Trump revealed highly classified information to Russian foreign minister and ambassador

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Zontar:
Oh, so now suddenly the left cares about Israel instead of hating it on levels that are borderline antisemitic. That's a change of pace at least.

I'm not "the left" and this isn't about Israel. They just happen to be the victims in this case. You're obviously not a big picture thinker so let me try to explain this to you in simple terms.

You can't have a sitting president revealing highly classified allied secrets to a hostile nation. It's not just dangerous for Israel and their field operatives, it's dangerous for the US and the entire western bloc. When it comes to these things, if he did it once, everyone is absolutely going to assume that he'll do it again. So now you have a situation where other allied countries won't be able to trust the US with intel that the US could certainly use. And in return the US could decide to retaliate against those countries and hold onto intel that their allies could use. It creates a hostile environment among allies in the intelligence communities all around the world at a very dangerous time. And all because one idiot couldn't keep his stupid mouth shut.

Zontar:

So basically despite how the media is painting this the issue isn't the actual act of sharing information, but instead how it was done. Given how that isn't what the actual outrage seems to be focused on, seems like just another day of the media being the media.

The issue, as should be patently obvious by reading the news stories and some replies here, is that PotUS was careless with classified information and shared it with people that should have no business knowing it. Not only did he share classified information from an ally with someone that's antagonistic to both countries, he did so in a way that revealed the source of the information and thus put said source at risk and diminished the intelligence gathering potential of said ally. This is not hard to get: Trump failed all the basic levels of information security.

This is the President of the United States failing to uphold information security because he blabbers on too much. Had he just shared the relevant information (supposedly about the laptop bombs) that'd be sort of fine, but raises the question why the President shares it with the Ambassador and the whole thing isn't done by two low level intelligence analysts. Now he revealed it in such detail that it most likely got an Israeli intelligence source killed.

I know you are you, Zontar, but how can you not see how this is a serious issue? The understanding that you don't reveal how you've obtained secret information about your enemies is so basic in information security that even Swedish conscripts were taught it. That the PotUS fails to understand it or comply with it is very alarming.

Zontar:

Parasondox:

Great? Who said she was great. All I hear is that she was flawed but wouldn't make the USA a joke Yeah she would shit on the carpet but not smear it on the wall and blame it on someone else.

Why not? worked for the previous 4 administrations.

Seriously, Zontar. Stop playing this stupid game of one-upmanship and trying to win a stupid made up game in your head and actually listen, acknowledge and understand the facts and information given to you. Stop blowing smoke into the room and actually call out the smell of bullshit.

Where was this attitude for the past 8 years? Outside of drone warfare it's hard to think of.

Here is something I haven't said in a long time but I feel needs to be brought back and in bold too.

Just because something currently happens, doesn't mean that it should.

Just because the four previous administration did it, doesn't mean this one has to follow suit.

Lastly, which attitude? I'm still learning the political game each day and 2016 flipped it upside down that I now have to rethink things. If you are talking about Obama's administration and why I weren't doing the things I told you to do, how do you know I weren't against the things he did? Of course I was. Still am. Once again, he shat on the carpet at times but didn't flood the house with shit.

Anymore deflections?

Adam Jensen:

Zontar:
Oh, so now suddenly the left cares about Israel instead of hating it on levels that are borderline antisemitic. That's a change of pace at least.

I'm not "the left" and this isn't about Israel. They just happen to be the victims in this case. You're obviously not a big picture thinker so let me try to explain this to you in simple terms.

You can't have a sitting president revealing highly classified allied secrets to a hostile nation. It's not just dangerous for Israel and their field operatives, it's dangerous for the US and the entire western bloc. When it comes to these things, if he did it once, everyone is absolutely going to assume that he'll do it again. So now you have a situation where other allied countries won't be able to trust the US with intel that the US could certainly use. And in return the US could decide to retaliate against those countries and hold onto intel that their allies could use. It creates a hostile environment among allies in the intelligence communities all around the world at a very dangerous time. And all because one idiot couldn't keep his stupid mouth shut.

More to the point that it crosses numerous boundaries set aside by things like ECHELON and FVEY. As much as one might criticise the largest espionage network in history, it is one of the core defence platforms of the Anglophone world that help severely impact foreign intelligence networks running IOps within the alliance. Offsetting our enemies attempts at infiltration and data sharing at a rate that has never been known before, nor likely ever will.

As contentious as it is, it's an effective weapon ... but only if all nations within it aren't compromising its structured relationship. Chain's only as strong as the weakest link, etc.

Honestly, Israel hs been doing snarky shit like misinformation in terms of FVEY for fucking years, so most of the Anglophone world barring the U.S. should give less of a shit about the welfare of Israeli intelligence operations ... but the Russia leaks is going so far as to give Australia and New Zealand pause about the welfare of its operatives when it doesn't play silly buggers with the alliance like a certain Middle Eastern state with nuclear weapons.

Can you Americans impeach this idiot, already? Most people at least clean up after they shit where they eat.

Belief: Trump is playing 5D chess.
Reality: Trump is playing 1D Candyland. And trying to cheat at it. And failing.

Zontar:

"Above Top Secret" doesn't exist, Code Word just makes the old policy of "need to know" codified instead of trusting people not to abuse their clearance.

That's really just semantics. The point is that the information that Trump just handed over to the Russians (in a meeting inside the Oval Office, where the American press was barred, and the Russian press was present and unvetted) was highly classified 'need to know'/'code word' secret. So secret that some people with Top Secret clearance did not have the proper clearance to hear/see the unedited form of that information. If high-ranking U.S. officials did not need to know that information, Russia sure as hell did not need to know. Especially when that information did not come from American sources.

As others have pointed out the President is allowed to share any information he wants legally.

Just because he can doesn't mean he should. And when his careless actions (being generous here) endangered the life of a foreign allied spy and jeopardized the intelligence gathering of an allied state, which may in turn jeopardize the intelligence sharing of other allies (because they don't want their spies brutally tortured and murdered and their countries targeted in retaliation) with America, I would say that he should not have shared that information.

But go ahead and keep living in your own little world where Trump is the valiant hero, those who oppose him are evil and only certain kinds of people are given rights and privileges.

Agema:
Cynicism is not, per se, critical thinking. It is a philosophical or mental inclination to distrust, and thus potentially unreasonable bias. If you mean "scientific skepticism", this has reduced applicability outside science itself. Furthermore, it is (in extremely simple terms) a philosophical stance of not believing things until sufficient evidence is in. It does not, however, demand we cannot make reasonable suppositions of what is the case (e.g. hypotheses) based on analysis of available evidence.

One way or another, whatever you are trying to argue, critical thinking is not dismissing evidence without sufficient appreciation and analysis of the evidence itself.

Cynicism works fine. It's politics. Distrust everything you hear until you receive legitimate confirmation. Obama was born in Africa? Pics or gtfo. The Russians have a sex-tape on Trump? Pics or gtfo (albeit horrible pics).

If you deviate from cynicism, you wind up allowing your personal biases to come to the fore. Sure, you may find it believable that Trump is a bogeyman or Obama is a lizard, but that is because of your personal opinion of the guy. Your opinion of media outlets likewise.

The other issue is possibly that I sense you are moving the goalposts, which is to turn this into an argument about whether the evidence of "unnamed source" (irrespective of other factors) is adequate to uphold a conclusion that Trump definitely did do that. In which case, just 'fess up to this shift now, and we can agree on that proposition.

I'm not moving the goalposts. I'm defending my original post which went out prior to later developments. An unnamed source alone is not sufficient to condemn somebody. It can prompt further questions, but is not to be relied upon.

Zontar:

Exley97:
[No, actually. It doesn't have more evidence

As I said, there's circumstantial evidence (Wikileaks stating someone inside the DNC was their source coupled with his murder being suspect in its timing). It's not enough in itself to go on, but given how that's still more then what their is for the claims it was Russia (which is nothing even compared to that) it amazes me that between the two everyone in the left wing media is going with Russia despite the fact if they actually held themselves to halfway decent journalistic standards they'd say "we don't know" and leave it at that.

Of course they don't because they aren't journalists with standards, but then at this point no one can honestly pretend they are.

In reverse order...
1. Yes, there is ample evidence Russian threat actor were behind the DNC hack from both government and private sector sources.
2. No, there's not even "circumstantial" evidence Seth Rich was involved with Wikileaks.
3.
WIKILEAKS
DID NOT STATE
ITS SOURCE
WAS A DNC INSIDER.

It amazes me that you keep repeating this as if it's fact, just as you keep repeating #PizzGate nonsense.

Also, fun fact for your "left wing media" argument -- the publication that broke the Clinton email story? That was the New York Times. Same reporter, in fact, that broke the Comey memo story. Enjoy!

It amazes me that people keep trying to engage with someone who clearly has zero intention of arguing in good faith, but what do I know.

McMarbles:
It amazes me that people keep trying to engage with someone who clearly has zero intention of arguing in good faith, but what do I know.

Zontar, despite not being a US citizen, is the purest representation of Pro-Trump on this forum. Sure, there are more than a few right-wingers, but alot of them are well, not as blatantly pro-Trump, atleast not in the way Zontar is.

So, unless Spicer, Conway, Bannon, or Trump himself want to step in personally, it is Zontar who most represents the Trump side here, and thus is who gets alot of focus on. Plus he is very active.

I dont think many of us really think we can change Zontar's views, but by proving him wrong at every turn, we prove wrong Trump's supporters and the defenses they use.

The other right-wing users represent more the general right, while Zontar is more Trump's Right-Wing.

McMarbles:
It amazes me that people keep trying to engage with someone who clearly has zero intention of arguing in good faith, but what do I know.

Fair point. I'm usually content not to get into these matters with specific folks in this forum, but in my defense the Seth Rich bullshit REALLY bothers me.

twistedmic:
Just because he can doesn't mean he should.

Indeed, but if I've learned anything about politics in the last few years, 'can' is the only measure that matters. When it comes to scandal, anything else is a nothing burger.

McMarbles:
It amazes me that people keep trying to engage with someone who clearly has zero intention of arguing in good faith, but what do I know.

I assumed it was a joke we were all in on.

I'll give the Israeli angle (for the time). Basically there's not a lot to talk about, the information was apperantly about ISIS (which is kinda weird considering Israel is far back on ISIS list, unless there's appearance of the organization in Gaza or on the border). Even if Russia shares the info with Iran there's not a lot of reason for either to spill the beans since they are fighting against ISIS and will sabotage a possible information supply network. Though considering the shitstorm I won't be surprised the agent already been extracted before ISIS starts going full inquisition (more than usually at least).

Will it affect the relations between Israel and USA? No, since we are stuck with the USA for better or worse. But it can cause outside organizations to have second thoughts about sharing info with the USA which can have insanely dangerous consequences in terms of terrorist attacks.

inu-kun:
I'll give the Israeli angle (for the time). Basically there's not a lot to talk about, the information was apperantly about ISIS (which is kinda weird considering Israel is far back on ISIS list, unless there's appearance of the organization in Gaza or on the border). Even if Russia shares the info with Iran there's not a lot of reason for either to spill the beans since they are fighting against ISIS and will sabotage a possible information supply network. Though considering the shitstorm I won't be surprised the agent already been extracted before ISIS starts going full inquisition (more than usually at least).

Will it affect the relations between Israel and USA? No, since we are stuck with the USA for better or worse. But it can cause outside organizations to have second thoughts about sharing info with the USA which can have insanely dangerous consequences in terms of terrorist attacks.

I wouldn't really expect this to affect US Israel Relations. I would however, expect that it may affect what information is provided and when they provide that information to the US as long as Trump is president. They may wait until they have extracted their their people first prior to sharing the information, they may decide to leave out some detail that could endanger an operation ect. Though I would think that would be the best course of action to ensure the safety of their own people and sources of information considering what could happen if they do not. Trump has shown himself to not have self discipline, so there is no telling what he will and will not do or say in casual conversation. He shows so little control over himself he could not even give a commencement speech without rambling about things that had no place in a commencement speech.

Baffle2:

Zontar:

Don't most search engines just emulate Google's algorithm at the moment?

No idea, but then I'm not the one who needs to prove he isn't making stuff up in order to retain credibility (I make stuff up all the time but I try to cite my sources when I do so.)

I'm legitimately sure there's a problem with the search algorithm because when I search "Canada propaganda", I shouldn't have hate speech laws as the first link. If anything, I should have the CBC documentary series "Love, hate, and propaganda". I know this wasn't a issue 6 years ago because I did a paper on the subject and had no problem using the exact same search terms to find it all.

Adam Jensen:
You can't have a sitting president revealing highly classified allied secrets to a hostile nation.

Why not? It wouldn't be the first time a sitting US president did just that. Not even the worst example of it either, hell there's a legitimate debate to be had if it's even an example of it being horribly handled. I won't pretend to know the specifics, but until someone who isn't a partisan media source actually does confirm this is a big deal compared to Obamas' intelligence sharing, then I'll treat this like every other "scandal" that has occurred since he took office.

So far, nothing has stuck. I'll wait a week or two to see if this narrative is even still alive, let alone if it manages to stick for once.

Parasondox:

Just because something currently happens, doesn't mean that it should.

Just because the four previous administration did it, doesn't mean this one has to follow suit.

