No one believes the fucking news anymore

GRR Spartan wrote:Current and former members members of Trump's inner circle are promoting the story that the CIA findings linking Russia's GRU to DNC hacks and Russian actions that were directed at the Clinton campaign is a  "false flag" operation.  

Those people include Michael Bolton who is under consideration to be Under Sec of State and former Trump campaign  official Carter Page who has been investgated by the FBI for his dealngs with the Russian government.  Page was in Russia giving a 30 mnute address on fake news and in the Q&A  said he suspected the CIA report was a false flag.

They have the support of Infowars Alex Jones.  The guy who has said the Oklahoma City Bombing was an inside job, Sandyhook shootings were a hoax, the huge Oklahoma tornado was part of a secret DoD weapons testng gone awry and Michelle Obama is a transgender man.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/12/false-flag/510410/?utm_source=feed

And Sean Hannity last night called the entire Russian interference in our election liberal fake news.

Also, I saw Pence's neighbors in Washington are pleading with him to eat at Ping Pong Comet Pizza to help quash the insanity around that fake news story.

The folks who watch Fox to be informed (We inform, you decide) will eat that stuff up.

I was warning people here about the threat Trump posed because of his relationships with Russia even if it was only hiring campaign people who had previous relationships with Putin and was told no worries we have laws and a constitution.

If no one stand up for the laws and Constitution and Trump has the support of a network willing to give him 24/7 support with "opinion" people like Hannity we'll wake up one morning finding our fellow citizens bragging the trains are running on time like the Italians in 1920's - 1930's Italy.

So bad information surfaced about them and it's all the Russians fault.

Amazing, most people here would normally advocate for having all the information possible out there.

But now that they're busy ginning up a new RED SCARE then this information is terrible.

Gotcha.

LooseGoose wrote:So bad information surfaced about them and it's all the Russians fault.

Amazing, most people here would normally advocate for having all the information possible out there.

But now that they're busy ginning up a new RED SCARE then this information is terrible.

Gotcha.

Nice rationalization Bob.

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:So bad information surfaced about them and it's all the Russians fault.

Amazing, most people here would normally advocate for having all the information possible out there.

But now that they're busy ginning up a new RED SCARE then this information is terrible.

Gotcha.

Nice rationalization Bob.

No counter argument - switch to name calling.

LooseGoose wrote:

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Nice rationalization Bob.

No counter argument - switch to name calling.

Half of this board including me doesn't engage with you because of your hyper partisan comments and inability to not use strawman arguement. Sound like anyone else you know?

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

No counter argument - switch to name calling.

Half of this board including me doesn't engage with you because of your hyper partisan comments and inability to not use strawman arguement. Sound like anyone else you know?

As if I'm the only "hyper partisan" here. Blind.

LooseGoose wrote:

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Half of this board including me doesn't engage with you because of your hyper partisan comments and inability to not use strawman arguement. Sound like anyone else you know?

As if I'm the only "hyper partisan" here.   Blind.

Is English your 2nd language or something?

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

As if I'm the only "hyper partisan" here.   Blind.

Is English your 2nd language or something?

I wasn't talking just Bob - Christ this board leans about 90% left.

LooseGoose wrote:

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Is English your 2nd language or something?

I wasn't talking just Bob - Christ this board leans about 90% left.

That's not true at all. Just because 90% hate Trump doesn't mean they lean left.

There are a lot of boards that are dominated by folks who agree with "conservatives" 99% of the time.

I didn't realize I was now a less than American because I favor knowing what the CIA found and how they arrived at their conclusion.

I live in a rural area where nearly 75% of my neighbors voted a straight GOP ticket (that's based on published reports including votes cast for Democratic candidates). Many thought the recount was a waste of time and money until it exposed a lot of poor ballot security in Wanye County when it morphed to SEE!.

Others and myself suspected Russia was interested in Trump winning in November when Trump hired Page and Manefort to work for his campaign. Now we see the CIA investigation has shown GRU involvement and Page is getting speaking fees in Russia going along with the false flag story.

I won't ignore those items and think its important to know why the GRU was hacking the DNC and why they were involved in Presidential and Congressioanl candidates that were all Democrats.

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

I wasn't talking just Bob - Christ this board leans about 90% left.

That's not true at all. Just because 90% hate Trump doesn't mean they lean left.

and, believe it or not, Goose doesn't even like Trump.

GRR Spartan wrote:The folks who watch Fox to be informed (We inform, you decide) will eat that stuff up.

I was warning people here about the threat Trump posed because of his relationships with Russia even if it was only hiring campaign people who had previous relationships with Putin and was told no worries we have laws and a constitution.

If no one stand up for the laws and Constitution and Trump has the support of a network willing to give him 24/7 support with "opinion" people like Hannity we'll wake up one morning finding our fellow citizens bragging the trains are running on time like the Italians in 1920's - 1930's Italy.

Oh....so NOW the Constitution and rule of law matter since your candidate lost?

GRR Spartan wrote: Now we see the CIA investigation has shown GRU involvement and Page is getting speaking fees in Russia going along with the false flag story.

I won't ignore those items and think its important to know why the GRU was hacking the DNC and why they were involved in Presidential and Congressioanl candidates that were all Democrats.

Got a link to an official declaration that the Russians did it?

You're relying on a CIA LEAK which could be based on nothing. The FBI seems to have disagreed. Yet you treat it as 100% truth and verified. Flimsy.

LooseGoose wrote:

GRR Spartan wrote: Now we see the CIA investigation has shown GRU involvement and Page is getting speaking fees in Russia going along with the false flag story.

I won't ignore those items and think its important to know why the GRU was hacking the DNC and why they were involved in Presidential and Congressioanl candidates that were all Democrats.

Got a link to an official declaration that the Russians did it?

You're relying on a CIA LEAK which could be based on nothing. The FBI seems to have disagreed. Yet you treat it as 100% truth and verified. Flimsy.

Its called grasping at straws...Democrats have collectively lost their mind. What a beautiful thing to see, hacks like GRR, Bob, etc just have complete mental breakdowns.

Great stuff.

In all seriousness. Isn't the prospect of a false or exaggerated flag scenario just as probable as foreign interference in our election process? Until the actual evidence is share... what do we as normal everyday citizens really know?

It sounds like playing politics to me.

xsanguine wrote:In all seriousness. Isn't the prospect of a false or exaggerated flag scenario just as probable as foreign interference in our election process? Until the actual evidence is share... what do we as normal everyday citizens really know?

It sounds like playing politics to me.

Is exaggerated flag an official term, X?

Rocinante wrote:

xsanguine wrote:In all seriousness. Isn't the prospect of a false or exaggerated flag scenario just as probable as foreign interference in our election process? Until the actual evidence is share... what do we as normal everyday citizens really know?

It sounds like playing politics to me.

Is exaggerated flag an official term, X?

It is now. I coined it, Roc.

Trump and his FoxNews friends have followed the Big Lie con to perfection.

Now the CIA is aganst Trump or can't be believed because its all a political ploy and should be forgotten.

xsanguine wrote:In all seriousness. Isn't the prospect of a false or exaggerated flag scenario just as probable as foreign interference in our election process? Until the actual evidence is share... what do we as normal everyday citizens really know?

It sounds like playing politics to me.

Bolton?

Well my answer to that question is the only way we will know is if we have a thorough and full investigation.

To summarize where we are at to date -

You have a push back by the right wing echo chamber fake news sites coming back swinging at the WSJ, Wash Post and NYT as being fake news.

Top conservatives, liberals and the best non-partisan journalists in this country write for those papers. Don't fall for it.

steveschneider wrote:

xsanguine wrote:In all seriousness. Isn't the prospect of a false or exaggerated flag scenario just as probable as foreign interference in our election process? Until the actual evidence is share... what do we as normal everyday citizens really know?

It sounds like playing politics to me.

Bolton?

Well my answer to that question is the only way we will know is if we have a thorough and full investigation.  

I guess my point is... we're just getting information from others. There's no way for us to verify whether we're being given true information or untrue information or what parts are exaggerated and what parts are purposely avoided. "We" won't be investigating anything... we'll take what someone else tells us and either believe it or not. Someone will always be jockeying for power and just going by history there's always some fuckery when it comes to government dealings and how that's portrayed to the people. It may seem tin foil hat-ish... but I always tend to lean on "they're all lying to me". I just find it hard to believe anything from anyone that has something huge to gain from the outcome.

I should probably just keep my comments to myself in the future. The thread is operating under the assumption that we're told the truth by our government.

xsanguine wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

Bolton?

Well my answer to that question is the only way we will know is if we have a thorough and full investigation.  

I guess my point is... we're just getting information from others. There's no way for us to verify whether we're being given true information or untrue information or what parts are exaggerated and what parts are purposely avoided. Someone will always be jockeying for power and just going by history there's always some fuckery when it comes to government dealings and how that's portrayed to the people.

You've just highlighted the exact problem I identified when I decide to make this thread. No ONE and I mean not just you, but millions of Americans don't believe anything anymore. Everyone feels like they are being fucked with or manipulated, or it's just some one with an agenda trying to manipulate them.

I really just in general find it very dangerous that we've reached this point. It's becoming a dystopian nightmare where no one trusts information and all we argue is conspiracy theories. And I fear once a population has reached that point the people holding power have got them exactly where they want them.

steveschneider wrote:

xsanguine wrote:

I guess my point is... we're just getting information from others. There's no way for us to verify whether we're being given true information or untrue information or what parts are exaggerated and what parts are purposely avoided. Someone will always be jockeying for power and just going by history there's always some fuckery when it comes to government dealings and how that's portrayed to the people.

You've just highlighted the exact problem I identified when I decide to make this thread. No ONE and I mean not just you, but millions of Americans don't believe anything anymore. Everyone feels like they are being fucked with or manipulated, or it's just some one with an agenda trying to manipulate them.

I really just in general find it very dangerous that we've reached this point. It's becoming a dystopian nightmare where no one trusts information and all we argue is conspiracy theories. And I fear once a population has reached that point the people holding power have got them exactly where they want them.

Do people not have good reason to question and really go over with a fine tooth comb what they're being told by their government, considering their resume? And when they don't have the resources to do so be willing to just assume they're being lied to by everyone associated with politics?

Why is that anymore dangerous than a populace that just buys what their government tells them, despite their history?

xsanguine wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

You've just highlighted the exact problem I identified when I decide to make this thread. No ONE and I mean not just you, but millions of Americans don't believe anything anymore. Everyone feels like they are being fucked with or manipulated, or it's just some one with an agenda trying to manipulate them.

I really just in general find it very dangerous that we've reached this point. It's becoming a dystopian nightmare where no one trusts information and all we argue is conspiracy theories. And I fear once a population has reached that point the people holding power have got them exactly where they want them.

Do people not have good reason to question and really go over with a fine tooth comb what they're being told by their government, considering their resume? And when they don't have the resources to do so be willing to just assume they're being lied to by everyone associated with politics?

Why is that anymore dangerous than a populace that just buys what their government tells them, despite their history?

Sure they should but

People don't even believe in evolution, the moon landing, Sandy Hook.

Where's the limit?

Regarding news I'm sticking to my guns, I trust the WSJ, Washington Post and NYT for my news. Throw in the Guardian as well. I'm just playing the percentages, they give you the best odds for knowing what's really happening. I find stuff in there all the time that goes against what I believe. I think if you are reading news and you find yourself agreeing with everything you are reading you aren't getting good news.

steveschneider wrote:

xsanguine wrote:

Do people not have good reason to question and really go over with a fine tooth comb what they're being told by their government, considering their resume? And when they don't have the resources to do so be willing to just assume they're being lied to by everyone associated with politics?

Why is that anymore dangerous than a populace that just buys what their government tells them, despite their history?

Sure they should but

People don't even believe in evolution, the moon landing, Sandy Hook.

Where's the limit?

I think that's a little bit different, Steve. There's a long history of fuckery in situations just like this from virtually every actor involved and then the broader organization even longer. That's what happens when your government and the media lie to you over and over and over and over... then you realize they're all just humans with the same weaknesses, ego, insecurities and dominance as anyone else.

steveschneider wrote:Regarding news I'm sticking to my guns, I trust the WSJ, Washington Post and NYT for my news. Throw in the Guardian as well. I'm just playing the percentages, they give you the best odds for knowing what's really happening. I find stuff in there all the time that goes against what I believe. I think if you are reading news and you find yourself agreeing with everything you are reading you aren't getting good news.

The WSJ is telling you to be a little less certain on your Russian deal.

Russian Hackers and American Hacks

The CIA that misjudged Putin for years is now sure of his motives.

