POLITICS House Intel Releases Muh Russia Docs

Discussion in 'Politicants' started by Tenacious D, May 8, 2020.

  1. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    You’ll be surprised at how quickly things are about to pick up.
     
  2. Unimane

    Unimane Kill "The Caucasian"

    The allegations against him, though, have had some basis and verification, to some extent. Sure, there have been outlets and people who exaggerate, but the Mueller Report was far more damning than people seem to realize and the Ukraine call and impeachment was based upon fact, as well.

    As far as the timeline, it remains suspect when it's produced by an outlet proven to be rabidly pro-Trump to the point where they were caught falsifying information in order to promote him.

    Now, this said, sure, it's possible the Obama Administration overstepped their boundaries and this outrage is different than the other outrages in being actually true. But, I've seen nothing to suggest it and the track record for crying wolf is pretty poor, not to mention the timing is a clear attempt to distract. So, I'll remain very dismissive and suspect until given a reason not to do so, like when my kids promise they spent the last hour in their room doing school work rather than doing TikTok or whatever.
     
  3. doolmeonce

    doolmeonce Member

    My .02...folks can cover their eyes and ears and scream orange mad bad to their hearts desire. It doesn’t change the fact that the allegations from the ‘rogue right’ have merit.

    The clinton admin was the most egregious and unapologetic with domestic counterintelligence. A subpoena might result in a box full of glitter and shredded documents. Nothing involving Hilary would shock me.
     
    Tenacious D likes this.
  4. Indy

    Indy Pronoun Analyst

    @Unimane your questioning of the biases of these smaller, right wing news sources is hilarious. Have you read the NYT? Watched CNN? Everyone is biased and everyone has an agenda. Just look at the recent Chuck Todd debacle. The examples are endless.

    If you’re going to write something off nowadays just because it comes from a biased source, you might as well never turn on your tv or click on a link to a news article ever again. Instead, I suggest you read the information available to you, evaluate it yourself, check it against other sources of information on the topic, and make an informed decision. There definitely appears to be smoke here, regardless of how much you want to pretend there isn’t.
     
  5. VolDad

    VolDad Super Moderator

    Who/what might give you a reason to do so? The main stream media will do nothing to besmirch Obama.
     
  6. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    I don’t blame anyone for distrusting any media.

    This isn’t going to play out in the media, IMO.
     
  7. Unimane

    Unimane Kill "The Caucasian"

    There's bias and then there's outright slanted news, basically propaganda. I've already noted, and specifically named, a number of left wing sources which I wouldn't cite, so I clearly have a standard in mind when discussing relevant news. I also haven't cited CNN, Chuck Todd, either. But, as much as you may not like it, the NY Times is a largely reputable source. They are clearly more reliable than an Epoch Times, which I'm supposed to gather as legit info, despite them specifically spending $1.5 million on pro-Trump ads on Facebook. Plus, I don't cater in conspiracy nonsense, which I've made abundantly clear and includes left wing theories in addition to the 527 ones pushed by Trump and others in this post-truth age.

    And, why is there some smoke for me to pay attention to here? Because Trump tweets incessantly about it? Because goofball Tenny peddles 75 different posts from blatantly useless sources, like Trump himself or exceptionally partisan web sites (for which none of you say a [dadgum] word about, for some reason) of dubious nature? I mean, in this entire thread, is there one, simply one reliable source which Tenny has used, other than the one I gave him credit for in the WSJ? So, no, I'm not yet buying the smoke being there simply because of the noise from the right over it. I spent 8 years watching these same sources flail about Obama and chase mythical scandals, to no effect.

    Perhaps lecturing me less and reflecting on your own standard of information consumption might be something you reflect upon or, at least, look at the utter silliness of the resources presented in this thread would be in order.
     
  8. Volst53

    Volst53 Super Moderator

    The New York Times has let Biden’s team basically edit and dictate the narrative of his sexual assault.

    To act like they’re unbiased would be just dishonest.
     
    Butthole and zehr27 like this.
  9. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    People who don’t acknowledge the enormous and persistent left-leaning bias of the MSM are liars.
     
    Butthole and zehr27 like this.
  10. Volst53

    Volst53 Super Moderator

    And what the media picks not to cover is just as important too.
     
    Butthole likes this.
  11. Indy

    Indy Pronoun Analyst

    The declassified documents themselves should be enough to give any reasonable, open-minded person pause, regardless of what source is reporting and discussing them.

    Of course the NYT is "reputable." They can be both reputable and biased as the same time. I listen to their podcast "The Daily," pretty much every single day. It's a good source for information in a lot of cases and tells some very interesting stories at times, but it's obviously a very left leaning podcast. So I take what I hear from it with an enormous grain of salt and think critically about what I'm hearing before I just believe everything it says. I do the same with any and all news sources.

    But it's funny to me that you'll call out certain news sources while simultaneously acting as if the NYT doesn't have an agenda.
     
  12. Unimane

    Unimane Kill "The Caucasian"

    I noted there's bias and then there's outright slant in the first sentence of my response. I call out the absurdly untrustworthy sites passed off as news sources. If I posted a blog from Daily Kos, would you consider it a reliable news source? Would you consider the Epoch Times, with their timeline here I've been encouraged to accept, a reliable news source? In fact, which of the news sources in this thread would you consider a reliable news source?
     
  13. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    So has the news recently posted from these sources not been true?
     
  14. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    You racist SONOFA[itch bay]!!
     
  15. Unimane

    Unimane Kill "The Caucasian"

    The Daily Kos is a cheerleader site for lefties. I read it sometimes, but take it with the grain of salt it deserves. Epoch Times is, basically, a campaign news source for the Trump Administration. The rest of the sources posted in this thread are mostly a bunch of Twitter personalities whom I rely upon as much as I do Sab, who lives in that Twitter environment these days, for UT news. It's a Tenny politics special. He nearly always cites some backwoods right wing blog or site in his ramblings. I mean, not just a biased source, but some really extreme, way out there resource, followed by how this is clearly impending doom for Democrats. It's kind of silly, at this point.
     
  16. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    Right. You've made your position on that very clear. That seems fairly tangential. Was the news untrue, though?
     
  17. Unimane

    Unimane Kill "The Caucasian"

    How would one know from these sources? I've seen nothing to indicate malfeasance from the Obama Administration and vague accusations justified by "You know what he did" by Trump aren't exactly clarifications, either. I think it's reasonable to ask some questions of the FBI and their tactics, but Flynn's case being dropped is 100% political and done to placate Trump by a DOJ obviously politicized under Barr.
     
  18. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    But the decision to go after Flynn wasn't political?
     
  19. kptvol

    kptvol Super Moderator

    And the James Woods tweet you've referenced a few times is just him quoting a Fox News article, which he links in the tweet. So kind of disingenuous to say he's a news source. That article if very long and I just skimmed it, but you should be able to verify if the claims they make are true.
     
  20. Unimane

    Unimane Kill "The Caucasian"

    No, the concern about Flynn's actions was real and should have been, as was his lying about them.
     

Share This Page