• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: All things Trump + Russia Part 2

Status
Not open for further replies.
magellan said:
ah yes.
The usual US story.
"We didn't mean bad, we are just incompetent."
Click to expand...
I think I see where you're going wrong : you start from the premise that the US media is a monolithic organisation following some dictated line, but it really isn't like that. Some parts of the US media played cheer-leader for the Iraq invasion, while others should have done better and frankly let themselves and everybody down. Other parts of the media did well. We had the same experience in Britain, with Blair slavishly following the White House line backed up by the Murdoch press (naturally), Daily Mail, Excess and Torygraph while the BBC and ITN stuck firmly to "balance". The Guardian did way better.

It's actually one of my favourite sayings: "Never assume malice when incompetence is a sufficient answer." But after decades of "incompetence" that *always* works in the US favor ...
Click to expand...
Again you embrace an invalid premise : that there is something one can call "the US favour". It is, for instance, very hard to argue that the Iraq invasion was in the US's interests, nor even the media's for that matter (see how it lost your love, for intstance, and it wasn't just just yours).
 
Childlike Empress said:
Actually you were being lectured by me, I just decided to not humiliate you. You do that quite fine yourself by your expressed knowledge and schoolyard spellings. Interesting how deep the hatred for the man was planted inside you.
Click to expand...
As interesting as how deep your love is for him? I've already told you to humiliate away. Put up or shut up.

Schoolyard spellings? Expressed knowledge? Find the posts and address them, or address both of those things in real time. If you can't, or won't, then fall of that high horse you've perched yourself on. This entire thread is littered with links to your bias media and propaganda garbage you try to pass off as legitimate sources. That's not the way you should act, childlike.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 
varwoche said:
I'm perversely glad to see this thought expressed so boldly and so succinctly. Realize, here's what you're actually saying... Who cares about facts...
Click to expand...


Not just facts, but truth in general. Henri's apparent position is that it doesn't matter if he states falsehoods, because the thing he's defending against is also false.

How does he know it's false? Who knows? Who cares? Henri clearly doesn't.
 
Last edited:
NYT Op Ed: That Crazy Talk About Robert Mueller
If there were any remaining hope that Republicans would accept the precise, methodical work of this veteran, highly respected, Republican-appointed law enforcement official — the man Newt Gingrich once called a “superb choice to be special counsel” — it has evaporated in a fog of propaganda and delirious conspiracy theories....

Reading the increasingly outlandish theories cooked up by Mr. Trump’s defenders and apologists is like entering an alternate, upside-down universe where Hillary Clinton remains Public Enemy No. 1.

In these irrelevant tales, Mrs. Clinton (or, as Sean Hannity called her on Monday, “President Clinton”) is the real colluder, working stealthily with the Russians to — stay with us here — destroy her own candidacy. Also, she and Bill Clinton once sold American uranium to the Russians. Also, Robert Mueller failed to fully investigate that sale when he led the F.B.I., so he’s complicit in it, too, not to mention he has ties to Mr. Comey, who also led the F.B.I. Also, some of his investigators donated to Democratic candidates.

There’s no bottom to the delusion on display.
Click to expand...

So based on the premise put forward by Hannity (and I don't know who else), since Mueller worked for the FBI he has to recuse himself from this case.

Republicans just introduced a resolution to remove Mueller from the Trump-Russia investigation (Note that is some Republicans as there are others with the opposite POV.)
Reps. Matt Gaetz of Florida, Andy Biggs of Arizona, and Louie Gohmert of Texas say Mueller should step down because he was the FBI director in 2010 when US government agencies approved the sale of Uranium One, a Canadian energy company, to a Russian nuclear-energy firm. The deal required approval because Uranium One had mining operations in the US.

Gaetz says the issue is that Mueller's FBI had found evidence of criminal activity that may have been relevant to the deal but did not bring any charges, and that Mueller therefore should recuse himself from the current investigation.

"These deeply troubling events took place when Mr. Mueller was the Director of the FBI. As such, his impartiality is hopelessly compromised," Gaetz said in a statement. "He must step down immediately."
Click to expand...
IOW, because no charges were brought against Clinton for [fill in the blank] Mueller needs to go.

No matter how many times these idiots hear the fact there is no evidence of any crimes in the Uranium deal, neither Vince Foster nor Seth Rich were murdered by the Clintons, and the technical violations with secure documents being on Clinton's server did not warrant criminal charges, these guys are completely on board with the fantasy: Trump good, Clinton criminal.

Unfortunately, these are Congressmen, not just Trump's voter base.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
LOL
Click to expand...
That's....that's it? That's literally the retort you have? That Tapatalk lists my phone model? Don't you have some state run Russia source that shows Google is pro-clinton or some dumb **** equivalent to that?

Yeah, I use a phone and I talk on this forum. Good work.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 
Argumemnon said:
Yes, yes they are. The Russians lie, like everybody else
Click to expand...

Oh, look! Whataboutism!

Argumemnon said:
but due to the nature of their regime, they lie even more.
Click to expand...

Ah because they are commies and Evil and putin is hitler. And we call it a regime instead of a government, because that sounds sinister, while having the exact same meaning. Like the Warshaw treaty vs. the NATO pact.

Argumemnon said:
So I ask you again, mister dodge, why trust Russian outlets, specifically, at all?
Click to expand...

Again: Track record. US lies (Politicians and media:) A lot and very dangerous. US telling me that the Russians lied doesn't mean they did. Am I going to believe what the US tells me or my own lying eyes? Going to trust my eyes.
 
magellan said:
Oh, look! Whataboutism!
Click to expand...

Oh, look! Someone who doesn't know what that word means!

Ah because they are commies and Evil and putin is hitler. And we call it a regime instead of a government, because that sounds sinister, while having the exact same meaning. Like the Warshaw treaty vs. the NATO pact.
Click to expand...

Strawman. Do you think you're being clever?

Again: Track record. US lies (Politicians and media:) A lot and very dangerous. US telling me that the Russians lied doesn't mean they did. Am I going to believe what the US tells me or my own lying eyes? Going to trust my eyes.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant.

You're either not getting it or are dodging deliberately. The US lying doesn't make the Russians more trustworthy. You are making a LOT of effort to avoid answering my question, so I guess we can conclude that you have no good answer.
 
Argumemnon said:
Oh, look! Someone who doesn't know what that word means!
Click to expand...

Ah yes.
Russians lie! But what about american lies? <-Whataboutism
America lies! But what about russian lies? <- Not whataboutism
I can clearly see the difference

Argumemnon said:
Strawman. Do you think you're being clever?
Click to expand...

Why do you need to call the russian government a regime then?


Argumemnon said:
You're either not getting it or are dodging deliberately. The US lying doesn't make the Russians more trustworthy. You are making a LOT of effort to avoid answering my question, so I guess we can conclude that you have no good answer.
Click to expand...

Can you point me to one or 2 of these lies by russia? Bonus points if they had devastating consequences like a few million dead or something around that ballpark.
Again: It doesn't become a lie just because the US says so.
 
magellan said:
Ah yes.
Russians lie! But what about american lies? <-Whataboutism
America lies! But what about russian lies? <- Not whataboutism
I can clearly see the difference
Click to expand...

But that's NOT what I was saying. I didn't say "what about Russian lies". I asked why one would trust Russian sources, and you replied that Americans lie. I pointed out that the same argument holds for Russians. I'm saying that your response doesn't answer the question. Learn some English.

Can you point me to one or 2 of these lies by russia?
Click to expand...

I'm the one asking the question, which you have dodged from the beginning.

If I ask someone why they take their news from the BBC, and they answer that the Pakistani news outlets are untrustworthy, is that person answering my question?
 
Argumemnon said:
But that's NOT what I was saying. I didn't say "what about Russian lies". I asked why one would trust Russian sources, and you replied that Americans lie. I pointed out that the same argument holds for Russians. I'm saying that your response doesn't answer the question. Learn some English.



I'm the one asking the question, which you have dodged from the beginning.

If I ask someone why they take their news from the BBC, and they answer that the Pakistani news outlets are untrustworthy, is that person answering my question?
Click to expand...

Oh boy, is this really so complicated?
US tells me Russians are to blame for refugees. Obviously a lie, if time is linear.
US tells me the russians "hacked their election" Obviously an intentionally nebulous charge, so I am not going to believe them.
US (The guys who run RFE) tells me RT and Sputnik are kremlin propaganda, and I just have to take a look at it to see that that is mainly another US propaganda lie.
 
magellan said:
Oh boy, is this really so complicated?
US tells me Russians are to blame for refugees. Obviously a lie, if time is linear.
Click to expand...

Let's start one at a time.

When and where did the US bastards claim that Russians are to blame for the refugees? Because I'm an avid consumer of US media, but I sure as hell didn't get that point. Indeed, as you've mentioned, the refugee crisis preceded the Russian involvement in Syria.

So, do show me any US government claim or even US media claim that the Syrian refugee crisis is due to Russian involvement. Just one major news story from a respectable media outlet would do. I await with breath bated, of course.

And if you succeed in doing so, I'll be happy to say that the source cited was full of ****. And if you can't do so, well...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom