Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6343
Posted: June 27 2017 at 19:57
Evolver wrote:
The truth has a liberal bias.
The NY Times has an unfortunate history of posting Breitbart propaganda.
Really? The story I posted from the NEW YORK TIMES was written by Jo Becker. She won the Pulitzer Prize.
Formally with the Washington Post, Jo Becker currently works as an investigative journalist for the NEW YORK Times. Jo has never worked with or for Breitbart.
Based on the things Trump has said about Russia's hacking, it seems to me like he's deflecting and changing the subject often. If you think he's innocent in this, you're delusional and are in need of some self-reflection.
---------- i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag that's a happy bag of lettuce this car smells like cartilage nothing beats a good video about fractions
Based on the things Trump has said about Russia's hacking, it seems to me like he's deflecting and changing the subject often. If you think he's innocent in this, you're delusional and are in need of some self-reflection.
What do South Korea and Italy have in common? Both countries have larger Gross National Products then Russia. I don't doubt Russia hacks into other countries infrastructures. All major countries hack each others infrastructures. This isn't 60's or 70's anymore. Russian isn't a giant superpower. Oh, Russia has nukes. But, outside of that, Russia is mediocre. I fear China more than Russia.
Yesterday, SteveG claimed, nobody on PA believes in Trump Russia collusion. Because Steve G knows everything about everybody on PA, including you Aadvark, I'm sure you don't believe Trump colluded with Russia. When it comes to Trump, I don't know what your hinting at Progaardvark. If you want me to understand your point Aardvark, could you be more specific then "THIS" (If you think he's innocent in this)
However, I have a few questions. Will you deflect and change the subject, Progaardvark, in lieu of answering my questions?
1. After 11 months of FBI, CIA, NSA, congressional, and Special Council Mueller investigating...How do explain ZERO evidence of Russia Hacking DNC? Please show me evidence instead of hearsay. Obama's word is not evidence. However metadata* is evidence. Show me proof. A video or news article, where the head of the FBI, CIA, or NSA claim (under oath) they have hard evidence will suffice. However, opinions expressed by the same Department Heads are NOT evidence.
2. How do you know the DNC e-mails weren't leaked by a DNC employee? (Even your article uses the word "stolen") Can you prove the email's weren't leaked? Show me proof not opinions. As evidence, I would accept FBI, NSA, or CIA IT experts running computer diagnostics on DNC server, laptops, and computers.
Your articles on Obama fly in the face of Obama's pre-election rhetoric on election hacking. How do explain this video of Obama made at the same time The Washington Post says Obama knew the opposite to be true?
Both Obama opinions can't be true. They are mutually exclusive. Therefore, I deduce that Obama lied.
Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17847
Posted: June 28 2017 at 10:09
^ "Obama lied" is too harsh for such a sooper nice guy.....he did not fully tell the truth because his administration did not brief him well enough, is a better explanation .
I'm starting to like this horrid thread.....When CNN is off line I can come here for "news".
Joined: June 14 2007
Location: Sea of Peas
Status: Offline
Points: 51071
Posted: June 28 2017 at 11:43
omphaloskepsis wrote:
1. After 11 months of FBI, CIA, NSA, congressional, and Special Council Mueller investigating...How do explain ZERO evidence of Russia Hacking DNC? Please show me evidence instead of hearsay. Obama's word is not evidence. However metadata* is evidence. Show me proof. A video or news article, where the head of the FBI, CIA, or NSA claim (under oath) they have hard evidence will suffice. However, opinions expressed by the same Department Heads are NOT evidence.
2. How do you know the DNC e-mails weren't leaked by a DNC employee? (Even your article uses the word "stolen") Can you prove the email's weren't leaked? Show me proof not opinions. As evidence, I would accept FBI, NSA, or CIA IT experts running computer diagnostics on DNC server, laptops, and computers.
I can't come to the same conclusion about the video you posted. Let's just say I need more hard evidence or "metadata" or something.
What I do find is that Trump's statements on Russia going back to the summer of 2016 are rather bizarre. He's either a complete idiot, or something is going on. Most sensible people I think would agree, unless they only get their information from Trump-approved sources.
---------- i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag that's a happy bag of lettuce this car smells like cartilage nothing beats a good video about fractions
Joined: June 14 2007
Location: Sea of Peas
Status: Offline
Points: 51071
Posted: June 28 2017 at 12:02
Catcher10 wrote:
wikipedia for news source?? Hmm...I would never go there to get my news. Whatever floats ur boat I suppose........
The Wikipedia article specifically addresses the DNC hack and gives references to news sources that you can go to. Those little numbers in brackets mean something. And when did I ever say that I "go there to get my news?"
---------- i'm shopping for a new oil-cured sinus bag that's a happy bag of lettuce this car smells like cartilage nothing beats a good video about fractions
Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17847
Posted: June 28 2017 at 12:07
^ Chill out, it was a simple general comment, I did not even quote your post . All I said was I/Me/catcher10 would never go there for news, if you do that is fine.
Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6343
Posted: June 28 2017 at 12:51
progaardvark wrote:
Catcher10 wrote:
wikipedia for news source?? Hmm...I would never go there to get my news. Whatever floats ur boat I suppose........
The Wikipedia article specifically addresses the DNC hack and gives references to news sources that you can go to. Those little numbers in brackets mean something. And when did I ever say that I "go there to get my news?"
All articles with zero evidence. Aardvark did you read the articles with little numbers in brackets? Please, go read the articles and show me one piece of hard evidence that DNC server was hacked. Just one. I will accept government officials testifying under oath...Like the video I provide below.
It's impossible for Law enforcement or FBI to directly know if DNC was hacked. How can that be? Check out this hard evidence...
Aardvark, can you prove that a DNC employee did not leak emails? You never answered that question. Please provide ONE piece of hard evidence that a DNC employee did not leak the DNC emails to WikiLeaks. Thus the name...WikiLeaks. I will accept Government officials testifying under oath, like the video I provided above.
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20609
Posted: June 28 2017 at 14:22
omphaloskepsis wrote:
Yesterday, SteveG claimed, nobody on PA believes in Trump Russia collusion. Because Steve G knows everything about everybody on PA, including you Aadvark...
I never claimed that "nobody on PA believes in Trump Russia collusion." I said that "as far as I can see, no one has mentioned it in PA" as it relates to this thread discussion. I also said that you were an idiot.
Joined: December 15 2012
Location: abroad
Status: Offline
Points: 22767
Posted: June 28 2017 at 14:30
This discussion has gone to sh*t so fast... Well I believe discussions are for finding consensus so can you have the sanity to admit that Trump is an arrogant tool who is not fit for his position? I can get into all your mean concerns and ideals for your country but hasn't this guy constantly shown to be happily ignorant of many important issues until he gets a single news report on his plate? Hasn't he shown to be incpable of functioning well on the subject of law-making, achieving economic and political goals and all around handling the responsibilities of being a president? Have you seen the video of him asking his entire staff to say something nice about him? It's just painful...
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20609
Posted: June 28 2017 at 14:41
What we are dealing with are two different perceptions of reality. One that's accurate and one that's quite skewed. As long as the Republican Party praises the emperors new clothes, this shtick will go on unabated for quite some time.
To measure the worth of a man, consider this question: Has anyone publicly claimed that their life was made better by Donald Trump? Did he ever do something so altruistic that it changed someone's life profoundly for the better?
Forget all the partisan fighting and BS and consider this one question. I can't find anyone that has said that their life was made better by some action by Donald Trump. Yes, Donald Trump, the President of the United States.
Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6343
Posted: June 28 2017 at 15:33
Opinions are like anus holes. Facts, truths, proof, and evidence are in rare supply. Let's see some facts people!
I don't agree with everything Trump does. However, political discussions based on personal biases and partisan opinions disintegrate into drivel, slander, and name calling. Socrates said, 'When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.' You people are better than that. I'm OK with opinions as long as you declare it's your point of view. If you pass opinions as fact, then don't be upset when your called on it and caught.
Be prepared to supply evidence and proof to bolster strong statements you believe to be absolutely true. For example, since Trump became president the National Debt has dropped 100 billion dollars. In the same span of Obama's first term the National Debt went up 175 billion dollars. Here the proof for your perusal...
Now I'll state an opinion. I think it's wrong of Trump to attack Assad's forces in Syria. I really don't like it. If recent history tells us anything, regime change never works. Look at Libya. Say what you want to about a dictatorship in Libya, after regime change Libya turned into a hellhole on earth. It's much worse.
Every time America invades and forces regime change in the Middle East: terrorist's fill the power vacuum, refugees flee for Europe, rape and human trafficking ensue. blah blah blah. That's my opinion. I could back my viewpoint with a mountain of circumstantial evidence. Perhaps the weight of a mountain of circumstantial evidence would persuade some. Perhaps not. I wouldn't claim "End of Story" like I'm God of Prog Archives!. Instead, I would say that's my viewpoint and these are reasons I believe what I believe.
Don't be offended if I ask you to back up your statements with evidence. Don't be offended if I disprove your statement with evidence such as multiple government officials testifying to direct questions under oath. Notice I say direct questions. Because the same government officials can state opinions under oath. More often then not, the government officials opinions are 180 opposites of the direct questions they answered.
Comey's testimony is textbook this way. Why would Comey's opinion be different then his yes or no answers? In my opinion, Comey is politically biased. Yet, he doesn't want to spend jail time for perjury. So he must say the truth under direct questioning. However Comey can't perjure himself with an opinion, thus his opinions differ greatly from his direct answers. Comey says he wrote a memo. When Congress asks Comey to provide memo, Comey says he deleted it. The sum total of these behaviors contribute to my opinion that Comey is politically biased. And that's why I only trust Comey's direct answers to question under oath. Even then, Comey answers need to jibe with other accounts give under oath and metadata evidence. The more accounts jibe and agree with metadata the higher the likelihood my opinion approaches the actual reality.
Joined: December 15 2012
Location: abroad
Status: Offline
Points: 22767
Posted: June 28 2017 at 15:38
I won't go into such questions but seriously, if you(the Repubs here) say 'no politician is perfect' you mean that some have a track record of making some bad deals earlier in their career, changing some political opinions over the years and perhaps having some bad hobbies next to a professional political career, while Trump's entire track record, his entire life story is starting with a lot of money, then expanding it by being a good salesman with the property and name he already has while letting others do the actual work for him, then almost completely f**king that up and then making it up by appearing in the most dumb and schlocky TV shows while in terms of politics just saying any reactionary sh*t that comes to his mind, until realising that he could build an entire campaign on a few of these poorly formed but funny and cool sounding ideas... There's just no comparison between an actual politician like Obama or Hillary, even if you disagree with them, and this utter doofus.
Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17847
Posted: June 28 2017 at 15:54
Correct no politician is perfect, no human being is perfect. Trump built his wealth in real estate, probably working pretty hard to get there, as well as going broke probably a few times along the way. I'm not sure what you mean by "his entire life story is starting with a lot of money...."
Trump is not a politician, I am fine with that and so are the American voters looks like. Obama and Hillary are both what you call professional career politicians, and they are not perfect. Hillary and her husband are far from it, surrounded in political turmoil almost all their political careers going back to Arkansas governors mansion.
If you don't like Trump, that is fine, but I think all he has done to get this "doofus" tag is about his tweets. Has he passed any "doofus" laws, signed any "doofus" bills.....If you think he has that again is fine since it is just your opinion. But whatever he has done has been approved/passed by majority votes. Yea this healthcare thing is a mess, I would never want to be in that process, it really is almost a lose/lose situation, trying to provide govt health care. At the end of the day many people will be pissed and many people will be happy, just like with Obamacare.
Good luck with it Washington DC.......LOL!
If you don't like him because of his reality show, strange because he provided many people with jobs that paid $250K for the winner and I bet those that did not win were offered jobs by other corporations. And then the show changed and went to giving money to the celebrity charities.....To me that is some pretty damn good work for a "doofus" like Trump.
Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6343
Posted: June 28 2017 at 15:58
twseel wrote:
I won't go into such questions but seriously, if you(the Repubs here) say 'no politician is perfect' you mean that some have a track record of making some bad deals earlier in their career, changing some political opinions over the years and perhaps having some bad hobbies next to a professional political career, while Trump's entire track record, his entire life story is starting with a lot of money, then expanding it by being a good salesman with the property and name he already has while letting others do the actual work for him, then almost completely f**king that up and then making it up by appearing in the most dumb and schlocky TV shows while in terms of politics just saying any reactionary sh*t that comes to his mind, until realising that he could build an entire campaign on a few of these poorly formed but funny and cool sounding ideas... There's just no comparison between an actual politician like Obama or Hillary, even if you disagree with them, and this utter doofus.
You are of the opinion that Trump is an utter doofus. I disagree, but let's say, Obama and Hillary are smarter than Trump. In my opinion Obama and Hillary were selling large chunks of America to the highest bidder. The Uranium 1 deal and closing down America's coal industry are two examples.
Trump wants to bring back jobs to America. Obama allowed jobs to leave America. I believe the average American would rather have a President who keeps jobs in America even if that same President's IQ is lower than the previous president who allow jobs to escape overseas.
Joined: December 15 2012
Location: abroad
Status: Offline
Points: 22767
Posted: June 28 2017 at 16:23
I'm drunk now so I won't go into evidence for that but please, you can see that he is very stupid... It's not a question of politics at all, he's just a complete idiot, whatever his advisors and managers have claimed would be good marketing doesn't mean anything, he's a human piece of trash and if I wanted to achieve what you want to achieve for your country I would be very angry if this was gonna be the guy who was supposed to do it, I don't care about these details, his entire persona just screams dumb self-appraising attention-grabbing narcissistic cheap bullsh*t. Ugh.
Joined: October 19 2011
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 6343
Posted: June 28 2017 at 16:40
twseel wrote:
I'm drunk now so I won't go into evidence for that but please, you can see that he is very stupid... It's not a question of politics at all, he's just a complete idiot, whatever his advisors and managers have claimed would be good marketing doesn't mean anything, he's a human piece of trash and if I wanted to achieve what you want to achieve for your country I would be very angry if this was gonna be the guy who was supposed to do it, I don't care about these details, his entire persona just screams dumb self-appraising attention-grabbing narcissistic cheap bullsh*t. Ugh.
If I understand you. Anything but Trump! Instead of Trump, you would rather have a likable, charming President who steals, lies, kills and sells your country out from under you. Would that be preferable to Trump? Yes or No.
If you answer YES, I can respect that. At least, I know where you stand. And I wouldn't attempt to convince you otherwise. However if you answer NO, I would surmise that you care more about issues and policies then personalities. We could discuss issues and policies in vacuum sans "Presidential Personality".
It's your life to live. Whatever floats your boat. If Likeability is everything, that cool.
Joined: December 15 2012
Location: abroad
Status: Offline
Points: 22767
Posted: June 28 2017 at 17:03
Somehow you think I'm some kind of typical misguided leftist; no I don't want people selling out my country from under me, but that's not anything close to what has happened to your country so far, it has been more stable and respected than it has since the '70s, with the main new issue being a dangerously increasing gap between rich and poor. This change has come with free market politics, leading businesses to outsource some jobs while others got automated. The way to correct this is by either reducing work weeks by law so that this newly gained profit can be divided equally across the people, also making sure that these wages will actually go to the markets for essential products for living so that these can become more affordable while less goes into the savings acounts of the rich, so that this money will then be used by (now once again unregulated) investors to create economic bubbles which screw over the entire world like it already has, or otherwise by investing heavily in the exporting economy to create new jobs. Rather, Trump has used his goldfish brain to muster up the populist idea that to get back jobs, you can just tell companies that they must keep their jobs in the US, so that the produce becomes more expensive again, profits drop, and the economy will slow down, costing the government progressively more money to afford more tax breaks and subsidies which by Trump's means will be pulled out of education, causing the general populace, which is already having a much harder time getting proper education than the rest of the Western world, to be so uneducated that the many high paying jobs in for example IT will be outsourced again. This will mean the government will have to expand more again to regulate even more jobs while the economy keeps shrinking. Of course you don't see those effects when Trump has in his few months just said 'you used to get money? Not anymore!' to a lot of people to show off how clever he is but sh*t, this is gonna chase you for years to come, if not the massive stain on the US' international reputation to a big majority of the rest of the world, which certainly will cost you export and allies. That's why Trump is a doofus.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 1.141 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
The American Politics Thread
Topic Options
Evolver wrote:
The truth has a liberal bias.
.
