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

CNN Doxxes a gif maker

uke2se said:
You mean CNN should stop reporting on what can possibly be the largest scandal in US political history
Click to expand...

The skeptic in me thinks that any smoking guns would have been leaked by now. Even Van Jones has admitted "Russia is big nothingburger".

which has spawned three high level investigations, including an investigation of Trump himself, and will no doubt spawn many more if the Benghazi affair is anything to go by?
Click to expand...

Benghazi was all fluff too, I didnt buy any of that nonsense either.
I'll patiently wait for the facts to come in before I join the lynch mob.


Why in the world would they do that? Just because you are a Trump apologist and thus chose to close your eyes to the evidence doesn't mean the rest of us aren't interested.
Click to expand...

What the best evidence? That Russia tries to meddle in elections all over the world, which is something the US does as well?
 
apathoid said:
Heres my definition: fake news is inaccurate and or irresponsible reporting that is attempting to push a false narrative.
Click to expand...

I have a problem with most of that.

Inaccurate merely means not accurate. While that has synonyms such as wrong, it also includes imprecise. News can be imprecise sometimes.

Irresponsible is simply not fake. Irresponsible but true is a different problem.

A false narrative is opinion (false) on what is essentially interpretation and framing of information (narrative). That isnt true or fake as it really isn't falsifiable.

Here is my counter definition: news reported that contains falsifiable fabrications of fact (not merely opinion or editorial) generated by the journalist or includes fabrications created by a third party that the journalist knows is fabricated.
 
apathoid said:
The skeptic in me thinks that any smoking guns would have been leaked by now.
Click to expand...

In the absence of the actual gun, how about all the smoke and the word of the intelligence agencies? The financial ties, personal favours, etc.?

That Russia tries to meddle in elections all over the world, which is something the US does as well?
Click to expand...

The question is whether the Trump admin was helping them out.
 
uke2se said:
That definition isn't the definition the rest of us are using. If it was, Fox would be nothing but fake news.
Click to expand...

I'll be happy to agree upon a universally accepted definition, but there isn't one. If you're trying to get me to defend Fox, you're barking up the wrong tree.
 
apathoid said:
The skeptic in me thinks that any smoking guns would have been leaked by now. Even Van Jones has admitted "Russia is big nothingburger".
Click to expand...

I didn't realize Van Jones was an insider in the investigations. Does the skeptic in you normally dismiss any investigation that information isn't leaked from?


apathoid said:
Benghazi was all fluff too, I didnt buy any of that nonsense either.
I'll patiently wait for the facts to come in before I join the lynch mob.
Click to expand...

But you're saying we should basically forget about it, and CNN shouldn't report it. The implications of a US president being helped to power by a hostile foreign nation are quite large. I think reporting it is quite reasonable



apathoid said:
What the best evidence? That Russia tries to meddle in elections all over the world, which is something the US does as well?
Click to expand...

The best evidence for what? That Russia meddled in the election or that the Trump campaign was involved? Evidence for that I can't give you, because as you well know, the investigations are ongoing. I can show you lots of smoke tho, but I am betting you're not actually interested.
 
Last edited:
Argumemnon said:
There probably isn't a universally accepted definition of the word "table", but that doesn't mean there isn't a generally agreed upon one for most situations.
Click to expand...

What do you think of my variation above? We don't agree on very much, but I think we both consistently rail against the use of fake news to mean editorializing you don't agree with.
 
I've been yellow carded for a derail already so this will be my last post about this before getting back to the OP.

Argumemnon said:
In the absence of the actual gun, how about all the smoke and the word of the intelligence agencies?The financial ties, personal favours, etc.?
Click to expand...

He owns properties all over the world. Of course he has some casual ties to Russian banks. That's not a shock and its not evidence hes guilty of colluding with the Russian government to steal an election. I want to see something with teeth and I'll defer to the official investigation of Mueller et al and I'll accept his findings. If he finds some impeachable offenses, I'll be right behind you in the lynch mob.

The question is whether the Trump admin was helping them out.
Click to expand...
I don't see strong evidence that he was. Again, if there was, we'd have it by now.
 
apathoid said:
He owns properties all over the world. Of course he has some casual ties to Russian banks. That's not a shock and its not evidence hes guilty of colluding with the Russian government to steal an election.
Click to expand...

Actually, it is evidence. It's just not strong evidence in and of itself. And it's a very specific bank, is it not?

Again, if there was, we'd have it by now.
Click to expand...

The intelligence agencies are under no obligation to follow your personal time table.
 
There's some serious inflation of their own importance in that link. Jeez, that's pathetic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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