• 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.

House Impeachment Inquiry

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lying for your team, in politics in general and in the Impeachment, is a normal course of action now, regardless of party, I guess. It's been so completely normalized and expected that just calling it fake news, to misidentifying the journalistic source as Pravada, or pulling any old totally unconvincing thing out of your ass to dismiss it and make it go away is absolutely fine and normal.
 
kellyb said:
Is this statement below true or false?



"The prospect of Mr Trump, who has praised Ukraine’s arch-enemy Vladimir Putin, becoming leader of the country’s biggest ally has spurred not just Mr Leshchenko but Kiev’s wider political leadership to do something they would never have attempted before: intervene, however indirectly, in a US election."
Click to expand...
What is the source of their information?
 
alfaniner said:
A new toadie to add to my most disliked and most disingenuous list --
Rep Elise Stefanik. What a piece of work.
Click to expand...
That's rather unfortunate.

Looking at her wikipedia page, she seems like she might actually have had some intelligence... voting against the Republican tax cut bill, criticizing Trump for withdrawing from the Paris Climate agreement and the travel ban. Not exactly a 'democrat' but at least a semi-moderate republican. Now she seems to have gone all in with the republican playbook.
 
Interesting article debunking the claims of the known propagandist David Ignatius in the Washington Pest - trying to blame Trump for people dying in Ukraine - by looking at OSCE reports:

PaulR said:
[...] And so it turns out that not a single one of the victims of war mentioned by David Ignatius was injured as a result of rebel fire – the injuries were all either self-inflicted or the consequence of the Ukrainian military firing on civilians in rebel-held territory. If Ignatius’ argument is that these people need protecting and that President Trump has a moral duty to provide military assistance to the armed forces which are defending them, then the only logical conclusion is that the United States is providing aid to the wrong side.

Or perhaps the argument is just completely bogus in the first place.
Click to expand...
 
Segnosaur said:
That's rather unfortunate.

Looking at her wikipedia page, she seems like she might actually have had some intelligence... voting against the Republican tax cut bill, criticizing Trump for withdrawing from the Paris Climate agreement and the travel ban. Not exactly a 'democrat' but at least a semi-moderate republican. Now she seems to have gone all in with the republican playbook.
Click to expand...

It's called reelection time.
Her behavior is yet another argument for Term Limits.
 
plague311 said:
To save the rest of you some time:

irrussianality.wordpress.com

Is the source. Feel free to skip over it as it's just some dood posting nonsense.
Click to expand...

Thanks.

I just dismiss as disinformation, without reading, anything from any Russian source .

ALL such sources, e.g. RT, are just Putin's propaganda arm, much like Radio Moscow, Radio P&P, Pravda and Izvestiya were propaganda outlets for the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
Yes, please. I skimmed back something like 14 pages and couldn't find it.
Click to expand...

No problem. I remember the word "activists" is in there and can find the links pretty easily. Sorry you spent 14 pages of time looking!

Here's the link.
https://www.ft.com/content/c98078d0-6ae7-11e6-a0b1-d87a9fea034f

You might not have access. I seem to get one view a month with Financial Times. I (and you) might only be able to get in via grabbing a line of the text and putting it in through google and finding it that way, too. Not sure why I have access that seems spotty like that.

Here's where I was able to get the link to work and C&P a bunch in response to someone.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=12891834&postcount=1727

There might be more of the texts in the screenshots in the journalist Aaron Mate's twitter post here: https://twitter.com/aaronjmate/status/1194675914971463681

The journalist who wrote the FT article is a guy named Roman Olearchyk, who has no controversies associated with him and his work (including with this article) if my google searching of the topic is anything to go by, but I only went a few pages into google checking.

Here are his FT headlines:
https://www.ft.com/stream/7b2da31d-9bac-3e56-8fc8-c71deb29949b

I can't really get a totally reliable sense of his work without having a subscription to FT, but his headlines make him seem like a good, normal "financial press" journalist who can be assumed to have dine basic due diligence. FT itself has a really good reputation, as well.
 
Last edited:
smartcooky said:
YOU might think its a no-brainer, but most of us here do have brains, we are smart, and we know exactly what you are trying to do.

We are not falling for your game.



Its not relevant because Kent was SPECIFICALLY answering a question at the end of a train of questions related to the debunked 'Ukraine framed Russia for the DNC server hack' conspiracy theory.



We are not quasi-trolling. We are trying (repeatedly) to explain to you that you are mistaken about Kent's answer because you are isolating it from the context in which it belongs.

Kent's answer was truthful, and honest and correct in the context that the question was asked and answered. That is why Leshchenko's statement is irrelevant, and why we are not going to be drawn into saying whether or not it is true.

If you can't (or won't) accept this, then there is not a lot we can do to help you understand where you are making your mistake.
Click to expand...
While I'm not in agreement with kellyb on her interpretation, this "we" business that you flog is something that impresses me as a sign of weakness in your argument, it's highly presumptuous, and downright obnoxious.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom