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 Crowdstrike , donald trump , Putin conspiracies , rudy giuliani , Trump controversies , Trump impeachment , vladimir putin

Reply
Old 25th January 2020, 03:08 PM   #41
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 17,906
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
1. Russia did't TRY to interfere; they did. That is well established.

BS. You really deserve what is coming to you in 2020.
__________________
Audiatur et altera pars
Childlike Empress 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 January 2020, 03:12 PM   #42
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 10,756
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Nothing screams "I don't have a serious complaint" like "tried to ban ferrets".
While I agree that the 'ban ferrets' (and marrying a second cousin) is nothing notorious, I also notice that you just ignore the rest of Mumbles' more serious list.
Stacyhs 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 January 2020, 03:54 PM   #43
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,862
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Two falsehoods in one sentence:

1. Russia did't TRY to interfere; they did. That is well established.

2. There is no way to determine if Russian interference affected the votes or not. It's impossible to identify how many voters fell victim to false information spread by the Russian campaign and had it affect their vote.
They interfered. Theres no evidence they succeeded in altering votes. That is well established. It's a serious issue that they even attempted it but again...

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
More falsehoods. The only person denying it was Trump. Obama was not so blind or stupid.
Obviously he was either negligent or just playing politics during an election season. You can say what you want about Trump denying Russian involvement. I take it at face value. But it's on record that the obama administration, Candidate Clinton and punditry absolutely ridiculed the complaint of a rigged election... that is of course until Trump won. Only AFTER he won did the 'left' claim he stole the election.

This is why i cant take some of this Putin puppetry threads claim seriously. It doesnt make Giuliani's activity moral or comforting at all... but there is only so much people can embellish the facts before it stinks of putrid waste

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
On the other hand, Trump repeatedly denied there was Russian interference in the election, said he had no reason to disbelieve Putin's denial, and balked at signing sanctions against Russia. From his 'perfect' phone call with Zelensky, it's obvious he's still reluctant to admit Russia was behind the election interference and wants to advance the debunked claim that Ukraine was behind it.


(same link as above)
Trump is full of it to Express those claims at face value. They did interfere. I agree. It doesnt exonerate the fact that people have short and long term memory issues about how and who got the blame for inaction and mockery. And my remarks on the history of this topic are spot on. You want me to start posting their remarks? You seem adamant that none of these remarks were made
__________________

Last edited by Grizzly Bear; 25th January 2020 at 04:01 PM.
Grizzly Bear 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 January 2020, 03:58 PM   #44
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 41,764
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Denial or Ignorance won't do anything but make you feel better.
Of course. How could I forget. It's Soros!
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
“Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos
a_unique_person 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 January 2020, 04:07 PM   #45
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 41,764
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Denial or Ignorance won't do anything but make you feel better.
OAN

Quote:
Russia

Further information:*Special Counsel investigation (2017–2019)*and*Timeline of Russian interference in the 2016 United States elections

OAN is known for downplaying threats posed to the United States by Russia. According to a former OAN producer, on his first day at OAN he was told, "Yeah, we like Russia here."[8][10]*One of OAN's reporters, Kristian Brunovich Rouz, simultaneously works for the*Russian propaganda*outlet and news agency*Sputnik, which is*state-owned; when Rouz runs segments on OAN that relate to Russia, OAN does not disclose that he also works for Sputnik.[20]

In September 2019, OAN filed suit in federal court in*San Diego, California*against*MSNBC*host*Rachel Maddow*for $10 million after Maddow described the network as "paid Russian propaganda" on her July 22nd program. Maddow had referenced a*Daily Beast*story identifying Rouz as also working for Sputnik. Also named in the suit were*Comcast, MSNBC and*NBCUniversal Media.[63]
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
“Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos
a_unique_person 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 January 2020, 04:11 PM   #46
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 17,906
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
OAN

Ad Hominem (against the producer of the documentary Ghouliani thought should be presented to the public more than a month ago) won't help you either against the reality shock that is coming to you.
__________________
Audiatur et altera pars
Childlike Empress 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 January 2020, 04:48 PM   #47
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,448
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
Obviously he was either negligent or just playing politics during an election season. You can say what you want about Trump denying Russian involvement. I take it at face value. But it's on record that the obama administration, Candidate Clinton and punditry absolutely ridiculed the complaint of a rigged election... that is of course until Trump won. Only AFTER he won did the 'left' claim he stole the election.
False, on multiple fronts. Toupee Fiasco has repeatedly denied the (verified by all intelligence services) Russian attempts at changing the outcome through social media tampering, as well as their hacking attempts. Instead, in keeping with his white supremacist conspiracy theory-loving campaign, he has baselessly declared that "millions of illegals" were being bussed around casting votes.

Obama and Clinton, naturally, agreed to the former (with Clinton discussing it before the election), and ignored the latter (which was just Dolt 45's usual racist crap)

Quote:
Trump is full of it to Express those claims at face value. They did interfere. I agree. It doesnt exonerate the fact that people have short and long term memory issues about how and who got the blame for inaction and mockery. And my remarks on the history of this topic are spot on. You want me to start posting their remarks? You seem adamant that none of these remarks were made
The person who deserves the most blame is the man who blocked any public federal announcement - Mitch McConnell, who, when asked to present a bipartisan front against Russian interference, instead promised to make it a strictly partisan issue.
Mumbles 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 January 2020, 05:08 PM   #48
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 10,756
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
They interfered. Theres no evidence they succeeded in altering votes. That is well established. It's a serious issue that they even attempted it but again...
Sigh. Unless you can find voters who 1) say they knew they were exposed to Russian operative sites spreading false info and 2) say it affected their vote, then no, there is no evidence that they succeeded in altering votes. But just how likely do you think that is? On the other hand, there is circumstantial evidence that it did affect how some people voted:

Quote:
...a University of Tennessee Knoxville study funded by the Defense Department found that Trump’s polling upticks during the 2016 campaign correlated with social media activity by Russian trolls and bots. According to the study, every 25,000 retweets from troll and bot accounts connected with Russia’s Internet Research Agency predicted a 1 percent bump in Trump’s polling.
Quote:
There is also a strong argument to be made that WikiLeaks, which published the first tranche of emails purloined from Clinton campaign chair John Podesta by Russian hackers just hours after the Washington Post published the Access Hollywood tape of Trump on October 7, swayed voters during the final month of the campaign. In this period, Trump overcame a string of sexual misconduct allegations and a 7-point deficit in the polls to win the election.
Quote:
It’s worth remembering that Trump’s closing message centered largely around WikiLeaks. He mentioned Julian Assange’s operation about five days a day during the campaign’s final month, but now pretends that never happened. (“Problematic is an understatement,” Mueller said on Wednesday about Trump’s promotion of WikiLeaks.) Is it possible the Clinton campaign email dumps and Trump’s relentless hyping of them on the campaign trail had no impact on the outcome of the election? It seems exceedingly unlikely.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...dley-no-impact

It's more than 'exceedingly unlikely' that no votes were affected by the Russian campaign. The only question is not 'if' but 'how many'? Anyone who can't see that is either being intentionally blind or suffering from the Dunning-Kruger Effect.


Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
Obviously he was either negligent or just playing politics during an election season. You can say what you want about Trump denying Russian involvement. I take it at face value.
Oh, boy. What would you suggest Obama have done? Bomb Russia? He warned Putin to stop, tried to warn the state governors about the interference, but the Republicans in Congress rebuffed it. He sanctioned Russia and threw out 35 of their diplomats. Trump? He sided with Putin and denied any interference because he feared it undermined his legitimacy and didn't want to sign the sanctions approved by Congress.

"You can say what you want about Trump denying Russian involvement. I take it at face value."
What the hell does that mean? Trump repeatedly denied Russian involvement against all of the Intelligence Agencies finding. Pull your head out of the hole.


Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
But it's on record that the obama administration, Candidate Clinton and punditry absolutely ridiculed the complaint of a rigged election... that is of course until Trump won. Only AFTER he won did the 'left' claim he stole the election.
The 'rigged election' complaint they ridiculed had nothing to do with Russia; it was Trump's claim that the election was rigged against him with millions of illegal immigrants and dead Democrats voting, people voting multiple times, and voters shipped in by busses. Please quote Obama or Clinton ever saying Trump 'stole' the election. Try and get your facts straight.

Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
This is why i cant take some of this Putin puppetry threads claim seriously. It doesnt make Giuliani's activity moral or comforting at all... but there is only so much people can embellish the facts before it stinks of putrid waste
I think there is a lot of hyperbolic nonsense by some people on the extent of Putin's control of Trump. No, Trump is not in the Putin's pocket. He's just a useful idiot and easily manipulated by not just Putin, but Kim Jong Un. Hell, it isn't difficult: just play to his narcissism.


Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
Trump is full of it to Express those claims at face value. They did interfere. I agree. It doesnt exonerate the fact that people have short and long term memory issues about how and who got the blame for inaction and mockery. And my remarks on the history of this topic are spot on.
As I've shown, your remarks on the history of this topic are definitely not 'spot on'. You've made several false statements which I've identified and presented evidence against.

Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
You want me to start posting their remarks? You seem adamant that none of these remarks were made
Exactly what remarks have I denied were ever made? Please quote me doing so.
Stacyhs 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 January 2020, 07:06 PM   #49
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,448
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I was not aware of most of that. I was thinking more of the Giuliani of 9/11.
Most people don't. Unless you were either in the area, or knew a lot of people who were, it wasn't discussed. Until 9/11, he was mostly given credit for a crime drop that actually started under Dinkens, and after that he was "America's Mayor".
Mumbles 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 January 2020, 07:12 PM   #50
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 10,756
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
Most people don't. Unless you were either in the area, or knew a lot of people who were, it wasn't discussed.
I live on the West Coast. I'd never heard of Giuliani before 9/11 and knew nothing of his politics.

Quote:
Until 9/11, he was mostly given credit for a crime drop that actually started under Dinkens, and after that he was "America's Mayor".
[/quote]

Rather like Trump taking credit for the good economy that started under Obama after he pulled us out of the worse economic downturn since the Great Depression.
Stacyhs 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 January 2020, 07:28 PM   #51
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 11,043
The DNC hacking alone, released right after the Hollywood Access Tapes, had a huge impact in damaging HRC and reducing the damage to Trump.

Anyone who thinks that Russia didn't decisively interfere in 2016 is motivated to think that way.
__________________
“Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”-Sen. Lindsey Graham
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 25th January 2020, 11:39 PM   #52
DetectedMotion
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 79
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
BS. You really deserve what is coming to you in 2020.
You are in denial aren't you? And I'm not talking about a river in Egypt.
DetectedMotion 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 27th January 2020, 08:50 AM   #53
ahhell
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,080
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
They interfered. Theres no evidence they succeeded in altering votes. That is well established. It's a serious issue that they even attempted it but again...



Obviously he was either negligent or just playing politics during an election season. You can say what you want about Trump denying Russian involvement. I take it at face value. But it's on record that the obama administration, Candidate Clinton and punditry absolutely ridiculed the complaint of a rigged election... that is of course until Trump won. Only AFTER he won did the 'left' claim he stole the election.

This is why i cant take some of this Putin puppetry threads claim seriously. It doesnt make Giuliani's activity moral or comforting at all... but there is only so much people can embellish the facts before it stinks of putrid waste


Trump is full of it to Express those claims at face value. They did interfere. I agree. It doesnt exonerate the fact that people have short and long term memory issues about how and who got the blame for inaction and mockery. And my remarks on the history of this topic are spot on. You want me to start posting their remarks? You seem adamant that none of these remarks were made
I just want to highlight that bolded bit. Some much of the anti-trump rhetoric is like that these days. All gilding the lily. There's is all sorts of stuff that he does that is bad but the anti-trumpist have to dial it all up to 11. Guiliani was in Ukraine doing shady **** with shady people, he doesn't have to be on Putin's payroll to make that bad. Sure, you could say he was working for Putin because Putin's goal is to stir up discord in the US, but again, doesn't need to be on Putin's payroll for that to be the case. Putin has succeeded beyond his wildest dreams by the way. Not because Trump was elected but because He's convinced half of America that the Trump was elected due to Russian hacking.
ahhell 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 27th January 2020, 06:42 PM   #54
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 10,756
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
I just want to highlight that bolded bit. Some much of the anti-trump rhetoric is like that these days. All gilding the lily. There's is all sorts of stuff that he does that is bad but the anti-trumpist have to dial it all up to 11. Guiliani was in Ukraine doing shady **** with shady people, he doesn't have to be on Putin's payroll to make that bad. Sure, you could say he was working for Putin because Putin's goal is to stir up discord in the US, but again, doesn't need to be on Putin's payroll for that to be the case. Putin has succeeded beyond his wildest dreams by the way. Not because Trump was elected but because He's convinced half of America that the Trump was elected due to Russian hacking.
Hyperbole. Half of Americans do not believe Trump won because of the Russian interference. In the last poll I could find (Gallup Poll. Aug. 1-12, 2018), only 39% believe Russian interference affected the election outcome.

https://www.pollingreport.com/russia.htm
Stacyhs 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 27th January 2020, 06:51 PM   #55
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 24,269
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
I just want to highlight that bolded bit. Some much of the anti-trump rhetoric is like that these days. All gilding the lily. There's is all sorts of stuff that he does that is bad but the anti-trumpist have to dial it all up to 11. Guiliani was in Ukraine doing shady **** with shady people, he doesn't have to be on Putin's payroll to make that bad. Sure, you could say he was working for Putin because Putin's goal is to stir up discord in the US, but again, doesn't need to be on Putin's payroll for that to be the case. Putin has succeeded beyond his wildest dreams by the way. Not because Trump was elected but because He's convinced half of America that the Trump was elected due to Russian hacking.
I can see why it might seem over the top. But even if Rudy wasn't working directly for Putin, the evidence he was working indirectly is there. And it isn't a stretch. Parnas and his partner who can be seen in videos with Rudy were being paid by a Russian oligarch with close ties to Putin.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla 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 28th January 2020, 06:37 AM   #56
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,862
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Sigh. Unless you can find voters who 1) say they knew they were exposed to Russian operative sites spreading false info and 2) say it affected their vote, then no, there is no evidence that they succeeded in altering votes. But just how likely do you think that is? On the other hand, there is circumstantial evidence that it did affect how some people voted:
Thank you for clarifying. Yes on this part you are right. And regardless of their succeeding or not it's a serious issue that requires people to be informed. I can only comment on the direct vote count manipulation which was the focus of my comments. As to the degree of impact on the election in 2016 there isn't hard evidence that it impacted the outcome, but I do believe it was effective enough at a minimum to impact partisan divides in the parties and impact the decisions of an uncomfortable number of voters.



Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Oh, boy. What would you suggest Obama have done? Bomb Russia? He warned Putin to stop, tried to warn the state governors about the interference, but the Republicans in Congress rebuffed it. He sanctioned Russia and threw out 35 of their diplomats. Trump? He sided with Putin and denied any interference because he feared it undermined his legitimacy and didn't want to sign the sanctions approved by Congress.
Warned state governors... in private
Warned Russia to stop... privately
Ousted 35 of their diplomats.... after the election.
I understand some of the logic may have been to avoid an outward appearance of tipping the scales toward Clinton, and I understand it may or may not have changed minds. But it smacks in the face of their public rebukes against election rigging late into the cycle. Furthermore, while I don't think Trump was smart to give Putin any legitimacy by peddling his denials on interference, whether he believed his own words or not, remember that by the logic of the threads hyperbole, we should be having this discussion about Obama telling Putin how much flexibility he would have after he won his second term.

This is foreign policy, and this thread remains a perfect example of how hyper partisans will ignore the actions of the politicians they like while dialing specific issues to the north degree when it concerns the ones they hate. Going by parts of your response to me your position doesn't rise to the level of the OP, so no worries there.

I'll get to the rest of your response later. Short on time.
But since you're being patient, I'll take the time to explain, and correct my remarks where needed.
__________________

Last edited by Grizzly Bear; 28th January 2020 at 06:43 AM.
Grizzly Bear 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 28th January 2020, 07:22 AM   #57
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,344
Talking

Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
I can see why it might seem over the top. But even if Rudy wasn't working directly for Putin, the evidence he was working indirectly is there. And it isn't a stretch. Parnas and his partner who can be seen in videos with Rudy were being paid by a Russian oligarch with close ties to Putin.
When you add to this that Rudy helped defend Jerome Corsi in the Mueller Investigation and it was Russian Television dirrectly from Moscow that got me to save Corsi in 2008 from his 9/11No Planer Theories then something becomes clear here.
Why 🦊 Fraud News, and the Republicans wanted to cover up that Corsi was Lying as was Sean Hannity also becomes pretty clear to me.
But I guess that's just a Crazy Conspiracy theory from a Crazy Chainsaw Guy.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 28th January 2020, 07:33 AM   #58
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 11,043
He is certainly being paid by Putin.
It would be a bit unusual if Vlad didn't get something for his money.
__________________
“Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”-Sen. Lindsey Graham
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 28th January 2020, 07:48 AM   #59
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,344
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
He is certainly being paid by Putin.
It would be a bit unusual if Vlad didn't get something for his money.
I think Putin Helped Barrack Obama get Elected not dirrectly but, though polarization of the African American vote, backlash from Corsi and Fox news. That would Explain why they wanted me to save Corsi in 2008, they knew he would try to Swift Boat Obama. They were Terrified of John McCain. They were using Corsi as a useful idiot.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 28th January 2020, 08:08 AM   #60
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 11,043
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
I think Putin Helped Barrack Obama get Elected not dirrectly but, though polarization of the African American vote, backlash from Corsi and Fox news. That would Explain why they wanted me to save Corsi in 2008, they knew he would try to Swift Boat Obama. They were Terrified of John McCain. They were using Corsi as a useful idiot.
I guess you can make that argument for 2008.
It would be harder to make for 2012, especially considering the Putin-HRC relationship.
__________________
“Impeachment is not about punishment. Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”-Sen. Lindsey Graham
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 28th January 2020, 08:23 AM   #61
llwyd
Muse
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 554
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
BS. You really deserve what is coming to you in 2020.
Are you privy to the coming operation? Can you give just a little hint?
llwyd 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 28th January 2020, 08:23 AM   #62
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,344
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
I guess you can make that argument for 2008.
It would be harder to make for 2012, especially considering the Putin-HRC relationship.
It's just a conspiracy theory for now so I posted it over their, I had always been bothered by that.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 28th January 2020, 08:46 AM   #63
DetectedMotion
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 79
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
Ad Hominem (against the producer of the documentary Ghouliani thought should be presented to the public more than a month ago) won't help you either against the reality shock that is coming to you.
Sure does make one wonder why the Republican Senate has voted out Audiatur et altera pars.
DetectedMotion 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 28th January 2020, 08:54 AM   #64
BrooklynBaby
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,080
This topic belongs in a CT thread.
BrooklynBaby 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 28th January 2020, 09:44 AM   #65
Crazy Chainsaw
Philosopher
 
Crazy Chainsaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 5,344
Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby View Post
This topic belongs in a CT thread.
I know people said I was nuts in 2008 too.
Crazy Chainsaw 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 28th January 2020, 09:59 AM   #66
Segnosaur
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 14,845
Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby View Post
This topic belongs in a CT thread.
Giuliani has acted in the best interests of Putin... between attempts to push the 'Ukraine hacking' myth which works to obscure Russia's role in election interference, and engaging in actions which are illegal (violating the Logan act) which harms America's standing in the world.

We do not have evidence that Giuliani is an actual paid employee or has received direct compensation from Putin or other Russian sources, but it certainly ACTS like e could be.
__________________
Trust me, I know what I'm doing. - Sledgehammer

I'm Mary Poppin's Y'all! - Yondu

We are Groot - Groot
Segnosaur 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 28th January 2020, 10:11 AM   #67
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 21,219
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
OAN
They promoted the conspiracy theory that the Syrian White Helmets gassed themselves with chemical weapons like a false flag attack, which might be why you are seeing them cited and defended by a certain poster here. They are staffed with a bunch of loony tunes kooks who have promoted Pizzagate, QAnon, Seth Rich conspiracy, etc. A few decades ago, an outfit like OAN would be left mumbling to themselves on streetcorners broadcasting on short wave radio or mimeographing conspiracy pamphlets to distribute at gun shows. It's kind of insane that they are treated like the real media.
carlitos 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 30th January 2020, 05:39 AM   #68
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 88,382
Originally Posted by Childlike Empress View Post
BS.
Yes, I know the exalted Putin denies it, so you follow suit.

What he meant was it's well-established in the world of reality, where several intelligence and law enforcement agencies have demonstrated the fact beyond any sane doubt.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... 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 30th January 2020, 10:15 AM   #69
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,862
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
What the hell does that mean? Trump repeatedly denied Russian involvement against all of the Intelligence Agencies finding. Pull your head out of the hole.
And I was saying you can throw that at me all you want to claim I'm wrong. I've never once denied that Trump said this. In fact I've made it clear that him saying as much was not only bad optics, but not in line with information released by the intelligence community.

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
The 'rigged election' complaint they ridiculed had nothing to do with Russia; it was Trump's claim that the election was rigged against him with millions of illegal immigrants and dead Democrats voting, people voting multiple times, and voters shipped in by busses. Please quote Obama or Clinton ever saying Trump 'stole' the election. Try and get your facts straight.
We can go tit for tat any day of the week about lost ballots, double voting, dead people voting, or Russian interference. I think Trump embellished his claims to be more than they were... Be that as it may, the very notion that the election interference would be an issue at all in public disclosures was ridiculed. Do not forget that.

Russia's interference was only publicly and outwardly decried and taken seriously when Trump won. Before that it was assumed that Hillary was going to win. Part of this doesn't surprise since a component of the outrage is a repeat of what happened in the Bush vs Gore election over the electoral college/popular vote issue.

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
I think there is a lot of hyperbolic nonsense by some people on the extent of Putin's control of Trump. No, Trump is not in the Putin's pocket. He's just a useful idiot and easily manipulated by not just Putin, but Kim Jong Un. Hell, it isn't difficult: just play to his narcissism.
Trump publicly says some idiotic stuff, I'll give you that; optics especially. Then again, his actions have not always matched with his words, and the same could be said of the previous administrations interactions with Putin or Russian leadership after the Soviet Union went south. We just don't have as many hot mic moments available to compare with past Presidents, most of them tend to favor their private interactions with leaders for that type of gossip. You don't really need hot mic moments with Trump to catch him blurting out this stuff

Otherwise, bolded part is on point and we agree.

Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
As I've shown, your remarks on the history of this topic are definitely not 'spot on'. You've made several false statements which I've identified and presented evidence against. Exactly what remarks have I denied were ever made? Please quote me doing so.
I would suggest re-reading some of the posts you've responded to. And then reading my clarifications. I've conceded some the issues that I recognized as being inaccurate and offered better explanations to the ones that you may have been confused about.

Not much else to say if you're not into the OP's level of hyperbole
__________________

Last edited by Grizzly Bear; 30th January 2020 at 10:17 AM.
Grizzly Bear 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 30th January 2020, 03:39 PM   #70
Cabbage
Master Poster
 
Cabbage's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 2,157
Originally Posted by Grizzly Bear View Post
Russia's interference was only publicly and outwardly decried and taken seriously when Trump won. Before that it was assumed that Hillary was going to win. Part of this doesn't surprise since a component of the outrage is a repeat of what happened in the Bush vs Gore election over the electoral college/popular vote issue.

