ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags classified information , donald trump , national security issues , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 19th May 2017, 07:41 PM   #961
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 14,627
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
Yes.

In return, please ask yourself "If this were Clinton, would I be falling over myself as readily to find some excuse for her behavior?"
In all fairness, I've never ever ever ever seen in either party a bigger boob than Trump.

I fully admit I would surely be attacking probably most of the policies of any Republican President. Mocking their insensitivity to every day Americans and doing everything I could in maintaining the social safety net. But I can't imagine a more unfit person to be President than Donald J Trump. Impeaching Trump would make Pence President. Not an idea that is appealing. A religious anti-gay sexist nut in my view. At least Trump has expressed moderate views regarding social issues.

Frankly, I can't think of a single thing I agree with Pence on. At least Trump made infrastructure a big part of his campaign not that we've heard any real initiatives.

I don't want Pence to be President, but I think Trump is dangerous to everybody. Republicans should be looking for a way to send him packing as much maybe even more than Democrats.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 07:56 PM   #962
The Great Zaganza
Master Poster
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,895
TBH, the amount of revelations about Russian involvement and Trump incompetence is getting too much for me: I suspected both, but ont on this scale (and the investigations aren't even done yet).
One the one hand it feels good not to have been wrong when millions of voters and most of the media falsely declared that all of this was not a big deal.
But on the other: WTF, how can anyone, including the Russians, be so stupid?

At the very least, they should have put a non-compete clause in their deal with Flynn: taking money from Russia and Turkey is not the way to stay under the radar of counter-intelligence.

Last edited by The Great Zaganza; 19th May 2017 at 07:57 PM.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 08:11 PM   #963
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 14,627
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
TBH, the amount of revelations about Russian involvement and Trump incompetence is getting too much for me: I suspected both, but ont on this scale (and the investigations aren't even done yet).
One the one hand it feels good not to have been wrong when millions of voters and most of the media falsely declared that all of this was not a big deal.
But on the other: WTF, how can anyone, including the Russians, be so stupid?

At the very least, they should have put a non-compete clause in their deal with Flynn: taking money from Russia and Turkey is not the way to stay under the radar of counter-intelligence.
I think Flynn is going to prison but that doesn't address Trump. I don't even really care about the Russia scandal. I figure Trump has been colluding with them. But that doesn't bother me as much as his nonstop attacks on the checks and balances built into the American system of government. The claims of 'fake news' and his obsession with himself is enough. The man has terrible character flaws. We need to find a way to get rid of him.
__________________
“ A wise man proportions his belief to the evidence. ”
― David Hume
acbytesla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 08:26 PM   #964
Bob001
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 5,690
Originally Posted by The Don View Post
....
Why does he have to retire ? I'm pretty sure he could have declined the post (IIRC others did) and even if he felt compelled to fill the post, he could have done so with honour and not been a lying mouthpiece for the Trump administration.
....
Other people who turned Trump down were EX-military. As an active duty general, McMaster pretty much has to accept his orders or retire. Or maybe end his career at a radar station in Greenland.

I hope his motive was to serve as some kind of counterweight to Trump and the crazies around him. But his reputation is suffering, and Trump doesn't like him anyway.
https://www.salon.com/2017/05/09/nat...eport-alleges/
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 08:27 PM   #965
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,106
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I don't care when he lied. The claim was that "Trump flat out lied about his relationship with Putin." He either did it when he talked about having a friendship with Putin or when he said he never met the man. In either case, Varwoche's claim is undeniably true.
I think this really seals it. I cannot fathom how there could possibly be more evidence of a lie. Even if he outright stated, "I totally lied about all this stuff," then it could just be chalked up as "exaggeration."
I Am The Scum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 08:41 PM   #966
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,600
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post


The only thing that really sets Russia apart is that they *used to be* our enemy: The Cold War.

.
We have always been at war with Eurasia.
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th May 2017, 10:18 PM   #967
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,426
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
TBH, the amount of revelations about Russian involvement and Trump incompetence is getting too much for me: I suspected both, but ont on this scale (and the investigations aren't even done yet).

Yeah. If what we've been hearing lately is just the stuff that's been reaching the public, you have to wonder what kind of information is being held closer to the chest.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 07:20 AM   #968
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,423
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Please provide supporting evidence for those claims. Evidence that is actually evidence, not "someone accused someone else of this thing".
Cat, it really seems from this post that you've not followed this issue at all except from this forum. Because to ask for supporting evidence for these things shows total ignorance of the Russian hacking topic.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th May 2017, 07:21 AM   #969
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,423
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Sure, I can see that interpretation.
The two claims are mutually-exclusive Cat. This isn't an interpretation. It isn't even a scientific conclusion. It's a logical certainty.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2017, 12:36 PM   #970
SezMe
post-pre-born
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 22,255
Originally Posted by SezMe View Post
That's your error. You cannot assume that what is reported publicly is the totality of what Trump blurted out at the meeting.
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Okay... on what basis do you assume that what he blurted out was substantially more than what has been reported?
Really bad reasoning here. Assume we are both looking at the engine and 2-3 train cars coming out of a tunnel:
EC: That train is short.
SM: You cannot assume that.
EC: On what basis do you assert that it is long.

Can't you see the error of that logic on your part?
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2017, 01:31 PM   #971
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 15,768
Originally Posted by SezMe View Post
Originally Posted by SezMe View Post
That's your error. You cannot assume that what is reported publicly is the totality of what Trump blurted out at the meeting.
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Okay... on what basis do you assume that what he blurted out was substantially more than what has been reported?
Really bad reasoning here. Assume we are both looking at the engine and 2-3 train cars coming out of a tunnel:
EC: That train is short.
SM: You cannot assume that.
EC: On what basis do you assert that it is long.

Can't you see the error of that logic on your part?
Also remember that various news sources have said that there is more, whilst someone who has previously lied about this has denied it.

I'm going with, there is more - although if the intelligence community think that naming the city was sufficient to compromise their source, then I also have nothing to argue against that, and note that we do not know the city, although the Russian Press possibly does.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st May 2017, 07:12 PM   #972
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,519
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
If it's public knowledge, available from the interwebs in news articles... is it still a massive and scandalous breach of security?
The counter-measures were public knowledge, not the Intel.

Previously the guys at ISIS only knew that the change in airline policy would make their plans harder to carry out. They may have wondered if it was from a leak in their organization, but it could also be that a different organization had tried to make a bomb from a laptop lithium-ion battery, or that someone's security organization figured out the possibility, or a any number of possibilities.

Now they know for certain it was a leak in their organization. They will look for it hard, and heads could literally roll.

Sent from my SM-N910P using Tapatalk
Mycroft is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2017, 08:24 AM   #973
Stacko
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 8,826
Trump admits (again) that he disclosed classified intel.
TRUMP stops the press before they leave pool spray w/ Netanyahu: "Folks, just so you know I never mentioned the name Israel (in Russia mtg)"
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2017, 08:49 AM   #974
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,025
Originally Posted by Stacko View Post
I'm torn between desperation for it to be gone forever and desperation that it would learn when to keep its stupid mouth shut.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2017, 12:24 PM   #975
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 9,142
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
I was reading her whole post saying those words out loud to myself. I knew it was going to be hilarious when it started with:



That's some pretty disingenuous **** right there. He blatantly said something, and has had all the time in the world to correct the record. Literally thousands of times to correct the record, and he never has. Now he's balls deep in this Russia thing and he's trying to backpedal.
Holy cow, context is just lost here, isn't it?

Two potentials:

1) Trump lied several years ago in order to exaggerate his relationship with Russia regarding a beauty pageant. He hadn't actually had any meaningful contact with Putin, but thought it made him sound more important if he claimed he did.

2) Trump lied recently in order to downplay his relationship with Russia regarding his campaign. He had actually had significant and repeated contact with Putin, but thought it made him sound less culpable if he claimed he didn't.

*** It is also possible that both are true statements.

Consequences:

Assume that #1 is true: Trump previously exaggerated an immaterial contact with Putin into something more significant. What are the ramifications? Well, Trump is a liar. Beyond that? Nothing. No consequences other than that some people get to point out that he lied about something. Woopdedoo, the man lies about so many things, this is truly inconsequential. What it doesn't do is provide any actual evidence that Trump colluded with Russia in order to win the election.

Assume that #2 is true: Trump currently downplayed a material contact with Putin into something less significant. What are the ramifications. Well, Trump is a liar. Beyond that? Significant ramifications. Trump would have materially engaged in an illegal activity (potentially treason) in order to win the election. Try him for treason and behead him! You have my full support.

*** If #3 is true, it defaults to the consequences for #2.

Current evidence:

We have evidence that Trump claimed contact with Putin prior to his campaign, with respect the the beauty pageant. There seems to be at least some indication that some degree of contact did actually occur. We have no evidence that suggests it was a substantial amount of contact, or that it was meaningful in any way.

We do not as yet have any solid evidence that Trump colluded with Russia regarding his campaign and subsequent election.

Did he lie? Of course he did, the man lies wantonly. Did he lie in a material and meaningful way? So far, there doesn't seem to be any evidence to support that conclusion.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2017, 12:27 PM   #976
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 39,997
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Sorry, that's nuts. He lied about getting a consensual blowjob from someone other than his wife. If you can tell me how the knowledge of that is the government's business then I might agree. But I don't see it.
Yes it isn't like something minor like an attorney general lying to congress about their ties to russia, that is totally expected and OK now.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2017, 12:27 PM   #977
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 9,142
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I don't care when he lied. The claim was that "Trump flat out lied about his relationship with Putin." He either did it when he talked about having a friendship with Putin or when he said he never met the man. In either case, Varwoche's claim is undeniably true.
Bill Clinton flat out lied about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

One of the potential lies in Varwoche's claim supports the allegation of collusion. One of the potential lies weakens the allegation of collusion. Seems like that should matter. Simply saying "he lied" doesn't actually swing the needle one way or another if you ignore the context.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2017, 12:32 PM   #978
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 39,997
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
That doesn't seem to be a hang-up with the large swathes of the world where those things are also true. Like almost the entirety of Central and South America, the overwhelming majority of the continent of Africa, and most of Asia and Indonesia. Like nearly every bit of the Middle East. Pretty much everywhere except an arc of western Europe and Canada. They all demonstrate a lack of democratic principles and liberties - sometimes shockingly so. They all have some degree of discrimination against certain minorities, ethnicities, sexual preferences, and genders. They all have massive corruption and engage in highly questionable political and military antics.

Yet many of those countries are viewed as allies, or at least tolerated bed-partners. In fact, saying bad things about some of those countries is viewed as bigotry and close-mindedness.

The only thing that really sets Russia apart is that they *used to be* our enemy: The Cold War.
And they have set their sights on some of our allies like Estonia. But you would expect a businessman like trump to get only the best payment for selling out our allies.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2017, 12:37 PM   #979
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 39,997
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I always thought Cold War thinking was "Russians are the bad guys in all things". I always though the "Godless Commies" bit was the justification. That might be a meaningless distinction though, I suppose.
I guess their conquest of their neighbors is really a good thing then.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2017, 12:41 PM   #980
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 39,997
Originally Posted by tyr_13 View Post
This is ridiculous. He outright lied. He claims to have directly spoken to Putin, then claims he's never spoken with him. The other details aside, he's not only being dishonest about his connections with Putin, he's outright lying. No spin, no interpretation, outright lying. The interpretation part comes in for what his lying means, not if it's lying or not.

*************** is lying. It's a type of lying, which still makes it lying.
That is because you have to take him seriously and not literally. All trump supporters like Emily know better that. He can't be lying when you know not to think anything he says bears any relation to reality.

