Merged All things Trump + Russia

Status
Not open for further replies.
Childlike Empress said:
You're welcome. Took me less time to look up the transcript than it took you to write that post about your source criticism.
Click to expand...
:eek: You can see me typing? Elapsed time is not a great indicator of how long it took to compose a post - or whatever it is you're trying to say.

I had already watched the video *clip*. I used ellipses, but without them it is almost impossible to render a coherent Donald J. Trump statement. It's true a quote is not the whole transcript - that's what makes it a quote. So I weighted the various verb tenses he did use - I think Russia did it, Russia won't be doing it, Putin shouldn't have done it ... and counted those as confirmation that in this particular case he believed Putin did "it."

Childlike Empress said:
Your original question was what "convinced" Trump of the Russian hacking. Now that there's the evidence in, do you still think he was/is "convinced"?
Click to expand...

Yep.

I publicly quoted politicians (and many others) for decades and was never accused of misquoting anything. I also carefully considered when to use ellipses, looking to be as succinct, accurate, informative and fair as possible. Something changed Trump's mind. You don't think so; that's fine.
 
Minoosh said:
I had already watched the video *clip*. I used ellipses, but without them it is almost impossible to render a coherent Donald J. Trump statement. It's true a quote is not the whole transcript - that's what makes it a quote. So I weighted the various verb tenses he did use - I think Russia did it, Russia won't be doing it, Putin shouldn't have done it ... and counted those as confirmation that in this particular case he believed Putin did "it."
Click to expand...


What the hell are you talking about? In #650 you quoted CNN, ABC and Priebus (without linking to sources), but not Trump. Where did you report what you found in the clip? I must have missed it.

And make it short, please. I'm not interested in the direction of bickering this conversation is taking. If you claim that Trump sounds "convinced" while inquiring if I think his tweets are reliable, well, fine. But not very convincing.
 
Last edited:
Childlike Empress said:
What the hell are you talking about? In #650 you quoted CNN, ABC and Priebus (without linking to sources), but not Trump. Where did you report what you found in the clip? I must have missed it.
Click to expand...
I reported what I found in the clip in that post. The words I quoted came from video footage. I linked to the video clip afterward. Priebus I read on Reuters.

You did not link to the transcript you quoted, either.

Childlike Empress said:
And make it short, please. I'm not interested in the direction of bickering this conversation is taking.
Click to expand...
For someone not interested in bickering, you seem pretty interested in bickering.
 
Minoosh said:
I reported what I found in the clip in that post. The words I quoted came from video footage. I linked to the video clip afterward. Priebus I read on Reuters.
Click to expand...


What? In #650 you inserted quoting containers marked as from media reporting, and obviously in the tone they would use. Where did you do anything of this:

Minoosh said:
I used ellipses, but without them it is almost impossible to render a coherent Donald J. Trump statement. It's true a quote is not the whole transcript - that's what makes it a quote. So I weighted the various verb tenses he did use - I think Russia did it, Russia won't be doing it, Putin shouldn't have done it ... and counted those as confirmation that in this particular case he believed Putin did "it."
Click to expand...


I haven't seen you use a single ellipse, and I also haven't seen you "gather all of this verbatim" like you claimed in #661. Which was the post that made me look up the transcript because I was confused by your response. What is "this"? So please go back in the thread and point me to the number of the post where you did what you are referring to here.

Minoosh said:
You did not link to the transcript you quoted, either.
Click to expand...


It's the last link in post #662, immediatly before the quote I did from it.

:confused:
 
ChristianProgressive said:
16 US Law enforcement and intelligence agencies, at least 1 British intelligence agency, and multiple independent media in both the US and England all agree it's not "paranoia".
Click to expand...

They can agree all they like but their election hacking "evidence" doesn't stand up to scrutiny.
 
jimbob said:
A golf writer claims Eric Trump told him three years ago that Trump golf courses had Russian funding

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/201...thers-golf-courses-got-funding-russia-arnold/
Click to expand...

I don't think that's new, other than perhaps the golf aspect.

Regarding the visa thing, I don't think there's anything criminal about it, but it's an incredible level of sleaze. You'd think these people would have had some clue how bad it was going to look.

ETA: Oops, the last bit goes in another thread, but oh, well, China, Russia, who cares?
 
Last edited:
logger said:
Its called politics. SOP when your emails are leaked.
Click to expand...

I used the modifier "possibly" while relating the claim that fake documents have been included with the leak while you confidently assert your claim none were based on nothing but cynicism. Nice one, m7.
 
Sideroxylon said:
I used the modifier "possibly" while relating the claim that fake documents have been included with the leak while you confidently assert your claim none were based on nothing but cynicism. Nice one, m7.
Click to expand...

And I'm trying to get you to see it is typical that Marconi would put that out. He surely wouldn't say "yes they're all real"
 
Childlike Empress said:
What? In #650 you inserted quoting containers marked as from media reporting, and obviously in the tone they would use. Where did you do anything of this:
Click to expand...
"Obviously in the tone they would use?" I think you're being a tad subjective here.

From my post 650, I took the quote from video clips I saw on those websites. I will check the article written, then check the video, and whatever the results I give credit to the media outlet involved; e.g. I cite ABC News if I use video clips provided by ABC News. If I sound like I'm using their tone please give an example.

Childlike Empress said:
I haven't seen you use a single ellipse,
Click to expand...

From my post 650. Attributed to ABC news coverage because that particular clip was on their website:

As far as hacking, "I think it was Russia," Trump said. Putin "should not be doing it. He won't be doing it. Russia will have much greater respect for our country when I am leading it than when other people have led it. ... he shouldn't have done it"
Click to expand...
The 3 dots near the end are an ellipsis. Done for clarity, not any attempt to deceive.

Childlike Empress said:
and I also haven't seen you "gather all of this verbatim" like you claimed in #661.
Click to expand...
Well, I did. Gather it verbatim. The stuff in quotes marks are Trump's words which is a general rule of mine. If paraphrasing I will say so.

Childlike Empress said:
Which was the post that made me look up the transcript because I was confused by your response. What is "this"?
Click to expand...
"This" is the material I gathered verbatim from video clips of Trump speaking. For some reason you did not accept that I was quoting Trump verbatim. I do give a media source if I find a video clip on their website. I confirmed link in Post 663.

Childlike Empress said:
So please go back in the thread and point me to the number of the post where you did what you are referring to here.
Click to expand...
In 650 I gathered the words verbatim from Trump's mouth. As evidenced on by the quote marks annotating a video clip. On Priebis I relied on Reuters. Reaffirming accurate quotations from Trump was in a later post that linked to footage.

You are right, you linked to the transcript. I missed that. Usually I will try to cite the particular source when I send forum-ites to an outside website. It's the way I was raised.

:confused:
Click to expand...
I hope you're no longer confused. I'm not very clever at retrieving post numbers, nesting multiple quotes, etc. I've tried to be clear here. General rule: If I quote someone I will confirm the quote in as many ways as I can. I'm more interested in relaying accurate quotes than I am in any "tone" you might accuse me of adopting.
 
logger said:
And I'm trying to get you to see it is typical that Marconi would put that out. He surely wouldn't say "yes they're all real"
Click to expand...


Yes, the idea you are thinking that was contained in my accusation of you basing your certain knowledge on nothing but cynicism. Do you need to look that term up?

Anway, would it be "typical" that someone looking to sink a political candidate by releasing a mass of documents on election eve, and too late for public fact checking processes, spice it up with disinformation?
In such a situation he surely wouldnt say, "Yes, they're all real."
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom