Political Roundtable Part XII

[payitforward]

Are Trump supporters not concerned that Trump says we should not trust the Media, the Intelligence Agency nor any Judge that goes against him?

Why should we trust him over these other outlets when he does not provide evidence? His first and pretty much only defense is to put down the other side. It's the same tactics that a bad high school student would use.

It's scary how easily many Americans, particularly hard-core Trump supporters, have bought into the Trump narrative that all media, with the possible exemption of Fox News, is corrupt and/or fake. It worries me deeply when people take the word of the govt. and/or a President, who apparently believes he was elected emperor, over that of the free press...as flawed as the press may be.

it's the fault of the media, not Trump. Their obvious bias has gotten so over the top during the election that they completely undermined any credibility they have left. I view every story from the media as a hit piece. That doesn't mean it's a lie, but it does mean that they are likely to emphasize anti-Trump points and downplay pro-Trump points.

There is no unbiased media. None. Everyone has an agenda. Years ago, the conservative side admitted their agenda and the liberals pretended to be unbiased. Nobody believes that anymore, at least no moderate or conservative does. The New York Times is absolutely no different from National Review, except for they're on the left instead of the right.

Right, and after all, really, what is truth? There's no such thing. There are just "anti-Trump points" (emphasized) & "pro-Trump points" (downplayed).

What would you say about the Observer's take on Kremlingate, nate? Same deal? You might start reading here: http://observer.com/2017/02/donald-trump-administration-kremlingate-russia-mike-flynn/

Or read http://observer.com/2017/02/donald-trump-administration-mike-flynn-russian-embassy/, which begins:

"...the still-forming Trump administration is already doing serious harm to America’s longstanding global intelligence partnerships. In particular, fears that the White House is too friendly to Moscow are causing close allies to curtail some of their espionage relationships with Washington—a development with grave implications for international security, particularly in the all-important realm of counterterrorism.

"...Our Intelligence Community is so worried by the unprecedented problems of the Trump administration—not only do senior officials possess troubling ties to the Kremlin, there are nagging questions about basic competence regarding Team Trump—that it is beginning to withhold intelligence from a White House which our spies do not trust.

"That the IC has ample grounds for concern is demonstrated by almost daily revelations of major problems inside the White House, a mere three weeks after the inauguration. The president has repeatedly gone out of his way to antagonize our spies, mocking them and demeaning their work...."

What do you think? Is that what you meant by "putting America on better footing on the world stage?"

What makes these articles especially interesting is that the Observer is owned by Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, & the Editor in Chief is Kushner's Brother-in-law.

Feel free to correct their bias, nate -- all the media bias causing "pro-Trump" points to be "downplayed." What are some of the "pro-Trump points" about Kremlingate that you'd like to bring to the fore?

[DCZards]

Are Trump supporters not concerned that Trump says we should not trust the Media, the Intelligence Agency nor any Judge that goes against him?

Why should we trust him over these other outlets when he does not provide evidence? His first and pretty much only defense is to put down the other side. It's the same tactics that a bad high school student would use.

It's scary how easily many Americans, particularly hard-core Trump supporters, have bought into the Trump narrative that all media, with the possible exemption of Fox News, is corrupt and/or fake. It worries me deeply when people take the word of the govt. and/or a President, who apparently believes he was elected emperor, over that of the free press...as flawed as the press may be.

it's the fault of the media, not Trump. Their obvious bias has gotten so over the top during the election that they completely undermined any credibility they have left. I view every story from the media as a hit piece. That doesn't mean it's a lie, but it does mean that they are likely to emphasize anti-Trump points and downplay pro-Trump points.

There is no unbiased media. None. Everyone has an agenda. Years ago, the conservative side admitted their agenda and the liberals pretended to be unbiased. Nobody believes that anymore, at least no moderate or conservative does. The New York Times is absolutely no different from National Review, except for they're on the left instead of the right.

Your response only confirms my fears about Trump's ability to get people to drink his kool-aid about the media. There are a lot of good, honest reporters and editors in the so-called mainstream media, including at CNN, the NYT and the Wash. Post, who are doing solid, credible reporting about what's going on at the White House and within government.

The problem is that much of this objective reporting is making the new Pres. and his Administration look bad. So the Administration's response is to label it lies or fake news. Trump's modus operandi is to distract people by blaming his problems on the media (or Hillary Clinton's campaign) so that they don't look behind the curtain and see the mess that is his Administration. This works with some Americans...but I think those #s grow smaller with each Trump lie and misstep.

[AFM]

Thanks AFM! I didn't know that Obama was involved in it as well. Alex Jones is interesting to listen to.

Are you familiar with Pickle Gate?

Watch on YouTube

LOL!!

[AFM]

Start with just 15 minutes a day:
https://www.duolingo.com/course/ru/en/Learn-Russian-Online

We russian now, baby.

[gtn130]

It's scary how easily many Americans, particularly hard-core Trump supporters, have bought into the Trump narrative that all media, with the possible exemption of Fox News, is corrupt and/or fake. It worries me deeply when people take the word of the govt. and/or a President, who apparently believes he was elected emperor, over that of the free press...as flawed as the press may be.

it's the fault of the media, not Trump. Their obvious bias has gotten so over the top during the election that they completely undermined any credibility they have left. I view every story from the media as a hit piece. That doesn't mean it's a lie, but it does mean that they are likely to emphasize anti-Trump points and downplay pro-Trump points.

There is no unbiased media. None. Everyone has an agenda. Years ago, the conservative side admitted their agenda and the liberals pretended to be unbiased. Nobody believes that anymore, at least no moderate or conservative does. The New York Times is absolutely no different from National Review, except for they're on the left instead of the right.

Well, there's the obvious difference that the National Review only does commentary. The NY Times actually does both. They do commentary, AND actual factual reporting by journalists with degrees and editors and rules of conduct. Many of the outlets you cite only do commentary/opinion, but unlike the National review, just has worse columnists.

EDIT: And the change in tone and content in the past year is CLEARLY the direct fault of Trump. Everyone in the Republican contest for President would agree with that, along with virtually all researchers studying this. The man has changed the way news is reported. He and his staff pathologically lies overtly. This is new, whether you realize it or not. News reporting has changed as a consequence. Jay Rosen has done the best analysis on this.

Nate reads Info Wars

[bealwithit]

It's scary how easily many Americans, particularly hard-core Trump supporters, have bought into the Trump narrative that all media, with the possible exemption of Fox News, is corrupt and/or fake. It worries me deeply when people take the word of the govt. and/or a President, who apparently believes he was elected emperor, over that of the free press...as flawed as the press may be.

it's the fault of the media, not Trump. Their obvious bias has gotten so over the top during the election that they completely undermined any credibility they have left. I view every story from the media as a hit piece. That doesn't mean it's a lie, but it does mean that they are likely to emphasize anti-Trump points and downplay pro-Trump points.

There is no unbiased media. None. Everyone has an agenda. Years ago, the conservative side admitted their agenda and the liberals pretended to be unbiased. Nobody believes that anymore, at least no moderate or conservative does. The New York Times is absolutely no different from National Review, except for they're on the left instead of the right.

Right, and after all, really, what is truth? There's no such thing. There are just "anti-Trump points" (emphasized) & "pro-Trump points" (downplayed).

What would you say about the Observer's take on Kremlingate, nate? Same deal? You might start reading here: http://observer.com/2017/02/donald-trump-administration-kremlingate-russia-mike-flynn/

Or read http://observer.com/2017/02/donald-trump-administration-mike-flynn-russian-embassy/, which begins:

"...the still-forming Trump administration is already doing serious harm to America’s longstanding global intelligence partnerships. In particular, fears that the White House is too friendly to Moscow are causing close allies to curtail some of their espionage relationships with Washington—a development with grave implications for international security, particularly in the all-important realm of counterterrorism.

"...Our Intelligence Community is so worried by the unprecedented problems of the Trump administration—not only do senior officials possess troubling ties to the Kremlin, there are nagging questions about basic competence regarding Team Trump—that it is beginning to withhold intelligence from a White House which our spies do not trust.

"That the IC has ample grounds for concern is demonstrated by almost daily revelations of major problems inside the White House, a mere three weeks after the inauguration. The president has repeatedly gone out of his way to antagonize our spies, mocking them and demeaning their work...."

What do you think? Is that what you meant by "putting America on better footing on the world stage?"

What makes these articles especially interesting is that the Observer is owned by Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, & the Editor in Chief is Kushner's Brother-in-law.

Feel free to correct their bias, nate -- all the media bias causing "pro-Trump" points to be "downplayed." What are some of the "pro-Trump points" about Kremlingate that you'd like to bring to the fore?

I think nate is also missing how important the media was in helping Trump. I watched CNN and MSNBC frequently during the election. CNN had Trump surrogates on constantly, they even hired Corey freakin' Lewandowski and had him on panels nightly with Kayleigh McEnany or Jeffrey Lord. Fox News was never very critical of Trump and Hannity is pretty shameless in his support. All these networks also broadcasted almost every single one of Trump's rallies nearly in full! Hillary's speeches/rallies were also broadcast, but many of them would be cut off to go to: Trump's! He was the more exciting story and got tons of coverage both positive and negative, but in CNN's case plenty of it was pretty neutral or would feature both sides of the argument. He got maximum exposure. Once Trump became combative and hid from the media (that long drought during the election where he stopped having press conferences) the media decided, fine, if you're going to say we have no credibility then we have to fight back. He's doing the same thing as president, crying about fake news and then only taking questions from conservative lapdog networks. What do you expect the rest of the media to do, specifically NYT and WaPo? Be like Stephen Miller and say the president won't be questioned? Please. His administration has real problems and things he said during the campaign deserved criticism.

It became especially problematic after Trump became the nominee. He didn't stop saying ridiculous things, lies, insults, which crossed over the line of traditional right/left political differences and into This Guy Is Nuts and Needs to Be Factchecked and Told to Shut Up territory. That IS Trump's fault. He is not innocent in the media hating him.

What specific, significant examples do you have of hit pieces that are not factual? Or is anything that is a negative story a hit piece? Like all this Flynn stuff I'm guessing? Clear this up for me.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[closg00]

Remember when the Trump folks were beating their chest after Iran did a missile test? Listen to their silence as a Russian spy ship is near Connecticut.
https://www.facebook.com/nytpolitics/posts/1133461556776023



Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[dckingsfan]

She lost by a total of 70,000 votes in three states. To think that the daily Russian hacks AND the Comey letter didn't influence the outcome is to completely stick your head in the sand.

Thanks for the kind words sfam. Note how I put what I said.

Well, I would put it a different way. If she had run even a slightly better campaign without the "deplorables" comment, she would have won. She was the wrong candidate without a resonating message.

Always good to reply in context

Agreed. For clarity, the "stick your head in the sand" wasn't directed at you - merely anyone who believes those actions didn't impact the outcome - they clearly did, regardless the quality of candidates.

No worries. I am one of those that doesn't believe it was THE cause for the outcome. I am one of those that believe that Hillary was in control of her destiny and underperformed. Her campaign and message were underwhelming and if there was one reason she lost - it was that.

Guess I need to get some Q-tips to get the sand out of my ears

[JWizmentality]

Down goes another flunky.

We got Russia patrolling of the coast, increasing their activity in Ukraine, and raping Syria.

Putin trolled this country. Banana republic indeed. Hey deplorables, tell me more about my elitist ways.

Sent from my ASUS_Z01BDC using Tapatalk

[closg00]

Just as I suspected, our Intelligence Agencies are withholding information from DT as they rightfully should, they fear he may leak or be compromised.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/spies-keep-intelligence-from-donald-trump-1487209351?mod=e2fb




Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

[montestewart]

Thanks for the kind words sfam. Note how I put what I said.



Always good to reply in context

Agreed. For clarity, the "stick your head in the sand" wasn't directed at you - merely anyone who believes those actions didn't impact the outcome - they clearly did, regardless the quality of candidates.

No worries. I am one of those that doesn't believe it was THE cause for the outcome. I am one of those that believe that Hillary was in control of her destiny and underperformed. Her campaign and message were underwhelming and if there was one reason she lost - it was that.

Guess I need to get some Q-tips to get the sand out of my ears

Clinton could have done a better job in many areas and won the election, but she lost very narrowly in three states (MI, PA, WI) that traditionally vote Democrat in presidential elections. Out of nearly 14 million presidential votes in those three states, a mere 40 thousand voting for Clinton instead of Trump could have changed the outcome in those states, and Clinton would have won the election. Many factors undermined what in the past would have been easy victories, but if the Russians were behind stealing and distributing all the damning information about the Clinton posse, it's hard to rule out the Russians providing the final margin of victory for Trump.

[JWizmentality]

Just as I suspected, our Intelligence Agencies are withholding information from DT as they rightfully should, they fear he may leak or be compromised.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/spies-keep-intelligence-from-donald-trump-1487209351?mod=e2fb




Sent from my iPhone using RealGM mobile app

I hoped they would. Country before politics.

Sent from my ASUS_Z01BDC using Tapatalk

[doclinkin]

Remember when the Trump folks were beating their chest after Iran did a missile test? Listen to their silence as a Russian spy ship is near Connecticut.
https://www.facebook.com/nytpolitics/posts/1133461556776023

'Near Connecticut' sounds like no big deal. Except Electric Boat is in Groton, building nuclear submarines.

Russia is essentially showing their enemies they are invulnerable to reprisals, that the US is weak now, that they can destabilize our electoral process and elect a clueless buffoon who is a stooge of theirs, and suddenly they can ramp up attacks in the Ukraine and fire off illegal missile tests and buzz our destroyers and hey send a spy ship to examine our nuclear sub facilities and we will do jack-all now. Except to attack our own intelligence community and try to find out who is 'leaking'.

This is getting dire.

[TGW]

Remember that band of Muslim rapists in Germany....oh yea...that's fake news...

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/frankfurt-mass-sexual-assault-refugees-fake-made-up-bild-germany-cologne-new-year-allegations-a7581291.html

[Illuminaire]

Clinton could have done a better job in many areas and won the election, but she lost very narrowly in three states (MI, PA, WI) that traditionally vote Democrat in presidential elections. Out of nearly 14 million presidential votes in those three states, a mere 40 thousand voting for Clinton instead of Trump could have changed the outcome in those states, and Clinton would have won the election. Many factors undermined what in the past would have been easy victories, but if the Russians were behind stealing and distributing all the damning information about the Clinton posse, it's hard to rule out the Russians providing the final margin of victory for Trump.

These are good points. A few things I will say, not as a refutation or argument but as "this is a complicated scenario so lets keep all the facts in mind" commentary.

1) There were multiple damaging leaks, and only one is tied to the Russians in any way.
2) The information that is being tied to Russian hacking was also compromised by other actors, foreign or domestic. One of the early IC reports/leaks said that as many as five or six infiltrators had gotten in on the easily hacked password action. That's often lost in the current reporting... there were (strangely obvious) Russian footprints, but there was evidence of several other intrusions as well.

I'm very concerned that we are getting (at best) half truths from everyone involved in the current political scene. The MSM isn't acting as a neutral arbiter of facts. The Trump administrating is blustering around as loudly and stupidly as possible. And the leaders of the intelligence community are acting like self-righteous movie villains. It is frustratingly difficult to parse who is lying to us the most.

[Wizardspride]

Read on Twitter

[gtn130]

Read on Twitter

[tontoz]

Trumps behavior during the campaign was bad, but his behavior and actions after the election are a much bigger problem IMO. He has alienated so many people I don't see how he will be able to govern effectively, assuming he is able to stay in office for 4 years.

[nate33]

What specific, significant examples do you have of hit pieces that are not factual? Or is anything that is a negative story a hit piece? Like all this Flynn stuff I'm guessing? Clear this up for me.

The golden showers with prostitutes story.

The Trump sexually assaulted an airline hostess story.

The Trump made fun of a man with a disability story.

The implication that Trump was inciting violence at his rallies when it was, 99% of the time (one lone exception) instigated by leftist protestors.

The constant references to Trump being Hitler, like Hitler, or like Mussolini.

The lie that Trump's advisor Bannon "cited an Italian thinker who inspired fascists" when the reference in question was clearly critical of Julius Evola.

The lie that Trump claimed Mexican immigrants are rapists.

The lie that Trump abused Rowanne Brewer Lane.

And that's just off the top of my head.