in the ego a little?

Whats the over/under on how many of RP's 20,000 plus posts are him saying he's not posting anymore.

 

Are difficult to deal with without responding. I'd like to respond to each one, but I'll leave it. Said I'd deal with it, so will do.

 

But I can't just read the stuff about the media and fake news and leave it. Will just leave this from Greenwald on Jan 5th for you :

 

GLENN GREENWALD: So let’s focus on the extraordinary behavior of The Washington Post for the moment. They have produced two of the most humiliating debacles in American journalism over the last several years. And these two humiliations have taken place just within the last six weeks, both of which were about completely fictitious and fabricated claims about the threat posed by Vladimir Putin and Russia.

 

The first was on November 24th, when they claimed, based on a newly formed anonymous group, that there has been a very widespread, successful effort to implant Kremlin propaganda in the American discourse. And they accomplish this by giving credence to this secret list that this anonymous group of cowards had created in which they claim that a whole range of American media outlets and websites, such as the Drudge Report and other libertarian critics of Hillary Clinton on the right and long-standing left-wing critics of the Democratic Party, like Naked Capitalism and Truthout and Truthdig on the left—they decree them to be tools of Kremlin propaganda. And The Washington Post created this huge story, that went all over the place, based upon giving credence to this list and saying that Russian propaganda had been viewed more than 200 million times in the United States. Journalists all over Twitter, throughout the American media, mindlessly spread it, aggressively endorsed it. It became a huge story. And over the course of the next two weeks, the story completely collapsed, and there’s now a major editor’s note at the top of the article disclaiming the key source, saying that they did not intend to in any way vouch for the validity of the findings of the source on which the entire story was based.

 

But even more embarrassing was this weekend, when the Post trumpeted this story on Friday night that Vladimir Putin and Russia had hacked into the electric grid of the United States through a Vermont utility, which caused Vermont officials like the governor and Senator Pat Leahy to issue statements saying Vladimir Putin is trying to endanger the safety and the welfare of Vermonters by stealing their heat in the winter. The whole story, from start to finish, turned out to be a complete fabrication. There was no invasion of the American electric grid. The malware that was found on one laptop had nothing to do with Russia. The story was completely false. And again, the American media, in this hysteria, kept spreading and endorsing it.

 

And in both cases, the retractions were barely noted. So you have millions of people being misled into this hysteria, into this view that Russia is this grave threat, and when the story journalistically collapses, they barely hear about it. And it happened over and over through the election, with Slate saying that a secret server had been found between Donald Trump and a Russian bank, which turned out to be completely false. The Post aired allegations that Putin had poisoned Hillary Clinton on the day that she collapsed on 9/11. And so, it’s not really just dishonesty. It’s the kind of behavior we saw in 2002, where American media outlets are willing to publish anything that the U.S. government tells them to publish, to inflate and expand the threat posed by Russia, to raise fear levels to the highest possible degree. And it’s an incredibly irresponsible and dangerous form of behavior that media outlets, led by The Washington Post, are engaging in.

 

AMY GOODMAN: And you talk about how retractions obviously don’t get anything like the play of the story, that also has to do with what’s tweeted by the publication, even when they retract, and what isn’t, Glenn.

 

GLENN GREENWALD: Right. So let me just give you two examples of just the corruption that’s at play here. So, when the Post unveiled their huge story about Russia fake news based on this McCarthyite list that has been proven to be a fraud, they had Marty Baron, the executive editor, the widely respected executive editor of the paper, go onto Twitter and announce this huge exposé. And predictably, it got tweeted and retweeted and shared thousands and thousands of times by all of the biggest journalists with the biggest social media followings. When the story collapsed over the next two weeks and they appended this huge editor’s note, The Washington Post did nothing to bring anyone’s attention to the fact that the key claims of the story have been gutted. Marty Baron refused to answer any questions over that two weeks about what the paper did, and he uttered not one syllable on Twitter or anywhere else to tell all the followers that he alerted to this story that the story had collapsed.

 

With the story that I just talked about over the weekend of the—of how Putin had wanted to steal the heat from Vermonters to make them suffer in the winter, Brent Staples, who works for The New York Times editorial page, went on Twitter and said, "Our friend Putin has invaded the U.S. electric grid." And when that story collapsed and The Washington Post retracted it, he did something even worse: He just went and quietly deleted his tweet a day later, as though it never happened, and also failed to tell his 30,000 followers that what he had just told them the day before, that caused them to run around and share with all their friends on Facebook and Twitter that this has happened, was in fact a complete fiction.

 

And you see this over and over and over again. And remember, these are the people who keep saying that fake news is a huge problem, that Facebook has to suppress it. And yet it’s America’s leading journalistic outlets that are doing more to disseminate false and deceitful stories than Macedonian teenagers by a huge amount. And when they do it and it turns out that the stories are discredited, they take very little to no steps to alert the people that they’ve misled about the fact that the stories were false. And it’s incredibly reckless journalistically. And these are the same people pretending to be crusaders against fake news, who are themselves disseminating it more aggressively than anyone else.

 

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/5/glenn_greenwald_mainstream_us_media_is

[Red Phoenix]

[polymerpunkah]

So is that kind of like that Bret guy who works for Fox News, who reported one week before the election that Hillary's database had been penetrated by at least five foreign intellegence agencies, and who also reported that an indictment against her was "likely"?

 

That sort of thing?

 

I seem to recall someone posting it here as if it was gospel, even though it was total bullshit.

 

Did Trump mention that story in his press conference today? 

 

I didn't watch the whole thing, but I'm guessing it slipped his mind.

[Red Phoenix]

So is that kind of like that Bret guy who works for Fox News, who reported one week before the election that Hillary's database had been penetrated by at least five foreign intellegence agencies, and who also reported that an indictment against her was "likely"?

 

That sort of thing?

 

I seem to recall someone posting it here as if it was gospel, even though it was total bullshit.

 

Did Trump mention that story in his press conference today? 

 

I didn't watch the whole thing, but I'm guessing it slipped his mind.

 

Deflect by bringing up that, you can't even offer a comment on how the Washington Post has helped create this mess? Instead you're twisting it onto me and that story. Ok.

 

http://www.liverpoolway.co.uk/index.php?/topic/109983-us-election-thread-2016/?p=4630367

 

http://www.liverpoolway.co.uk/index.php?/topic/109983-us-election-thread-2016/?p=4630632

[Anubis]

Nobody is saying that the press don't fabricate news or get it wrong. There are plenty of examples of them doing just that both in the US and here.

 

But it isn't all of the media all of the time. And none of that defends the demonstrable madness and general insanity coming from the White House. Virtually every lie Trump and his staff tell can be fact checked - not just by the press but by ordinary people as well, usually are, and they are usually found wanting.

 

To try to excuse the demagoguery is idiocy in the face of a very dangerous set of people, headed by a man with a large ego and a very thin skin.

[Red Phoenix]

We're in the second month of the year, and both months I've been baited back into this thread. So this is in case of future bullshit, to be bookmarked then linked if and when I see it :
 
Things like these posts :
 
 

Just what would Hilary have had to do in her first week to be worse than this?

No RP or Dennis again.

 
 

All I can say is thank God Trump got in as opposed to Clinton
He's such a clever, good man with enormous hands
And many thanks to RP and Dennis for lighting the path to righteousness

 
 
Have baited me back into this thread twice now (have made less than 20 posts on politics since Dec 13th last year.) Instead of doing that, what about Clinton's team elevating Trump as a pied piper candidate? Didn't they play slightly more of a part in getting Trump elected than Dennis or myself posting things on this forum?
 
How many times has that pied piper strategy been discussed on here by people pissed off at Trump? Is that randomly brought up from time to time, like say, what's in the two posts I quoted here might be? Am I going to be baited every month like that until the next election? And will we see comments about the pied piper strategy every month as well if that's the case?
 
I don't think so. So what's the real problem here?
 
How many comments do we have on the US Democratic Party? Any threads on them? Is there an avoidance of criticising Clinton and her campaign team for their part in bringing about this situation? Have they been blamed much? They're one of the main reasons why Trump got elected right? Their failure allowed Trump in. So wouldn't you think there'd be a genuine interest in working out how that party is going to try and sort things out to prepare for the next election? Or is it just going to be looking at everything Trump does instead and ignoring the Dems for the most part? And baiting people like me into these threads as if I did anything comparable to what the failed Dems did?
 
How's that going to work out if so?

 

From Greenwald last month :

 

 

 

But because Democrats are so desperate to put the blame on everybody but themselves for the complete collapse of their party, they’re particularly furious at anybody who vocally challenges this narrative. And since I’ve been one of the people most vocally doing so, the smear campaign has been like none that I have ever encountered. I have been accused of being a member of the alt-right, of being an admirer of Breitbart, of being supportive of Donald Trump, of helping him get elected and, of course, of being a Kremlin operative. And it’s just this constant flow, not from fringe accounts online, but from the Democratic operatives and pundits with the greatest influence. In fact, Howard Dean, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, went on Twitter three weeks ago and said, "I think it would be really interesting to find out whether The Intercept is receiving money from Russia or Iran"—something that he obviously has zero evidence or basis for suggesting, but this is what the Democratic Party has become.

 

 

That's the party that's going to try and defeat Trump next time around, maybe they should be more of a focus than Dennis or myself.
 
If I'm baited less I'll link to this less, and probably post a whole lot less.

[Fugitive]

We're in the second month of the year, and both months I've been baited back into this thread. So this is in case of future bullshit, to be bookmarked then linked if and when I see it :

 

Things like these posts :

 

 

 

 

 

 

Have baited me back into this thread twice now (have made less than 20 posts on politics since Dec 13th last year.) Instead of doing that, what about Clinton's team elevating Trump as a pied piper candidate? Didn't they play slightly more of a part in getting Trump elected than Dennis or myself posting things on this forum?

 

How many times has that pied piper strategy been discussed on here by people pissed off at Trump? Is that randomly brought up from time to time, like say, what's in the two posts I quoted here might be? Am I going to be baited every month like that until the next election? And will we see comments about the pied piper strategy every month as well if that's the case?

 

I don't think so. So what's the real problem here?

 

How many comments do we have on the US Democratic Party? Any threads on them? Is there an avoidance of criticising Clinton and her campaign team for their part in bringing about this situation? Have they been blamed much? They're one of the main reasons why Trump got elected right? Their failure allowed Trump in. So wouldn't you think there'd be a genuine interest in working out how that party is going to try and sort things out to prepare for the next election? Or is it just going to be looking at everything Trump does instead and ignoring the Dems for the most part? And baiting people like me into these threads as if I did anything comparable to what the failed Dems did?

 

How's that going to work out if so?

 

From Greenwald last month :

 

 

 

 

That's the party that's going to try and defeat Trump next time around, maybe they should be more of a focus than Dennis or myself.

 

If I'm baited less I'll link to this less, and probably post a whole lot less.

Mental

[Hand Shandy]

Yep.

[Scott_M]

Heres a scary thought - Trump is right and everybody else is wrong

[Rico1304]

It looks like Fox News is turning on him now, could that be the beginning of the end?

[Sut]

Can anyone tell me who Red Phoenix is? I'm only posting intermittently and have never noticed him before.

 

Also, Sebastian Gorka did a sterling job last night defending his boss on Newsnight, yelling "Fake News!" and complaining about media bias every time he was asked a question.

[njackets]

Nobody is saying that the press don't fabricate news or get it wrong. There are plenty of examples of them doing just that both in the US and here.

 

But it isn't all of the media all of the time. And none of that defends the demonstrable madness and general insanity coming from the White House. Virtually every lie Trump and his staff tell can be fact checked - not just by the press but by ordinary people as well, usually are, and they are usually found wanting.

 

To try to excuse the demagoguery is idiocy in the face of a very dangerous set of people, headed by a man with a large ego and a very thin skin.

I think it prety much is all of the media all of the time, even if Trump is lieing so is the media so he has a right to call them on it and I'm sure it will go back and forth.

 

I'm just glad someone is standing up to the shower of cunts, there's a hysterical over reaction as always when it comes to Trump, he's not censoring the media I'm sure people will try and make out he is.

[Bobby Hundreds]

I'm not being funny but no matter your political views or how you stand on conspiracy I don't know how anyone can watch\listen to trump and not think it's fucking terrifying he's the president. Just listen to the prick and look at the people he's surrounded himself with.

[clangers]

I think it prety much is all of the media all of the time, even if Trump is lieing so is the media so he has a right to call them on it and I'm sure it will go back and forth.

 

I'm just glad someone is standing up to the shower of cunts, there's a hysterical over reaction as always when it comes to Trump, he's not censoring the media I'm sure people will try and make out he is.

 

Trouble is Trump and his team are coming out with demonstrable lies on a daily basis and dismissing anything that contradicts their 'alternate facts' as fake news.

 

Where would you like to start with Trump's dishonesty? Perhaps the 'Bowling Green' massacre which never happened or the claim that murder rates are at an all time high (they're actually at an all time low). It's an endless supply of falsehoods his supporters are happily buying into. He's simply trying to deflect attention away from his own failure on to the media, his disastrous travel ban that didn't go through any effective policy review being an example. 

 

Trump's response is to attack the media although it's actually his own government which is leaking factual information.

 

It's a strategy well used by previous state leaders, Hitler springs to mind.

[Section_31]

Trouble is Trump and his team are coming out with demonstrable lies on a daily basis and dismissing anything that contradicts their 'alternate facts' as fake news.

 

Where would you like to start with Trump's dishonesty? Perhaps the 'Bowling Green' massacre which never happened or the claim that murder rates are at an all time high (they're actually at an all time low). It's an endless supply of falsehoods his supporters are happily buying into. He's simply trying to deflect attention away from his own failure on to the media, his disastrous travel ban that didn't go through any effective policy review being an example. 

 

Trump's response is to attack the media although it's actually his own government which is leaking factual information.

 

It's a strategy well used by previous state leaders, Hitler springs to mind.

 

None of them are clever enough to pull off what they're trying to pull off, and they're only just now learning it. Kelly Ann Conway and Sean Spicer have got Louis Theroux documentary written all over them and Trump is just a spaz. This ain't no coup, it's a Disney film written by Tim Burton. 

[Anubis]

I think it prety much is all of the media all of the time, even if Trump is lieing so is the media so he has a right to call them on it and I'm sure it will go back and forth.

 

I'm just glad someone is standing up to the shower of cunts, there's a hysterical over reaction as always when it comes to Trump, he's not censoring the media I'm sure people will try and make out he is.

 

If you think Trump is some sort of shining knight battling for truth, then you are seriously deluding yourself.

[Section_31]

Genuinely baffles me how people can just call it 'the media'. Surely there's a difference between, say, The Boston Globe's Spotlight Team spending months in an office to uncover a paedophile priest scandal, and the Daily Mail peddling the political views of its wealthy owner? 

 

Ironically, it's the right wing media that are the most brazenly biased anyway, how a man who uses Fox News to get his point across can accuse the media of bias is an absolute joke.