He is the first post modern president.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2017, 01:13 PM   #981
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,819
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Bill Clinton flat out lied about his relationship with Monica Lewinsky.

One of the potential lies in Varwoche's claim supports the allegation of collusion. One of the potential lies weakens the allegation of collusion. Seems like that should matter. Simply saying "he lied" doesn't actually swing the needle one way or another if you ignore the context.
I won't deny context matters. Part of the context of Trump's lies about Russian contacts is that others in his circle have similarly lied about contacts with Russians -- contacts which evidently occurred.

That said, I certainly don't know whether Trump ever met Putin or not. It's clear that he didn't meet him when they both appeared on 60 Minutes, since they were not in the same studio.

In the end, you asked for evidence regarding Varwoche's claim. We can see that his first claim (Trump lied about his relationship with Putin) is undeniable. If you want to dispute relevance, that's another matter.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2017, 04:25 PM   #982
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 9,142
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I won't deny context matters. Part of the context of Trump's lies about Russian contacts is that others in his circle have similarly lied about contacts with Russians -- contacts which evidently occurred.

That said, I certainly don't know whether Trump ever met Putin or not. It's clear that he didn't meet him when they both appeared on 60 Minutes, since they were not in the same studio.

In the end, you asked for evidence regarding Varwoche's claim. We can see that his first claim (Trump lied about his relationship with Putin) is undeniable. If you want to dispute relevance, that's another matter.
I will conceded that Varwoche's statement, absent context, is correct. I will contest, however, that the implied meaning of Varwoche's statement is correct. It seemed clear to me that Varwoche's implied meaning was that Trump lied about how closely he was connected to Putin and that this supported allegations of collusion.

I also agree that the volume of cases of "no contact" turning into "some contact" is very troubling. What I don't know, and am still trying to figure out, is whether any of those contacts were meaningful. Aside from Sessions, there doesn't seem to be anything particularly concrete.

With Sessions, at least there is some solid pre-existing political connection, and at least some allegation that he discussed things he shouldn't have discussed, regarding the sanctions.

On the other hand... "Calm down, don't overreact. Yes, I know Obama is pre-emptively punishing you for meddling in the election without any actual evidence, but just chill. Trump will be in office in a couple of months, maybe we can take a look then" doesn't really seem like a bad message.... and so far as I can tell, that's essentially what Sessions is accused of having done. Inappropriate, sure, he shouldn't have been talking about future possibilities.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 22nd May 2017, 08:50 PM   #983
The Great Zaganza
Master Poster
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,895
Why did Trump go to such massive lengths to obfuscate the relationships of his team with Russia if there was nothing there?
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 02:14 AM   #984
TofuFighter
Graduate Poster
 
TofuFighter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,548
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
I will conceded that Varwoche's statement, absent context, is correct. I will contest, however, that the implied meaning of Varwoche's statement is correct. It seemed clear to me that Varwoche's implied meaning was that Trump lied about how closely he was connected to Putin and that this supported allegations of collusion.

I also agree that the volume of cases of "no contact" turning into "some contact" is very troubling. What I don't know, and am still trying to figure out, is whether any of those contacts were meaningful. Aside from Sessions, there doesn't seem to be anything particularly concrete.

With Sessions, at least there is some solid pre-existing political connection, and at least some allegation that he discussed things he shouldn't have discussed, regarding the sanctions.

On the other hand... "Calm down, don't overreact. Yes, I know Obama is pre-emptively punishing you for meddling in the election without any actual evidence, but just chill. Trump will be in office in a couple of months, maybe we can take a look then" doesn't really seem like a bad message.... and so far as I can tell, that's essentially what Sessions is accused of having done. Inappropriate, sure, he shouldn't have been talking about future possibilities.


AFAIK it was Flynn who discussed easing of sanctions with Kislyak. It was one of the major issues leading to his resignation in that he initially denied discussing the topic, with Pence supporting his denial, only to be contradicted by intelligence agencies with knowledge about it. Pence denied knowledge and the axe fell on Flynn.

"pre-emptively punishing you for meddling in the election without any actual evidence"
- The Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, described Russia’s alleged involvement in the 2016 vote as a “serious issue” and “one that we know” about.
- "A joint report from the CIA, FBI and NSA claims orders for a hacking and propaganda against candidate Hillary Clinton came from the “highest levels” of the Russian government."

Or perhaps you're hanging your hat on: Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov responded that “not a single fact has been confirmed”

I'm starting to wonder about either your knowledge of this subject or mine.
__________________
"come on. Judas is meeting us at midnight with the getaway donkeys"
TofuFighter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 07:54 AM   #985
ddt
Mafia Penguin
 
ddt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 17,533
Originally Posted by jimbob View Post
Also remember that various news sources have said that there is more, whilst someone who has previously lied about this has denied it.

I'm going with, there is more - although if the intelligence community think that naming the city was sufficient to compromise their source, then I also have nothing to argue against that, and note that we do not know the city, although the Russian Press possibly does.
There was a Russian photographer present in the Oval Office when this happened, so yes, at least one member of the Russian press does know it.
__________________
Founder of the group "The Truth about Anjezë Gonxhe Bojaxhiu aka Mother Teresa"

"I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people." - "Saint" Teresa, the lying thieving Albanian dwarf
ddt is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 08:05 AM   #986
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 10,501
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Holy cow, context is just lost here, isn't it?

Two potentials:

1) Trump lied several years ago in order to exaggerate his relationship with Russia regarding a beauty pageant. He hadn't actually had any meaningful contact with Putin, but thought it made him sound more important if he claimed he did.

2) Trump lied recently in order to downplay his relationship with Russia regarding his campaign. He had actually had significant and repeated contact with Putin, but thought it made him sound less culpable if he claimed he didn't.
...
You still have the facts wrong. He was still claiming to have met Putin during the campaign. See post #1 of Trump+Russia thread, where this conversation belongs.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.

Last edited by varwoche; 23rd May 2017 at 08:16 AM.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 08:48 AM   #987
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 9,142
Originally Posted by TofuFighter View Post


AFAIK it was Flynn who discussed easing of sanctions with Kislyak. It was one of the major issues leading to his resignation in that he initially denied discussing the topic, with Pence supporting his denial, only to be contradicted by intelligence agencies with knowledge about it. Pence denied knowledge and the axe fell on Flynn.

"pre-emptively punishing you for meddling in the election without any actual evidence"
- The Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, described Russia’s alleged involvement in the 2016 vote as a “serious issue” and “one that we know” about.
- "A joint report from the CIA, FBI and NSA claims orders for a hacking and propaganda against candidate Hillary Clinton came from the “highest levels” of the Russian government."

Or perhaps you're hanging your hat on: Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov responded that “not a single fact has been confirmed”

I'm starting to wonder about either your knowledge of this subject or mine.
You are correct, I mixed up names.

Regarding the rest... There are again, plenty of allegations and plenty of speculation and a whole ton of "an undisclosed source on condition of anonymity was willing to violate secrecy and confidentiality at the highest level to tell us that it's totally Russia".

We also, however, have:
http://www.snopes.com/2016/06/17/guc...-for-dnc-hack/
http://www.snopes.com/2016/07/25/wha...eaks-dncleaks/
http://www.snopes.com/2017/01/03/jul...s-dnc-e-mails/

So, sure, I suppose it's possible that WikiLeaks has transformed itself into a conservative stooge helping out the republicans... but that seems a bit far fetched. And I suppose it's possible that Snopes has decided to play the long con and stop providing reliable fact checking for hoaxes and falsehoods, and is instead a part of the now-massive conspiracy theory in play. Sure, that's possible. But WikiLeaks has previously been held as a reliable and honest source of whistle-blower-style information, and Snopes has previously been held as a reliable and unbiased source of fact-checking.

So unless you have good reason to suggest that both WikiLeaks and Snopes have gone over the dark side, I'm inclined to treat them as somewhat more credible than an unnamed source speaking on condition of anonymity while violating secrecy and confidentiality in order to leak to the press that secret sources that nobody can verify totally say it was totally Russia.

It could certainly have been Russia. That is a possibility. But the more people and organizations required to be involved in this conspiracy, the less likely it seems to me that it is a conspiracy.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 11:16 AM   #988
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
Why did Trump go to such massive lengths to obfuscate the relationships of his team with Russia if there was nothing there?
Because he is Trump. Any attempt to understand the nuances of such a mind is useless.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 04:03 PM   #989
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 9,142
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
Why did Trump go to such massive lengths to obfuscate the relationships of his team with Russia if there was nothing there?
Does it count as obfuscation if there's nothing there?

Not saying there's nothing there, just challenging the logic here.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 04:28 PM   #990
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,025
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Does it count as obfuscation if there's nothing there?

Not saying there's nothing there, just challenging the logic here.
Think it through...perhaps this example will help: I just met someone named Sam Snider. He was next to me on the bus this morning and we had a nice chat about the NBA Playoffs. This was the extent of our contact. It's 5 p.m. now and a police officer is at my door asking me if I know someone named Sam Snider. No other context, no mention of any crimes, etc.

If I tell the police officer "No, I've never met someone named Sam Snider," am I not obfuscating (it's actually lying, but going with the word choice)? Nothing important happened on the bus and nothing was said that could possibly be of interest to a police officer. I'd still be lying and I could definitely be charged with obstruction of justice (or lying to a police officer; it depends on the jurisdiction) if it was discovered that I had actually met that person, despite the fact that neither the meeting nor our discussion were in any way wrong or illegal. I could be charged even if telling the officer would not have advanced their investigation the tiniest bit.

Last edited by Babbylonian; 23rd May 2017 at 04:31 PM.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 06:56 PM   #991
TellyKNeasuss
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,891
Originally Posted by Stacko View Post
And in doing so he disclosed classified information to everybody.
__________________
"Facts are stupid things."
Ronald Reagan


TellyKNeasuss is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 07:15 PM   #992
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 9,426
"I didn't tell the Russians that the intel came from Israel. Ok? I didn't say that."
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 07:59 PM   #993
The Great Zaganza
Master Poster
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 2,895
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
Does it count as obfuscation if there's nothing there?

Not saying there's nothing there, just challenging the logic here.
As the Babbylonian said, it's not up to Trump to decide what is and what isn't relevant in an investigation into Flynn or others on his team.
So yes, it's definitely obfuscation.
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 08:03 PM   #994
skyeagle409
Master Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 2,248
I find this interesting:

Quote:
Brennan says Trump might have violated two protocols in meeting with Russian officials

Schiff asked Brennan about the Oval Office meeting recently in which Trump reportedly shared classified intelligence with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and Russia's ambassador to the U.S., Sergey Kislyak. Brennan said that if the press reports are accurate, then it appears that the president violated two protocols. First, he said that intelligence is not shared with visiting foreign ministers or local ambassadors; it's shared through intelligence channels to ensure that it's handled correctly. Second, Brennan explained that before sharing classified information with foreign partners, it needs to go back to the originating agency to ensure that the language won't reveal sources or methods.

"Neither did it go in the proper channels nor did the originating agency have an opportunity to clear the language for it," Brennan said.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/former-c...-live-updates/
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd May 2017, 08:36 PM   #995
SezMe
post-pre-born
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 22,255
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
On the other hand... "Calm down, don't overreact. Yes, I know Obama is pre-emptively punishing you for meddling in the election without any actual evidence, but just chill. Trump will be in office in a couple of months, maybe we can take a look then" doesn't really seem like a bad message.... and so far as I can tell, that's essentially what Sessions is accused of having done. Inappropriate, sure, he shouldn't have been talking about future possibilities.
I believe it is illegal for a private citizen (which Flynn was at the time) to mess around in state-level foreign affairs.
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2017, 09:57 AM   #996
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 9,142
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Think it through...perhaps this example will help: I just met someone named Sam Snider. He was next to me on the bus this morning and we had a nice chat about the NBA Playoffs. This was the extent of our contact. It's 5 p.m. now and a police officer is at my door asking me if I know someone named Sam Snider. No other context, no mention of any crimes, etc.

If I tell the police officer "No, I've never met someone named Sam Snider," am I not obfuscating (it's actually lying, but going with the word choice)? Nothing important happened on the bus and nothing was said that could possibly be of interest to a police officer. I'd still be lying and I could definitely be charged with obstruction of justice (or lying to a police officer; it depends on the jurisdiction) if it was discovered that I had actually met that person, despite the fact that neither the meeting nor our discussion were in any way wrong or illegal. I could be charged even if telling the officer would not have advanced their investigation the tiniest bit.
Good analogy.

This ends up being one of those ridiculously lawyerly situations. If the policeman asks "Do you know Sam Snider", you could very honestly say no. If you met a guy named Sam on the bus, but he didn't tell you his last name, you could very honestly say no. If you had forgotten the name of the random guy next to you on the bus, you could honestly say no. But the specific question of "Have you ever met Sam Snider", presuming that you recall his name, would require an answer of yes to be considered honest.

In the case of Flynn...

Do you know?
Have you met?
Have you met with?
Have you interacted with?
Have you had dealings with?
Have you had contact with?

Those could have a variety of different answers and all be honest.

Has Flynn had interactions of any sort at all with Russians? Yepperooni.
Were any of those interactions meaningful? I have no idea at present (I presume more information will be forthcoming).
How much does intent-vs-letter come into play with this scenario? That's a question for the courts, I'm not touching it.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2017, 09:58 AM   #997
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 9,142
Originally Posted by TellyKNeasuss View Post
And in doing so he disclosed classified information to everybody.
Holy cow. It's information that the press already leaked abundantly and with zeal!
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2017, 10:02 AM   #998
Emily's Cat
Knows how to push buttons... er... press keys
 
Emily's Cat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Pacific Northwet
Posts: 9,142
Originally Posted by SezMe View Post
I believe it is illegal for a private citizen (which Flynn was at the time) to mess around in state-level foreign affairs.
Okay then, I guess.

What if my great-aunt is a foreign ambassador, and I happen to be friends with a us representative that she has dealings with? If she gets pissed of at him, and calls me to complain, and I tell her not to be rash, just let it cool off for a couple of days... does that make me a traitor?

Just in case it isn't clear to anyone, This is me pretty much playing around with the logic here. This isn't a serious argument, it's not opposition. I'm surprised by how often things like this are taken seriously, when I think it's perfectly obvious that I'm pushing it into absurdity to see whether it holds, or how other people's perspectives shift.
__________________
I am me. I am just me. I'm a little like other cats... but mostly I am just me.
Emily's Cat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th May 2017, 10:11 AM   #999
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 11,185
Originally Posted by TellyKNeasuss View Post
And in doing so he disclosed classified information to everybody.
That is just part of his plan to "Make America Great Again".

But please note, Trump never did actually specify just who he is going to make American great for.
__________________
On 16 MAY 2017 Paul Bethke discussed some of the sexual prohibitions of his god regarding man-to-man sex acts and woman-to-woman sex acts: "So not only lesbian acts but also anal sex.."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0#post11840580

A man's best friend is his dogma.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th May 2017, 01:23 AM   #1000
TofuFighter
Graduate Poster
 
TofuFighter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,548
Originally Posted by Emily's Cat View Post
... This isn't a serious argument, it's not opposition. I'm surprised by how often things like this are taken seriously, when I think it's perfectly obvious that I'm pushing it into absurdity to see whether it holds, or how other people's perspectives shift.
Thanks for posting this, it probably saves me some future time. I wish I'd known it before I read through those meaningless Snopes links that you posted and written a long rebuttal.
__________________
"come on. Judas is meeting us at midnight with the getaway donkeys"
TofuFighter is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:03 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.