Actually, there's a very good reason that it was only after the fact that it was publicly and outwardly decried, and that good reason is inconsistent with the assumptions you made in the latter part of your quote above:

Obama wanted to publicly release the knowledge that Russia was meddling in the election, but Moscow Mitch promised that if Obama did that, he (Mitch) would spin it as Obama trying to rig the election in Clinton's favor.
Cabbage 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 30th January 2020, 04:09 PM   #71
trustbutverify
Philosopher
 
trustbutverify's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 7,780
Originally Posted by Crazy Chainsaw View Post
Putin doesn't hire he uses idiots that work for free.
Why not both?
__________________
"The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated." -- Mahatma Gandhi

Wollen owns the stage
trustbutverify 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 30th January 2020, 06:42 PM   #72
Grizzly Bear
このマスクによっ
 
Grizzly Bear's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 7,862
Originally Posted by Cabbage View Post
Actually, there's a very good reason that it was only after the fact that it was publicly and outwardly decried, and that good reason is inconsistent with the assumptions you made in the latter part of your quote above:

Obama wanted to publicly release the knowledge that Russia was meddling in the election, but Moscow Mitch promised that if Obama did that, he (Mitch) would spin it as Obama trying to rig the election in Clinton's favor.
If the point was to avoid spin and the perception of rigging the election as it was, it hasn't done a very good job at it. Looking at things in hindsight with current affairs you have the impeachment prosecutors outright spinning the 2020 elections as immediately questionable if the incumbent wins on one hand. And the spin that the impeachment is a pre-emptive effort to undermine an upcoming election that's less than a year away on the other.

It's a damned if you do, damned if you don't thing. But there probably would be some appreciation if these matters were actually treated with consistency
__________________
Grizzly Bear 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 30th January 2020, 06:44 PM   #73
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,903
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
While I agree that the 'ban ferrets' (and marrying a second cousin) is nothing notorious, I also notice that you just ignore the rest of Mumbles' more serious list.
Obviously it's not a serious list for Mumbles. Why should it be a serious list for me?
theprestige 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 30th January 2020, 07:16 PM   #74
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 10,756
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Obviously it's not a serious list for Mumbles. Why should it be a serious list for me?
Assumes facts not in evidence. Mumbles presented nothing to support your assertion that it's not a serious list for him. We may agree that the banning of ferrets and marrying a (second) cousin is irrelevant, but that doesn't mean they are irrelevant to Mumbles.
Stacyhs 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 31st January 2020, 09:48 AM   #75
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 41,903
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Assumes facts not in evidence. Mumbles presented nothing to support your assertion that it's not a serious list for him. We may agree that the banning of ferrets and marrying a (second) cousin is irrelevant, but that doesn't mean they are irrelevant to Mumbles.
I concede the point. It's a serious list for Mumbles.
theprestige 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 31st January 2020, 07:47 PM   #76
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 10,756
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
I'll keep saying this - I see little daylight between the man now, and the man that :

launched his mayoral campaign in a racist cop riot,

tried to shut down a museum because he didn't like an exhibit,

pointlessly (and at great cost) unsealed the juvenile records of a police shooting victim because "he was no altar boy." (the victim had served as an altar boy at the same catholic HS Guiliani had attended);

married his second cousin;

told his wife he was remarrying by announcing it on tv;

tried to ban ferrets;

created and implemented the unconstitutional the Stop and Frisk program based on a complete misreading of a single study;

forced the city to build it's Joint Command center in WTC7 over all objections, despite the World Trade Center had already been attacked before (and by Al Qaida);

and has been involved in various two-bit schemes ever since.

The man did a good job locking up mobsters as AG, but even then he was reportedly a glory hound - and he's off his rocker ever since been making a fool of himself ever since, often at great expense and/or loss of life to those around him.
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I concede the point. It's a serious list for Mumbles.
Some of his list are serious for others, too. I've highlighted those I think would fall into that category. The Stop and Frisk policy was extremely serious to the African American and POC population.
Stacyhs 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 3rd February 2020, 03:37 PM   #77
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 7,448
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Some of his list are serious for others, too. I've highlighted those I think would fall into that category. The Stop and Frisk policy was extremely serious to the African American and POC population.
I’ll admit, the ferret ban is a goofy fact - certainly it’s just Giuliani being a nitwit, and nothing as serious as the WTC matter, or Stop and Frisk. The latter was plainly unconstitutional, and the former got many people killed when the towers fell - folks that were actually heroic that day.

Having said that, the ferret ban did happen thanks to Giuliani.

Last edited by Mumbles; 3rd February 2020 at 03:53 PM.
Mumbles 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 11:14 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.