• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged All things Trump + Russia

Status
Not open for further replies.
Moved a lot of posts to AAH that were nowt to do with the topic of this thread. If you wish to discuss whether America exists or not, or whether Presidential powers are supreme start a new thread.
Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: Darat
 
Maybe it's worth to single out the link in the article that backs the "CIA-funded" part of the headline. In 2013 Jeff Bezos both made a contract for $600 million with the CIA to build them a private cloud on amazon cloud service, and purchased the Washington Pest for half that money. And is shy to let his readers know about that conflict of interest when he puts out the daily Russia conspiracy crap based on what the CIA told the pre$$titutes to print.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Maybe it's worth to single out the link in the article that backs the "CIA-funded" part of the headline. In 2013 Jeff Bezos both made a contract for $600 million with the CIA to build them a private cloud on amazon cloud service, and purchased the Washington Pest for half that money. And is shy to let his readers know about that conflict of interest when he puts out the daily Russia conspiracy crap based on what the CIA told the pre$$titutes to print.
Click to expand...

Umm, that is clearly not a conflict of interest. That anyone in their right mind would think is a conflict of interest is ridiculous.

I sell something and get dollars for it. I then buy something else. That something else is in no way influenced by the purchaser in the first situation.

I started writing more scenarios on how dumb this is, but I am speechless on how little sense the CIA argument makes. Not to mention the huge issue of the fungibility of money
 
Last edited:
BobTheCoward said:
Umm, that is clearly not a conflict of interest. That anyone in their right mind would think is a conflict of interest is ridiculous.

I sell something and get dollars for it. I then buy something else. That something else is in no way influenced by the purchaser in the first situation.

I started writing more scenarios on how dumb this is, but I am speechless on how little sense the CIA argument makes. Not to mention the huge issue of the fungibility of money
Click to expand...


That latest "bombshell" piece alone mentions the CIA and their anonymous wisdom seventeen times (according to the linked article, I didn't count or read it myself). That's where the conflict of interest lies. This crap is all based on "anonymous government officials" as you criticize as well and Bezos has an incentive to print it unquestioned if he values his fat contract with the agency.
 
Childlike Empress said:
That latest "bombshell" piece alone mentions the CIA and their anonymous wisdom seventeen times (according to the linked article, I didn't count or read it myself). That's where the conflict of interest lies. This crap is all based on "anonymous government officials" as you criticize as well and Bezos has an incentive to print it unquestioned if he values his fat contract with the agency.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. It seems the standard is to simply report ownership ties. Who the owner's other businesses sell goods and services to does not seem to be a requirement.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Bezos both made a contract for $600 million with the CIA to build them a private cloud on amazon cloud service, and purchased the Washington Pest for half that money.
Click to expand...

Ton of problems here. This clearly implies a 600 million revenue would mostly finance a minority shareholder's 300 million dollar purchase. There are so many steps there that prevent the math from adding up.
 
Whatever you think what I wrote implies, the facts are what they are and it is important information not only but especially for people who still take serious the ridiculous propaganda this rag has put out in recent years.
 
Childlike Empress said:
Whatever you think what I wrote implies, the facts are what they are and it is important information not only but especially for people who still take serious the ridiculous propaganda this rag has put out in recent years.
Click to expand...

Whether it is important (I did not comment on that) and whether they need to disclose it under journalist standards (my point, though I haven't been very clear) are different points.

One of the cool parts of being a skeptic is conflicts of interest don't matter. If all evidence is presented, it doesn't matter if their conclusions are tainted. You are able to reach the same or different conclusions independently.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
Whatever you think what I wrote implies, the facts are what they are and it is important information not only but especially for people who still take serious the ridiculous propaganda this rag has put out in recent years.
Click to expand...

How do you explain every other media outlet pretty much agreeing with the fact that Russia meddled in this election?

Left, right and center. It's the only thing every not stupid person agrees with.
 
NoahFence said:
How do you explain every other media outlet pretty much agreeing with the fact that Russia meddled in this election?

Left, right and center. It's the only thing every not stupid person agrees with.
Click to expand...
The Russian government's interest in hacking, and exploration of its potential via Wikileaks, long predates the 2016 election, of course, and it's the sort of story which draws the media like flies to a sheep-pile. It is, in essence, about them and their world.

The supra-national cyber community is similarly attracted, and reached the same conclusion, by entirely different routes and methods, long ago.

For a cash-strapped Russia desperate to be a world player the attraction is undeniable. They gain a short-term advantage by being the first to seize the opportunity, but that just started a race they can't stay ahead in.
 
Trump has said that Obama was told of Russian hacking, but did nothing. Now, we are heading into Trump's 6th month in office and yet, he has done nothing to punish the Russians for their hacking.

Trump is a hypocrite and Putin's puppet!
 
skyeagle409 said:
Trump has said that Obama was told of Russian hacking, but did nothing. Now, we are heading into Trump's 6th month in office and yet, he has done nothing to punish the Russians for their hacking.

Trump is a hypocrite and Putin's puppet!
Click to expand...

It was certainly remarked upon by followers of the Comey testimony how the only thing Trump cared about vis a vis the Russia investigation was how it affected his image. Not how it damaged the country or its institutions, not how it tarnished the image of the US and democracy itself in the eyes of the world, not how to catch those responsible and prevent it from happening again, just if it made him look bad.
 
skyeagle409 said:
Trump has said that Obama was told of Russian hacking, but did nothing. Now, we are heading into Trump's 6th month in office and yet, he has done nothing to punish the Russians for their hacking.

Trump is a hypocrite and Putin's puppet!
Click to expand...

It's cool though. He also assures us that it's all a hoax, too.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom