Ed Breaking: Mueller Grand Jury charges filed, arrests as soon as Monday

Status
Not open for further replies.
To me it's the traitorous Rebubs who are the far more alarming threat that the election-interfering Russians. If the Party in power is supinely failing to stand up for the Nation, even slight external forces are a danger. But a unified and patriotic administration at least has a hope against the most robust intrusions.

We must *first* address our own contributors to the problem before tackling the external component.
 
Aridas said:
I disagree. Emily's Cat was fairly clear with what she said. A lack of understanding of what she said is far more an issue on the part of the readers than it was on how she expressed it. Disagreement with what was said may well not be, though. Some of her implied observations are quite correct, regardless. That Russia's actions are in the spotlight more because of Trump and that the attention of most people is more directly focused on Trump than Russia are both fairly certainly true, after all. That she overemphasizes the importance of those things, however, is unsurprisingly in line with the biases that she's demonstrated.
Click to expand...

So we'll agree to disagree. Of course there is going to be less focus on Russia. You guys already said why, it doesn't hold people's attention. That, and Russia isn't releasing any information at all. The investigation isn't releasing any information at all. What do you want to discuss? In stark contrast there is a massive amount of information coming out from several different sources about Trump and his campaign's state side follies. One gets a disproportionate amount of discussion because one has a disproportionate amount of information being released. Outside of the charges from Meullers investigation, and Russia telling us to get lost, there hasn't been much available other than Russia saying, 'Nah'. If you want to discuss it we can.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk
 
Lurch said:
To me it's the traitorous Rebubs who are the far more alarming threat that the election-interfering Russians. If the Party in power is supinely failing to stand up for the Nation, even slight external forces are a danger. But a unified and patriotic administration at least has a hope against the most robust intrusions.

We must *first* address our own contributors to the problem before tackling the external component.
Click to expand...
This is exactly it.
 
Emily's Cat said:
I'm sorry, Dr. Keith, but again, you seem to be taking the same approach that I've identified here. Your post doesn't appear to address the actions of Russia in and of themselves; rather it appears to focus on Republicans, and the failings of those Republicans... where Russia is presented as evidence and support for an argument against Republicans.

Thus, it seems, that you are far more concerned with Republicans and their failings, their misbehavior, and their presence as a presumed enemy of Democrats.... than you are concerned about the psyops campaign of propaganda and misinformation perpetrated by a foreign nation against the US.

My point here is not intended to denigrate you in any way. I hold that a large number of Republicans are just as closed to the greater issue. As you rightfully point out, they are far more concerned with the president being Republican, and are far too quick to dismiss the issue in their zeal to paint Democrats as their enemy.

It is my opinion that partisanship is at least as big a threat to US democracy as any foreign interference is.
Click to expand...

I think Russian interference has been accepted as the reality and now we need to look at what we are going to do about it.

But it hasn't. If the party in control of both houses of congress and the executive branch refuse to acknowledge the problem then the problem changes. The problem is no longer the Russians, the problem is our inaction towards the Russians.

If your kitchen is on fire but someone keeps taking the only fire extinguisher away from you and saying it isn't that big of a fire, what is the most immediate problem? Getting the fire extinguisher and using it. fighting over the fire extinguisher is not ignoring the fire.
 
Dr. Keith said:
I think Russian interference has been accepted as the reality and now we need to look at what we are going to do about it.

But it hasn't. If the party in control of both houses of congress and the executive branch refuse to acknowledge the problem then the problem changes. The problem is no longer the Russians, the problem is our inaction towards the Russians.

If your kitchen is on fire but someone keeps taking the only fire extinguisher away from you and saying it isn't that big of a fire, what is the most immediate problem? Getting the fire extinguisher and using it. fighting over the fire extinguisher is not ignoring the fire.
Click to expand...

That's a good analogy, and makes sense.
 
Trump Tweets

"Reports are there was indeed at least one FBI representative implanted, for political purposes, into my campaign for president. It took place very early on, and long before the phony Russia Hoax became a “hot” Fake News story. If true - all time biggest political scandal!"

"Why isn’t disgraced FBI official Andrew McCabe being investigated for the $700,000 Crooked Hillary Democrats in Virginia, led by Clinton best friend Terry M (under FBI investigation that they killed) gave to McCabe’s wife in her run for office? Then dropped case on Clinton!"
 
pgwenthold said:
The guy has totally lost his mind.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but I don't think that tweet is evidence.

He's playing to his base. Who think that unfowars* is more trustworthy than the "BBC Pravda" for example.


*a typo that seems apt
 
jimbob said:
Maybe, but I don't think that tweet is evidence.

He's playing to his base. Who think that unfowars* is more trustworthy than the "BBC Pravda" for example.


*a typo that seems apt
Click to expand...

There is a growing minority in the UK that don't trust the BBC. They are on the left and right and their motivations are mixed. Some general political, some specific pro or anti Brexit for example and others commercial.

They all claim the BBC is either a govt stooge or anti govt or hurting commercial broadcasters or biased for or against Brexit and they actively seek to have it dismembered or shut down.
 
phiwum said:
Well conceded.

Such a concession does much to dispel the myth that you're a closet Trumpian.
Click to expand...

I never thought Emily's Cat was. She was making a point that a lot of us following this story have strong biases that might color how we perceive what is going on and what we want to happen.

Skeptics, I think, are introspective enough to realize that. I think some people reacted to Emily's post though, as she was implying that there wasn't a reasonable intellectual basis for favoring the investigation of Trump and his underlings in addition to whatever biases we bring to the issue.

This idea that biases can strongly affect our perception of truth leads to what I see as a bit of a skeptical conundrum. Skeptics realize that our actions and beliefs are often driven by subconscious biases while our conscious mind works to justify the actions and beliefs with logic. Given that skeptics understand this, how do skeptics ever conclude they have formed a true belief when they acknowledge that biases can control human actions and belief in humans and skeptics are humans.

The answer that skeptics usually tell themselves is that because they are aware of the role that biases play in the formation of their perception of truth they need to be very careful with their formation of beliefs so that they are based on logic and not biases. Being a skeptic myself, I believe that this is a reasonable approach but sometimes we can fool ourselves in to believing things that are questionable because we over estimate our ability to isolate our beliefs from our biases.

I thought Emily's Cat was stating something like that when I agreed with her above.

Long winded anecdote related to the above but of questionable interest: In one of the threads about birtherism I agreed with a birther that it was possible that Obama might be able to get his long form birth certificate released. At least one of the participants in the thread accused me of being a closet birther because I agreed with a birther on a point. I think the individual displayed exactly the kind of biases in that post that Emily's Cat was talking about. He had a strong tribal bias and anybody that disagreed with any part of the tribal narrative as he saw it had to be on the other side of the issue. Not a happy post by a forum member for a forum that featured skepticism I thought.
 
Last edited:
Captain_Swoop said:
There is a growing minority in the UK that don't trust the BBC. They are on the left and right and their motivations are mixed. Some general political, some specific pro or anti Brexit for example and others commercial.

They all claim the BBC is either a govt stooge or anti govt or hurting commercial broadcasters or biased for or against Brexit and they actively seek to have it dismembered or shut down.
Click to expand...

One of the truisms I've developed over the years is that if everybody kvetches about something, it's probably unbiased. CBC and public health are examples in Canada. The joke is that it's Canada's second favourite pastime after hockey.

There will be exceptions of course. Cancer. Everybody hates cancer. Cancer really is a prick.
 
logger said:
We’re talking about election interference swaying the election. So unless you have proof of these hackers forcing this lady to vote for the hildabeast?
Click to expand...

So Russia targeting the US military, defense contractors and journalists is AOK?


And why would they want to force anyone to vote for the Hildebeast? They wanted Trump.
 
davefoc said:
... However, any illegal connection between the above and Trump himself is not well known publicly, if it exists. ....
Click to expand...

Don Jr spoke to someone after the Trump Tower meeting he claims he can't remember whose blocked phone number he called. :rolleyes:

Trump was involved in writing up Don Jr's dishonest response that the meeting was about adoption.

You think Donnie Jr kept that meeting from Trump Sr? It's not credible.

The latest story after the adoption lie was busted, is that they didn't get any dirt. That's not any more credible than the adoption lie. They didn't need to get the emails themselves, just a plan about when and where to make them public. "Especially later in the summer," read Don Jr's email.

Papadopoulos spilled the beans about the Russians hacking DNC/Clinton emails to the Aussie ambassador in a bar. You think he wouldn't have told Trump?

There are a dozen other Trump connections to Russia, for example: changing the GOP Platform. Think Trump just requested that because Manafort said to? Or that Trump had nothing to do with it?


If you put everything together, it's simply not credible this all went on without Trump knowing about it.
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
Don Jr spoke to someone after the Trump Tower meeting he claims he can't remember whose blocked phone number he called. :rolleyes:

Trump was involved in writing up Don Jr's dishonest response that the meeting was about adoption.

You think Donnie Jr kept that meeting from Trump Sr? It's not credible.

The latest story after the adoption lie was busted, is that they didn't get any dirt. That's not any more credible than the adoption lie. They didn't need to get the emails themselves, just a plan about when and where to make them public. "Especially later in the summer," read Don Jr's email.

Papadopoulos spilled the beans about the Russians hacking DNC/Clinton emails to the Aussie ambassador in a bar. You think he wouldn't have told Trump?

There are a dozen other Trump connections to Russia, for example: changing the GOP Platform. Think Trump just requested that because Manafort said to? Or that Trump had nothing to do with it?


If you put everything together, it's simply not credible this all went on without Trump knowing about it.
Click to expand...

I thought it was during the meeting. ??
 
davefoc said:
I never thought Emily's Cat was. She was making a point that a lot of us following this story have strong biases that might color how we perceive what is going on and what we want to happen.
Click to expand...

Neither did i think the cat was pro Trump, but others have accused her of such.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom