Cont: The Trump Presidency: Part 22

Status
Not open for further replies.
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Retweeted

Barbara(Flynn)#WhoLeakedGenFlynn

The Obama/Clinton Cabal Knew They Had To Stop General Mike Flynn First! OR They Would ALL Be Locked Up By NOW!
Click to expand...

Did trump retweet that recently? First, looking for some context I discovered that tweet was posted in January 2019. Second, Barbara Flynn is General Flynn's sister! Third... Obama and the Clintons knew they would all be locked up by now? For what? Mike Flynn was named National Security Advisor. Why would he be locking up Obama and the Clintons?

This whole thing is insane. And becoming more insane everyday. trump is destroying us step by agonizing step. :(
 
newyorkguy said:
Did trump retweet that recently? First, looking for some context I discovered that tweet was posted in January 2019. Second, Barbara Flynn is General Flynn's sister! Third... Obama and the Clintons knew they would all be locked up by now? For what? Mike Flynn was named National Security Advisor. Why would he be locking up Obama and the Clintons?

This whole thing is insane. And becoming more insane everyday. trump is destroying us step by agonizing step. :(
Click to expand...

Don't you remember when Trump had Sessions investigate Clinton and Uranium-1 , which got so many sent to jail?

This will be just as thorough an investigation.
 
The hits keep on coming! From Business Insider:
President Donald Trump won't be unveiling former President Barack Obama's portrait at the White House, breaking a 40-year tradition, NBC News reported on Tuesday. Obama would also not be interested in attending such an event, according to the report, which cited people familiar with the matter. For decades, first-term presidents have held ceremonies in the East Room to unveil the portraits of their immediate predecessors. Obama did so for former President George W. Bush in 2012, for example. Link
Click to expand...
 
C_Felix said:
...To me, the key issue/question, is going to be, "Does putting a link below a tweet stating, '! Get the facts about (mail in ballots)'" count as editing?
Click to expand...

I agree. The link Twitter posted below trump's tweets was unobtrusive and fairly benign. See below. I agree with what some of the media analysts are saying. This is a fight trump wants and Twitter inadvertently played right into his hands. But I also do not see this in anyway as 'censoring' trump. Unfortunately, the thinking is, many of trump's most vociferous supporters won't look at the tweets. They'll just take trump at his word that he was 'censored.'
 

Attachments

  • WTH.jpg
    WTH.jpg
    86 KB · Views: 8
newyorkguy said:
Some media analysts are thinking this is a fight Twitter can't win. From CNN:


As for the 'tweets' that started all of this, accusing Joe Scarborough of a murder without any evidence, even some Republicans are troubled by that. From Politico:


We have a president who is now fighting over his 'right' to spread lies and misinformation on social media. It's really sickening. :(
Click to expand...

What, a tiny handful? Compared to those who sit by and say nothing, or those who retweet in support of his lie?

I've tried to convince myself that Trump isn't going to try to pull off a coup if he loses in November, but the evidence is mounting. The election is already "rigged." Voter fraud is already "rampant." Vote by mail is a plot to overthrow him.

When he loses, he may very well try to pull off a coup. And the Republican Senate doesn't have to actively participate. They can just sit back and do nothing. If the coup succeeds, they can reap the rewards. If it fails, they can't be blamed.

I hope this year doesn't turn out to be the end of democracy in the U.S., but the likelihood of it is increasing.
 
phiwum said:
You could, just as I could make a point that the post in question was misleading, either intentionally or (more likely) not. Most posts that mention a person's full name refer to actual persons unless context makes clear otherwise and thus the presumption here was not unreasonable.
Click to expand...

I didn't say it was an unreasonable presumption. That people may assume it to be true is part of the joke.

But, at the same time, on a board dedicated to critical thinking the complaint of "I went off half-cocked based on an unsourced post made by an anonymous stranger on the internet, therefore that stranger is to blame for my opinion being wrong" isn't a particularly convincing one.
 
newyorkguy said:
I agree. The link Twitter posted below trump's tweets was unobtrusive and fairly benign. See below. I agree with what some of the media analysts are saying. This is a fight trump wants and Twitter inadvertently played right into his hands. But I also do not see this in anyway as 'censoring' trump. Unfortunately, the thinking is, many of trump's most vociferous supporters won't look at the tweets. They'll just take trump at his word that he was 'censored.'
Click to expand...

Haven't you seen all those censored posts from Trump?

No ?

See, the censoring is bigly!
 
Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Retweeted

Barbara(Flynn)#WhoLeakedGenFlynn

The Obama/Clinton Cabal Knew They Had To Stop General Mike Flynn First! OR They Would ALL Be Locked Up By NOW!
@realDonaldTrump @MattWhitaker46

Randell Young
@randell_young
Everyone who knew there was no evidence of Trump-Russia collusion also knew the #ObamaGate "investigations" were never really investigations at all but were always a coup d'etat. They ALL must answer for their crimes. Every damn one. Sic semper tyrannis.
Click to expand...

I don't see anything wrong with using a phrase about killing tyrants when speaking of Obama and his minions. Nothing at all.

Indeed, it's a sign of high learning to use the same phrase John Wilkes Booth used after putting a bullet in Lincoln's head. Who was a Republican and a lot of people don't know that.

Very presidential to retweet it, in fact.
 
Last edited:
One item I need to remind myself of; and if I'm posting on my facebook account...

I do not call them "tweets." Twitter is the medium.

They are "Official statements from the office of the President of the United States."

I do my best not to write, "Trump tweeted and there was a video from another twitter account included. In this video someone says, 'The only democrat is a good democrat.'"

I do my to remember to write, "In an official statement from the office of the President of the United States, there was a video from another twitter account included. In this video someone says, 'The only democrat is a good democrat.'"

To me, it changes the narrative.
 
Trump Tweets

All over the World the CoronaVirus, a very bad “gift” from China, marches on. Not good!
 
newyorkguy said:
I agree. The link Twitter posted below trump's tweets was unobtrusive and fairly benign. See below. I agree with what some of the media analysts are saying. This is a fight trump wants and Twitter inadvertently played right into his hands. But I also do not see this in anyway as 'censoring' trump. Unfortunately, the thinking is, many of trump's most vociferous supporters won't look at the tweets. They'll just take trump at his word that he was 'censored.'
Click to expand...

They should just remove his account.
 
Squeegee Beckenheim said:
I didn't say it was an unreasonable presumption. That people may assume it to be true is part of the joke.

But, at the same time, on a board dedicated to critical thinking the complaint of "I went off half-cocked based on an unsourced post made by an anonymous stranger on the internet, therefore that stranger is to blame for my opinion being wrong" isn't a particularly convincing one.
Click to expand...

We all take for granted certain assumptions when we read. Your post mentioned a name. Do you google to see that every name mentioned by a poster is a real person? Or do you reckon that it is so (especially if the poster is a regular of whom you've formed a more or less positive opinion) unless there are clear reasons to doubt?

No need to tussle over this, I suppose. It is a minor matter. I appreciated your correction, though your evaluation of my skeptical credentials I could have done without.
 
C_Felix said:
One item I need to remind myself of; and if I'm posting on my facebook account...

I do not call them "tweets." Twitter is the medium.

They are "Official statements from the office of the President of the United States."

I do my best not to write, "Trump tweeted and there was a video from another twitter account included. In this video someone says, 'The only democrat is a good democrat.'"

I do my to remember to write, "In an official statement from the office of the President of the United States, there was a video from another twitter account included. In this video someone says, 'The only democrat is a good democrat.'"

To me, it changes the narrative.
Click to expand...

Captain_Swoop said:
Trump Tweets

All over the World the CoronaVirus, a very bad “gift” from China, marches on. Not good!
Click to expand...

In an official statement from the office of the President of the United States, the POTUS stated, "All over the World the CoronaVirus, a very bad “gift” from China, marches on. Not good!"
 
phiwum said:
We all take for granted certain assumptions when we read. Your post mentioned a name. Do you google to see that every name mentioned by a poster is a real person? Or do you reckon that it is so (especially if the poster is a regular of whom you've formed a more or less positive opinion) unless there are clear reasons to doubt?
Click to expand...

It depends on the context. I certainly try not to form strong opinions about something before I've checked for myself whether or not that something is true. It doesn't seem like it's particularly controversial to call that a basic foundation of scepticism.
 
Last edited:
https://twitter.com/marty_lederman/status/1266002888662421506

All Hat/No Cattle alert:

The draft E.O. is full of sound & fury, signifying nothing. Mostly amounts to directing DoC to petition the FCC for a proposed reg to "clarify" 230(c)(2)(A). Even if Trump could order Wilbur Ross to do so (which isn't clear), and Ross capitulates,... /1

... it's hard to imagine the FCC will do anything with it. And as for the FTC, Trump doesn't have the authority to issue his directive, and the Commission will ignore it.

Pay no attention to that man in front of the curtain. /2
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom