Now That Trump's President... (not any more!)

24 people have died in ICE custody during the trump administration

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/24-immigrants-have-died-ice-custody-during-trump-administration-n1015291

  On 6/9/2019 at 1:44 AM, Nebraska said:

 

Expand  

As if this wasn't enough, less than a month before we have a completely contradictory tweet. 

Someone tell Trump he should install an update on his twitter account. The errors are becoming too obvious.

Some scary examples in this article on AI generating fake news:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/07/technology/ai-text-disinformation.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Really scary. I think we're doomed, quite honestly. We simply aren't be able to recognise all the bullshit, if you ask me.

  On 6/9/2019 at 7:19 PM, goDel said:

Someone tell Trump he should install an update on his twitter account. The errors are becoming too obvious.

Some scary examples in this article on AI generating fake news:

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/06/07/technology/ai-text-disinformation.html?action=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

Really scary. I think we're doomed, quite honestly. We simply aren't be able to recognise all the bullshit, if you ask me.

 

Expand  

i think there will be a longish period of people going bananas over all the fake stuff and getting whipped into frenzies and manipulated etc then people will just look at it all as entertainment and ignore it all including the real news. 

perhaps there will remain one or two actual trustworthy news sources for the masses but the rest will be a swirling mess. i think the militaries and intelligence agencies of the world will spend a lot of time trying to figure out what to believe and go the route of finding out for themselves firsthand what's real and what isn't by using drones and actual spies to figure out the crucial intelligence.  but, i think a lot more damage is to be done. 

  On 6/9/2019 at 6:33 PM, ignatius said:

24 people have died in ICE custody during the trump administration

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/immigration/24-immigrants-have-died-ice-custody-during-trump-administration-n1015291

  Quote

Deaths in ICE custody remain "exceedingly rare," an ICE spokesperson told NBC News in a statement. The agency said it spends more than $269 million to provide "comprehensive medical care" to each of the 300,000 to 500,000 individuals who enter its custody each year and reviews the circumstances of all deaths that occur in ICE custody.

ICE "takes very seriously the health, safety and welfare of those in our care, including those who come into ICE custody with prior medical conditions or who have never before received appropriate medical care," said ICE spokesperson Danielle Bennett in a statement. "Any death that happens in ICE custody is a cause for concern."

I can smell the bullshit all the way up here near the Arctic

^^^ the bullshit is indeed smelling strong. a week or two ago all the activities for kids in detention centers waiting for hearings were cancelled. no more soccer, no more out door play, no more english lessons etc..  apparently the food  is bad even relative to shitty existing standards. 

cruelty is the #1 policy of this administration. 

  On 6/9/2019 at 7:28 PM, ignatius said:

i think there will be a longish period of people going bananas over all the fake stuff and getting whipped into frenzies and manipulated etc then people will just look at it all as entertainment and ignore it all including the real news. 

perhaps there will remain one or two actual trustworthy news sources for the masses but the rest will be a swirling mess. i think the militaries and intelligence agencies of the world will spend a lot of time trying to figure out what to believe and go the route of finding out for themselves firsthand what's real and what isn't by using drones and actual spies to figure out the crucial intelligence.  but, i think a lot more damage is to be done. 

...or outlets will just get better at digitally vetting information for authenticity, and come up with new (standardized?) processes for doing so? Of course, with the info sec war perpetually heating up it's easy to imagine some nightmare scenarios like theft of journalists' private GPG keys, cloning drives from BIOS backdoors, etc. We certainly live in interesting times.

  On 6/10/2019 at 3:02 AM, Mesh Gear Fox said:

when you're completely hollow as a person and have nothing substantial to say, repetition is your best friend to fill in the gaps.

not saying there's some of that from people in this thread,

but there's some of that from people in this thread.*

*but i'm not gonna assume that it means any of you are hollow or having nothing substantial to say i think you're all probably good people :)

  On 6/10/2019 at 3:11 AM, auxien said:

not saying there's some of that from people in this thread,

 

but there's some of that from people in this thread.*

 

*but i'm not gonna assume that it means any of you are hollow or having nothing substantial to say i think you're all probably good people :)

Expand  

O, coming back to what people have said in this thread. Weren't you convinced Mueller said his research found nothing substantial, or something like that? You still believe that after his letter to Barr and the recent press conference? 

Not trying to lure you into an argument, btw. I just want to have an idea where people who thought the report was a nothingburger currently are. Especially given the fact that an impeachment process is a political one. And the outcome strongly depends on the ability to change the perspective of roughly half the country (if not more). So if you havent seen any reason to change your mind ( if my memory is correct, that is), it's fair to say the rest of the nay-sayers haven't either, I'm guessing.

Not saying you should, btw. Just trying to get a feel for how far the country is from people changing their minds on whats in the Mueller report. Thats all. Lets assume everyone has valid reasons to have a certain perspective on this, regardless of what it is. Always fair to be sceptical, I guess.

I'm only interested in the likely hood of people changing their opinion given what we currently know.

  On 6/9/2019 at 2:17 AM, Candiru said:

The two celestial bodies will merge and become Maroon, the dopest fuckin planet with all the cocaine and whooooeeeerrres

I volunteer, nay, demand, I be among the first to live there. I offer years of experience moderating watmm as my first (and only) leadership quality. 

  On 6/10/2019 at 3:02 AM, Mesh Gear Fox said:

 

he probably just learned his followers are too stupid to understand anything unless it's drilled into them, also when you're completely hollow as a person and have nothing substantial to say, repetition is your best friend to fill in the gaps.

this could be true as well. Though he said he'd rake forest floors all by himself to stop fires... then again maybe he's just really bored and daydreaming half the time he's doing his presidential duties.

He's a radioactive shit blob that just happens to have the one-third zombie population of the country under mind control.

(Disregard most of my posts in this thread. More hot air than actual news updates.)

the house judiciary committee is doing hearings on the mueller report, today, and i think more are coming up. here's the live video scheduled to start at 2pm, new york time. john dean testifies today. 

in related news, the doj is caving to the house judiciary. that happened because tomorrow the house was scheduled to do the final vote on holding barr in contempt of congress for defying subpoena. 

mcgahn still may be found to be in contempt of congress, tomorrow.

  On 6/10/2019 at 6:49 AM, goDel said:

O, coming back to what people have said in this thread. Weren't you convinced Mueller said his research found nothing substantial, or something like that? You still believe that after his letter to Barr and the recent press conference? 

 Not trying to lure you into an argument, btw. I just want to have an idea where people who thought the report was a nothingburger currently are. Especially given the fact that an impeachment process is a political one. And the outcome strongly depends on the ability to change the perspective of roughly half the country (if not more). So if you havent seen any reason to change your mind ( if my memory is correct, that is), it's fair to say the rest of the nay-sayers haven't either, I'm guessing.

Not saying you should, btw. Just trying to get a feel for how far the country is from people changing their minds on whats in the Mueller report. Thats all. Lets assume everyone has valid reasons to have a certain perspective on this, regardless of what it is. Always fair to be sceptical, I guess.

 I'm only interested in the likely hood of people changing their opinion given what we currently know.

Expand  

go read back (carefully) what i said concerning that if you're interested, then get back to me regarding now. not interested in any arguments either.

Ok, so my guess is you currently don't think the country (as a whole) is anywhere near changing their mind. And your own position on the report is most likely still the same as well. Meaning that Mueller (supposedly) showed it was all smoke and mirrors. ( I added the "supposedly", but from your perspective it should be dropped, I guess.)

Right? 

nothing to see here... 

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/06/mcconnell-blocking-plans-to-prevent-russian-election-attack.html

  Quote

McConnell Is Blocking Any Plan to Prevent a Russian Election Attack in 2020: There actually are a lot of bills to safeguard the 2020 elections from the next Russian attack. Mitch McConnell is blocking all of them.

didn't Obama ask mcconnell for help when intelligence services became aware of the russia stuff back in the day (way back in like 2014 or whatever??)??

moscow mitch.. lol 

https://www.politifact.com/facebook-fact-checks/statements/2019/feb/14/facebook-posts/fact-checking-claim-mitch-mcconnells-biggest-donor/

maybe the $200 million mill factors in somewhere?

https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/15/business/rusal-russia-kentucky-aluminum-mill/index.html

what a shit show this shit show is becoming. 

If it’s all nothing, you’d have to explain away all the stuff we’ve learned about in the last few years, which so far has been the peak of corruption in American politics and part of a larger global threat. 

  On 6/11/2019 at 7:06 AM, Candiru said:

If it’s all nothing, you’d have to explain away all the stuff we’ve learned about in the last few years, which so far has been the peak of corruption in American politics and part of a larger global threat. 

that reporter who broke the panama papers story got killed. i think all the russian and trump stuff was probably in there.. surely some russians. 

i think pelosi is right "i don't want to see him impeached, i want to see him in jail"

but i hope she's a woman who can do both.  he's a disgrace.  bush was bad enough w/how he and his crew steamrolled into iraq and it's probably the biggest on purpose blunder i can think of in my life... there's others but the game they started has/is playing out in some fucked up ways. 

but trump is a cleptocracy in the making. 

Ignatius, the politifact came to the conclusion the story was mostly false. Whats the deal? 

Apart from McCnnl, or politicians in the US, having huge donors and making shady decisions, that is. 

  On 6/11/2019 at 7:29 AM, goDel said:

Ignatius, the politifact came to the conclusion the story was mostly false. Whats the deal? 

Apart from McCnnl, or politicians in the US, having huge donors and making shady decisions, that is. 

“Mostly false” but really just semantics. If the “attack on McConnell” was worded differently it’d be “mostly true”. The truth is there’s shitloads of foreign money coming into US elections. I’m guessing most of it is untraceable?

US Billionaires donate to election campaigns in every state. Look at Susan Collins of Maine. The bulk of her campaign finances come from a few people who don’t live in her state. Funneling money from outside the US happens in the same way.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Donors tend to be traceable. As politifact have shown in their article. 

Instead of guessing, https://www.opensecrets.org/ will give some insight. It's more transparent than you seem to think. 

And the politifact story was more than just semantics. It showed how poor the 'reporting' is. They flagged it as fake news.

Given the politifact article, Blavatnik wouldn't even be considered a foreign donor, btw. (US-UK passport, in the US since 70s, has a couple of US companies)

I agree with you that there are issues with campaign financing and all that. But this article doesn't do any good. So I'm having a hard time understanding why you're jumping into this rabbithole with a politifact article labelling it as fake news. I just don't understand.

  On 6/11/2019 at 6:35 AM, goDel said:

Ok, so my guess is you currently don't think the country (as a whole) is anywhere near changing their mind. And your own position on the report is most likely still the same as well. Meaning that Mueller (supposedly) showed it was all smoke and mirrors. ( I added the "supposedly", but from your perspective it should be dropped, I guess.)

Right? 

it's not a matter of whether i think the country is anywhere near changing their mind, look at the polls. 

assuming my position is a mistake on your part. for the 4th or 5th time, Mueller showed no direct evidence for Russian collusion or conspiracy. you (supposedly) read the report, you should know that. 

  On 6/11/2019 at 2:32 PM, auxien said:

for the 4th or 5th time, Mueller showed no direct evidence for Russian collusion or conspiracy. you (supposedly) read the report, you should know that. 

he actually did present evidence of conspiracy. look at this, from the intro to volume 1:

  Quote

A statement that the investigation did not establish particular facts does not mean there was no evidence of those facts.

the phrase he is referring to, "did not establish," is the phrase he uses a couple paragraphs earlier, here:

  Quote

The investigation also identified numerous links between the Russian government and the Trump Campaign. Although the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts, the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.

also, in mueller's may 29 public statement, he says

  Quote

This volume includes a discussion of the Trump campaign’s response to this activity, as well as our conclusion that there was insufficient evidence to charge a broader conspiracy.

"insufficient evidence" is not "no evidence"

basically all they were missing was evidence of  an agreement.

i should also point out that you are using the word collusion, and mueller is talking about conspiracy. however, the definition of conspiracy mueller is using is actually very narrow and very difficult to prove. evidence of conspiracy he lays out is also evidence of collusion.

for anyone who doesn't want to crunch the 448 pages of partially redacted fbi work product (it's actually not that bad), i recommend wittes' notes on the mueller report. available for free on that page or you can buy an audiobook here

you sure wasted a lot of words and time saying exactly what I already said