Somewhere in the Kremlin Vladimir Putin must be laughing. The Russian strongman almost certainly sought to undermine public confidence in American democracy this year, and as the Obama Administration leaves town it is playing into his hands.

That’s the real story behind the weekend reports that U.S. intelligence services have concluded that Russia intervened to assist Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. The stories are attributed to “senior administration” officials who won’t go on the record but assert murky details that are impossible to verify without seeing the evidence.

The difference now is that the intelligence community is said to have concluded with “high confidence” that the Russians did the hacking to help elect Mr. Trump. But we’re told the evidence for this conclusion is far from definitive, and multiple intelligence services offered no such judgments when briefing the House Intelligence Committee on the election-related hacks last week.

The New York Times cites claims from its sources that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee website but then didn’t leak any documents. But other sources say that while it’s clear the Russians were probing the RNC website, it isn’t clear they penetrated it enough to grab emails. This is in contrast to the months the Russians spent roaming through the DNC site. We’re also told that there’s no definitive intelligence about who hacked Hillary Clinton campaign chief John Podesta. His emails posted on WikiLeaks were arguably more politically damaging than those from the DNC.

If the CIA really does have “high confidence” about Mr. Putin’s motives, this would also be the first time in recent history. These are the same seers who missed the Russian invasion of Crimea, missed the incursion into southern Ukraine, and missed Mr. Putin’s foray into Syria. The intelligence community also claimed “high confidence” in 2008 for its judgment that Iran had suspended its nuclear-weapons program. That judgment conveniently shut down any further Bush Administration action against Iran. But a year later, in the Obama Administration, our highly confident spooks disclosed Iran’s secret Fordo underground facility.

But why wait? U.S. intelligence services already know most of what they’re likely to learn. Release the evidence now. Let’s see if the Kremlin really did steal RNC emails, and let’s also hear from those who don’t share CIA Director John Brennan’s “high confidence.” The last thing Americans need is for an outgoing Administration that is still sore over losing an election to assist Vladimir Putin in poisoning the result.

I guess now that I think about it I don't really trust what anyone tells me. You live in NYC, steve, you know how it is. Everyone is trying to sell you or con you.

xsanguine wrote:I guess now that I think about it I don't really trust what anyone tells me. You live in NYC, steve, you know how it is. Everyone is trying to sell you or con you.

The hustle never stops

The_Dude wrote:

xsanguine wrote:I guess now that I think about it I don't really trust what anyone tells me. You live in NYC, steve, you know how it is. Everyone is trying to sell you or con you.

The hustle never stops

They come up with some genius stuff some times.

This is dumb. X, you're talking about what "The government" tells us. But the press is not the government.

LooseGoose wrote:

steveschneider wrote:Regarding news I'm sticking to my guns, I trust the WSJ, Washington Post and NYT for my news. Throw in the Guardian as well. I'm just playing the percentages, they give you the best odds for knowing what's really happening. I find stuff in there all the time that goes against what I believe. I think if you are reading news and you find yourself agreeing with everything you are reading you aren't getting good news.

The WSJ is telling you to be a little less certain on your Russian deal.

Russian Hackers and American Hacks

The CIA that misjudged Putin for years is now sure of his motives.

Somewhere in the Kremlin Vladimir Putin must be laughing. The Russian strongman almost certainly sought to undermine public confidence in American democracy this year, and as the Obama Administration leaves town it is playing into his hands.

That’s the real story behind the weekend reports that U.S. intelligence services have concluded that Russia intervened to assist Donald Trump’s presidential campaign. The stories are attributed to “senior administration” officials who won’t go on the record but assert murky details that are impossible to verify without seeing the evidence.

The difference now is that the intelligence community is said to have concluded with “high confidence” that the Russians did the hacking to help elect Mr. Trump. But we’re told the evidence for this conclusion is far from definitive, and multiple intelligence services offered no such judgments when briefing the House Intelligence Committee on the election-related hacks last week.

The New York Times cites claims from its sources that the Russians hacked the Republican National Committee website but then didn’t leak any documents. But other sources say that while it’s clear the Russians were probing the RNC website, it isn’t clear they penetrated it enough to grab emails. This is in contrast to the months the Russians spent roaming through the DNC site. We’re also told that there’s no definitive intelligence about who hacked Hillary Clinton campaign chief John Podesta. His emails posted on WikiLeaks were arguably more politically damaging than those from the DNC.

If the CIA really does have “high confidence” about Mr. Putin’s motives, this would also be the first time in recent history. These are the same seers who missed the Russian invasion of Crimea, missed the incursion into southern Ukraine, and missed Mr. Putin’s foray into Syria. The intelligence community also claimed “high confidence” in 2008 for its judgment that Iran had suspended its nuclear-weapons program. That judgment conveniently shut down any further Bush Administration action against Iran. But a year later, in the Obama Administration, our highly confident spooks disclosed Iran’s secret Fordo underground facility.

But why wait? U.S. intelligence services already know most of what they’re likely to learn. Release the evidence now. Let’s see if the Kremlin really did steal RNC emails, and let’s also hear from those who don’t share CIA Director John Brennan’s “high confidence.” The last thing Americans need is for an outgoing Administration that is still sore over losing an election to assist Vladimir Putin in poisoning the result.

That was a good read. Like I've said I find stuff in all three papers all the time that challenge my positions and ideas. I firmly believe if we are reading news that we always agree 100% with we aren't reading good news.

That being said, I agree with the column's call for an investigation and Obama to declassify and release the CIA findings. I'll also call out Obama, he's known about this since July and sat on it. The timing now lends itself to the argument that he's trying to undermine the president elect. I still think this story is very serious, and should be taken seriously. We can not have a foreign power messing with our sovereignty.

It might tell you which party does a better job on cybersecurity - IF they "roamed the DNC for months" and were unable to hack the RNC. (and yes, I know the next answer here - "they didn't try to hack the RNC" - I don't buy it.)

LooseGoose wrote:It might tell you which party does a better job on cybersecurity - IF they "roamed the DNC for months" and were unable to hack the RNC. (and yes, I know the next answer here - "they didn't try to hack the RNC" - I don't buy it.)

I think we owe Trump a chance.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2016/10/26/report-91-percent-of-medias-trump-coverage-has-been-negative-n2237193


Mind boggling that the media went all in to try and sink Trump, prop up Hilary, she outspent him 2-1, and he still kicked her ass.

Complete embarrassment for Dems.

LooseGoose wrote:It might tell you which party does a better job on cybersecurity - IF they "roamed the DNC for months" and were unable to hack the RNC. (and yes, I know the next answer here - "they didn't try to hack the RNC" - I don't buy it.)

You are making an assumption.

Was the RNC more secure? Possible, then if so how? This info should be shared across the board to make our government more secure.

or the other question is

Did hackers choose to not hack the RNC? If so why?

steveschneider wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:It might tell you which party does a better job on cybersecurity - IF they "roamed the DNC for months" and were unable to hack the RNC. (and yes, I know the next answer here - "they didn't try to hack the RNC" - I don't buy it.)

You are making an assumption.

Was the RNC more secure? Possible, then if so how? This info should be shared across the board to make our government more secure.

or the other question is

Did hackers choose to not hack the RNC? If so why?

They did. They were likely successful to some degree. They likely have information on the R's that will come out when they are fully in power to further spread the chaos. Trump is probably not an asset to the Russians and as soon as he is not useful, they will dump what they have on him and the RNC. Probably through Wikileaks which will serve two purposes: destabilize further the U.S. and throw public opinion off the trail that Wikileaks is a Russian intel front. Which it is.

Rocinante wrote:

steveschneider wrote:

You are making an assumption.

Was the RNC more secure? Possible, then if so how? This info should be shared across the board to make our government more secure.

or the other question is

Did hackers choose to not hack the RNC? If so why?

They did. They were likely successful to some degree. They likely have information on the R's that will come out when they are fully in power to further spread the chaos. Trump is probably not an asset to the Russians and as soon as he is not useful, they will dump what they have on him and the RNC. Probably through Wikileaks which will serve two purposes: destabilize further the U.S. and throw public opinion off the trail that Wikileaks is a Russian intel front. Which it is.

Unlike you, Im all for exposing politicians for their hidden bigotry, private vs public opinions, their gaming of undermining American democracy, how they collude with the media, etc. All of these things were proven true through the DNC leaks.

Id love to see RNC leaks. I want to know the truth for people that we give great power to. The truth and facts scare the left though.