The Trump Effect

They did. And that's awesome - because they said this in the course of....wait for it....reporting it.

Maybe these fake news outlets do need some action taken against them.

 

Reporting that the dossier exists and has been circulating but that its contents cannot be verified seems reasonable.

 

Here, again:

Did he say that they had verified the information as being "unreliable"? No, because verifying any possible unreliable information isn't a thing. And, as he clearly mentions, and deeds follow words, they did not rely on it in reaching their conclusions.

What, precisely, more can he say to speak to the bogus nature of the reports veracity, than this?

 

You can't seriously be pretending you've never encountered an unverified report before.

 

So it wasn't circulated? because that is what was reported and that is what I thought 4chan was crowing about.

Either it was and CNN was factual, or it wasn't and we are all hallucinating.

 

You are correct, that seems fair & reasonable, and I withdraw the point on CNN, specifically.

 

Depends. Am I a news reporting organization?

Now, please answer my question - does the mainstream media report anything other than facts?

 

No, he would have to have the nuclear option to get some of the nominees through, which will create some problems, as it has for the Democrats when they decided to make it available in 2013. He will get any nominee through, most likely, but only conservatives feel there will be no damage or repercussions.

Political maneuverings aside, the failure to hold the hearing of Garland has been an utter farce and disgrace.

 

The failure to hold hearings on Garland was an uber-convenient use of purely dirty politics by the GOP. I don't think there is a reasonable defense available to explain it, and won't attempt one. But I also and fully supported their denial of his hearing. I don't have to be right, or even pure, in all things. I can admit that, and own my shit.

Trump will get whatever - whomever - he wants on the SCOTUS. There will be no significant fallout, if any, by anyone who isn't already, instinctively, and rabidly anti-Trump. And if he does it right, the nominee will be both young and vigorous, impacting the court for decades to come. I believe that you believe these things, but disagree that it will occur.

 

If you don't understand why I am instantly suspicious of any matter regarding, related to, eminating from, or otherwise involving the US intelligence community, and the too often subversive role they can play, please believe Democratic Senate Minority Leader, Chuck Shumer (D-NY):

(Emphasis mine)

Set all of the atypical political silliness aside for a moment, and really give some thought to even the possibility of this being true. I can tell you the lobbyists and government unions aren't those who are most worried with what an incoming Trump Administration will mean to them.

If he's a man of his word, and possess sufficient courage, Trump's going to drain swamps that many don't now know even exist, and put them squarely back to fully supporting the interests of America, first, instead of their own agencies & hidden agendas, instead.

Time will tell.

Link: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...enge-plot-Trump-says-six-ways-Sunday-you.html

 

I am of the opinion that CNN (or any reputable news source) should not be reporting anything that cannot be substantiated. Otherwise you become a rumor mag.

My opinion on it.

 

I'm still confused. 1. That we would call the US CNN fake news, but the English Daily Mail not. Make America Great Again -- outsource its news.


But, if this had been floating around 4chan since September, how is the intelligence community involved again? They pre-emotively released stuff before Donald had disagreed with their assessment on Russia that wasn't yet made?

Or what? What am I missing, or what that has been said in this thread is wrong?

 

The circulation of that document is what CNN reported and that is a fact.

 

The basis of this is false, and I will prove it simply: can he get himself on SCOTUS? No. Then he cannot get whomever he wants.

He can only get that which is reasonable. Which is largely Unimane's point. To your own, yes. If he appoints someone qualified, that isn't a complete nut, then they'll easily make it through, as nobody has any reason to oppose his view. He should do due diligence, though, or else end up appointing someone too young and too moveable towards the middle.

 

That report was not circulated in the intelligence briefing and it is not a fact.

 

He can get whomever he wants.

He doesn't want to be on SCOTUS.

He can get whomever he wants.

 

He cannot.

He is not an emperor, he is the President. The sooner you realize this, and come to accept it, the better.

As proof of this, if he wants someone that does not want the job, he cannot order them to take it. Ergo, he cannot "get whomever HE wants."

Be logical, for once, about this person you are beginning to worship entirely too much.

 

Good advice for a great many people.

 

Did they report it was circulated in the briefing? Not to my knowledge. Was it circulated? Yes, my god a us senator said he was the one who turned it over because he didn't know what to make of its authenticity. This 1984 shit, pretending like this story could simultaneously exist and be fake news at the same time.

 

Yup. The sooner everyone realizes we have a balance of power for a reason, and this President will have the same powers as the the last President, and still less than a great many other Presidents in our history, the better.

He is the President. Nothing more.