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 "A Warning" , donald trump , Trump administration , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 28th October 2020, 03:42 PM   #81
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 14,275
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
Should anonymous make herself known? (I'm using that pronoun to cover all genders and non-genders.)

If anonymous were a cabinet level official like Pompeo or Haley, then, yes, she should have publicly broken with the administration. But if it's some no-name, UK-born Putin nerd, then this seems like THE way to maximize the resistance. A no-name person would not get nearly this much attention for writing the same exact thing. People want intrigue and mystery.
This reveal helps Trump. Christ, is everyone in that administration incompetent? I wouldn't trust them run a cathouse.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain 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 October 2020, 04:01 PM   #82
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 49,661
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Well, that's disappointing. I was hoping it would be someone bigger.
Assistant Regional Manager, at least.
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 28th October 2020, 04:31 PM   #83
dmaker
Graduate Poster
 
dmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 1,686
Assistant to the regional manager
dmaker 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 October 2020, 04:55 PM   #84
dirtywick
Illuminator
 
dirtywick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,128
Maybe him, Paul Ryan, and John Bolton can go on a book tour together. Following a long line of noble, courageous men who, when their country called, sat quietly and only spoke out when they could maximize their personal profits.
dirtywick 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 October 2020, 05:07 PM   #85
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 49,661
Originally Posted by dirtywick View Post
Maybe him, Paul Ryan, and John Bolton can go on a book tour together. Following a long line of noble, courageous men who, when their country called, sat quietly and only spoke out when they could maximize their personal profits.
Did any of them speak out about anything that would have changed anything if they'd done it while still on the job?
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 28th October 2020, 05:58 PM   #86
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 49,661
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
This isn't a science journal with peer reviews, Bob. It's the experiences of a senior WH official as verified by the NYT.
Turns out it's not a senior White House official. Didn't stop the NYT from saying he was, though. Didn't stop people from appealing to the authority of the NYT, though.
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 28th October 2020, 06:22 PM   #87
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 18,012
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Turns out it's not a senior White House official. Didn't stop the NYT from saying he was, though. Didn't stop people from appealing to the authority of the NYT, though.
Wow...you really had to go looking for that one from a year ago, didn't you? A post that really has virtually no importance or relevancy in the scheme of things considering what we know about Trump now and are experiencing a year later. I have to wonder why you'd even bother looking through a year old thread when you could have said the exact same thing without bringing me into it. Actually, I don't have to wonder.
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 28th October 2020, 06:27 PM   #88
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
 
alfaniner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Sorth Dakonsin
Posts: 24,888
Just had an interview with Chris Cuomo on CNN, who called him out on the obvious questions. However, in following the news as much as I have, his name has not really made a blip in my consciousness. I doubt any of the revelations he has made will make any difference at this point.
__________________
Science is self-correcting.
Woo is self-contradicting.
alfaniner 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 29th October 2020, 06:30 AM   #89
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 49,661
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Wow...you really had to go looking for that one from a year ago, didn't you? A post that really has virtually no importance or relevancy in the scheme of things considering what we know about Trump now and are experiencing a year later. I have to wonder why you'd even bother looking through a year old thread when you could have said the exact same thing without bringing me into it. Actually, I don't have to wonder.
Do you think the NYT has gotten better at verifying its anonymous sources, and accurately reporting the results of its verification process, in the past year?

I think the amount of faith we put in organs like the New York Times, and whether that faith is justified, has a lot of importance and relevancy in the scheme of things. Last year, this year, next year, any year.

Also, it's not my fault we had to wait a year to find out who the author was. And there's no statute of limitations on the claim it was a senior official. I grant that Walter Duranty was a long time ago, and everyone who enabled him at the NYT is now long gone. But the people telling you Anonymous was a senior official last year are still at the NYT today, still telling you stuff today. Don't lash out at me for bringing it up. It's one of the more significant parts of the story, in my opinion.
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 29th October 2020, 06:38 AM   #90
timhau
NWO Litter Technician
 
timhau's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Looks like Finland. Smells like Finland. Quacks like Finland. Where the hell am I?
Posts: 14,474
Hey, I have an idea: let's bicker about the messenger, so we don't have to touch the message or its credibility!
__________________
When I was a kid I used to pray every night for a new bicycle. Then I realised that the Lord, in his wisdom, doesn't work that way. I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me.
- Emo Philips

Last edited by timhau; 29th October 2020 at 06:42 AM.
timhau 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 29th October 2020, 06:38 AM   #91
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,719
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Wow...you really had to go looking for that one from a year ago, didn't you? A post that really has virtually no importance or relevancy in the scheme of things considering what we know about Trump now and are experiencing a year later. I have to wonder why you'd even bother looking through a year old thread when you could have said the exact same thing without bringing me into it. Actually, I don't have to wonder.
I reckon he's primarily aiming his barb at the NYT and he has a point, sort of. Chief of Staff of DHS is one of the top political appointees of DHS. Does that mean he is or is not a "senior White House official"? If not, the NYT should be criticized.

But "senior White House official" has no clearly defined meaning, far as I know, and I'd say there's more than enough plausibility to say that DHS chief of staff is such an official.
phiwum 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 29th October 2020, 06:42 AM   #92
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 20,239
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Do you think the NYT has gotten better at verifying its anonymous sources, and accurately reporting the results of its verification process, in the past year?

I think the amount of faith we put in organs like the New York Times, and whether that faith is justified, has a lot of importance and relevancy in the scheme of things. Last year, this year, next year, any year.

Also, it's not my fault we had to wait a year to find out who the author was. And there's no statute of limitations on the claim it was a senior official. I grant that Walter Duranty was a long time ago, and everyone who enabled him at the NYT is now long gone. But the people telling you Anonymous was a senior official last year are still at the NYT today, still telling you stuff today. Don't lash out at me for bringing it up. It's one of the more significant parts of the story, in my opinion.
And it was a senior official.
BobTheCoward 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 29th October 2020, 08:14 AM   #93
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 12,636
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Do you think the NYT has gotten better at verifying its anonymous sources, and accurately reporting the results of its verification process, in the past year?
.....

The Times always knew who the guy was. His publisher always knew. Thry don't print random ramblings. And some would argue that any chief of staff to a cabinet secretary who meets regularly with the President and VP is by definition a "senior official," no matter what their actual title might be.
Quote:
Mr. Taylor, 33, ultimately became chief of staff to Kirstjen Nielsen, Mr. Trumpís third homeland security secretary. In that position, Mr. Taylor was one of the most senior political officials in the sprawling department, which employs more than 240,000 people.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/28/u...es-taylor.html
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 29th October 2020, 10:00 AM   #94
Firestone
Proud Award Award recipient
 
Firestone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,997
While we all yawned at the revelation of Anonymous' identity, someone is still tweeting about it, 5 days before election day.

So it turns out that the wise guy promoted as “Anonymous” by the @nytimes, named Miles Taylor (who I never even heard of!), was only a little known “staffer” as opposed to a “Senior Administration Official”. He then scammed @CNN, lied to @andersoncooper, & got a job there....
....He also worked at, of all places, @Google. They all have big liability!!!


And he still claims he "never even heard" of him.

__________________
The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it, with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age. -- Carl Sagan

Last edited by Firestone; 29th October 2020 at 10:02 AM.
Firestone 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 29th October 2020, 11:43 PM   #95
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Stacyhs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 18,012
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
I reckon he's primarily aiming his barb at the NYT and he has a point, sort of. Chief of Staff of DHS is one of the top political appointees of DHS. Does that mean he is or is not a "senior White House official"? If not, the NYT should be criticized.

But "senior White House official" has no clearly defined meaning, far as I know, and I'd say there's more than enough plausibility to say that DHS chief of staff is such an official.
No, he could have made his point without finding and quoting a year old post from me. He knows, and I know, exactly why he did it. Enough said about it.
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 30th October 2020, 12:54 AM   #96
Susheel
Graduate Poster
 
Susheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hyderabad, India
Posts: 1,756
Considering theprestige's responses until now, if it had turned out that the source of revelations was the Veep, it would still be not "high-level enough" because...reasons.
__________________
I've got to get to a library...fast Robert Langdon
Susheel 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 October 2020, 12:57 AM   #97
Firestone
Proud Award Award recipient
 
Firestone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Belgium
Posts: 2,997
The revelation has given Trump one more irrelevant subject to tweet about and ad lib about during his super spreader events.

He is just so easy to manipulate.
__________________
The method of science is tried and true. It is not perfect, it's just the best we have. And to abandon it, with its skeptical protocols is the pathway to a dark age. -- Carl Sagan
Firestone 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 October 2020, 06:00 AM   #98
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 49,661
Originally Posted by Susheel View Post
Considering theprestige's responses until now, if it had turned out that the source of revelations was the Veep, it would still be not "high-level enough" because...reasons.
Actually I grant that this guy was in fact a senior official.

But now that you mention it, I'm not sure about the vice president. High ranking member of the government, yes. But senior official in the administration? He's not part of the cabinet. He's not an agency or department head (or even an agency or department head's chief of staff). All of his constitutional duties are senatorial, except for succession.

On the other hand, presidents do sometimes delegate some of their authority to the VP. Trump put Pence in charge of the Covid task force, for example. So I guess he's a senior administration official now. But was he before 2020? Probably doesn't matter.

ETA: I take that back. I just remembered that the VP is actually the head of the Cabinet. So yeah, the VP is always a senior administration official.

Last edited by theprestige; 30th October 2020 at 06:03 AM.
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 October 2020, 09:12 AM   #99
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 22,581
Originally Posted by alfaniner View Post
Just had an interview with Chris Cuomo on CNN, who called him out on the obvious questions. However, in following the news as much as I have, his name has not really made a blip in my consciousness. I doubt any of the revelations he has made will make any difference at this point.
If anything, it's kind of a let down. I was hoping for someone more prominent, someone who makes the rounds on the Sunday shows or in the briefing room.
Craig4 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 October 2020, 09:19 AM   #100
Craig4
Penultimate Amazing
 
Craig4's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: I live in a swamp
Posts: 22,581
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Do you think the NYT has gotten better at verifying its anonymous sources, and accurately reporting the results of its verification process, in the past year?

I think the amount of faith we put in organs like the New York Times, and whether that faith is justified, has a lot of importance and relevancy in the scheme of things. Last year, this year, next year, any year.

Also, it's not my fault we had to wait a year to find out who the author was. And there's no statute of limitations on the claim it was a senior official. I grant that Walter Duranty was a long time ago, and everyone who enabled him at the NYT is now long gone. But the people telling you Anonymous was a senior official last year are still at the NYT today, still telling you stuff today. Don't lash out at me for bringing it up. It's one of the more significant parts of the story, in my opinion.
He was the chief of staff of a cabinet department and reported directly to the Secretary. That's a very senior position and wielded a great deal of power and authority behalf of his boss. The NYT did correctly verify he was a senior official.
Craig4 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 October 2020, 09:49 AM   #101
phiwum
Penultimate Amazing
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 12,719
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Actually I grant that this guy was in fact a senior official.
So, just to be clear, you no longer stand by the following? The Times wasn't lying?

Or are you balking at the use of the phrase "White House official"?

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Turns out it's not a senior White House official. Didn't stop the NYT from saying he was, though. Didn't stop people from appealing to the authority of the NYT, though.
ETA: From what I can find, the Times preface described the author as "a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure," not as a White House official.

Last edited by phiwum; 30th October 2020 at 09:53 AM.
phiwum 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 30th October 2020, 10:23 AM   #102
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 49,661
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
So, just to be clear, you no longer stand by the following? The Times wasn't lying?
Correct. The Times wasn't lying. Or even being incompetent.

Quote:
Or are you balking at the use of the phrase "White House official"?
Nah. I figured out that "White House official" was a paraphrase, not the actual claim.

Quote:
ETA: From what I can find, the Times preface described the author as "a senior official in the Trump administration whose identity is known to us and whose job would be jeopardized by its disclosure," not as a White House official.
Yep. Once I saw that I started to rethink my position.
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
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 07:25 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, 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.