Lastly, which attitude? I'm still learning the political game each day and 2016 flipped it upside down that I now have to rethink things. If you are talking about Obama's administration and why I weren't doing the things I told you to do, how do you know I weren't against the things he did? Of course I was. Still am. Once again, he shat on the carpet at times but didn't flood the house with shit.

See here's my point: the previous 4 administrations committed war crimes and crimes against humanity, along with other incidents that make this look like the none-issue it is by comparison, all of which the media ignored because it wasn't convenient. Oh they reported on some of it, but most of it flew under the radar because the media simply wasn't interested, much of it not coming to light for years even though the information was there for all to see (though us small folk don't have the time to find it).

I'm going to be blunt: had this been Obama, Bush, Clinton or Bush Sr., no one would care. No one would care that intelligence was shared with a hostile state that's fighting a common enemy that doesn't dramatically effect the boots on the ground or our allies. The worst that could happen is US allies loosing a bit of trust that they'd be stupid to still have in the US anyway. At this point, outside of Canada, the UK, Australia and New Zealand (due to our common intelligence community) the only countries that could possible rationalise trusting the US at this point are satellite states like Japan. Anyone with even a hint of true autonomy would be out of their minds to trust the US at this point, even before Trump came into office. If Germany having its leader have her phone tapped by the US didn't do it, and the open acknowledgement that the Anglo intelligence community intercepts just about everything (Alert is definitely Canada's gift to the Empire if nothing else. Wouldn't want to be the sucker stationed there thought) didn't do it, this sure as hell won't.

twistedmic:

But go ahead and keep living in your own little world where Trump is the valiant hero, those who oppose him are evil and only certain kinds of people are given rights and privileges.

Trump saved my nations (as well as yours) from the TPP, he's going to have to do a fuck of a lot more for me to even pretend he wasn't great for myself, most of my family, most of the people I know, and hell most of the people I've ever met. The TPP was about as close to an existential threat to my people as we've seen since the Separatist movement almost tore this country in half. Like hell am I going to pretend that the man singlehandedly responsible for killing it isn't worth praise for that because of his giving intelligence on a common enemy to those who are effectively a temporary ally of convenience due to realpolitik, especially from a group who without a hint of irony or self awareness compare him to dictators where the very fact they can make such comparisons objectively disprove their claims in itself.

Exley97:

In reverse order...
1. Yes, there is ample evidence Russian threat actor were behind the DNC hack from both government and private sector sources.
2. No, there's not even "circumstantial" evidence Seth Rich was involved with Wikileaks.
3.
WIKILEAKS
DID NOT STATE
ITS SOURCE
WAS A DNC INSIDER.

If 1 is true, why have every single one of those sources made the choice to keep it to themselves?
If 2 and 3 are true, who faked the Wikileaks message making that claim?

Also, fun fact for your "left wing media" argument -- the publication that broke the Clinton email story? That was the New York Times. Same reporter, in fact, that broke the Comey memo story. Enjoy!

And yet the media pretends that what she did wasn't illegal, despite the fact that what she did intentionally for months on end has seen people imprisoned for accidentally doing once.

Every day she walks free is an affront to the claims of blind justice and an equal judicial system, but that's a topic for another thread.

McMarbles:
It amazes me that people keep trying to engage with someone who clearly has zero intention of arguing in good faith, but what do I know.

Today I learned holding a dissenting opinion in a place that's otherwise in agreement with itself and refusing to accept arguments from authority (form people who have long voided that authority at that) is "zero intention of arguing in good faith".

What what do I know, I'm just a dirty conservative, who cared what I think, I'm not evolved like urban coastal champagne socialists are. I can't look down on the blue collar workers from down here amongst them, so how could I possibly discuss politics?

Zontar:

McMarbles:
It amazes me that people keep trying to engage with someone who clearly has zero intention of arguing in good faith, but what do I know.

Today I learned holding a dissenting opinion in a place that's otherwise in agreement with itself and refusing to accept arguments from authority (form people who have long voided that authority at that) is "zero intention of arguing in good faith".

What what do I know, I'm just a dirty conservative, who cared what I think, I'm not evolved like urban coastal champagne socialists are. I can't look down on the blue collar workers from down here amongst them, so how could I possibly discuss politics?

"Authority" varies. It is not a constant thing. When Trump is "Authority" I am anti-authority.

And uh, you look down on immigrants and Muslims.

Zontar:

Adam Jensen:
You can't have a sitting president revealing highly classified allied secrets to a hostile nation.

Why not? It wouldn't be the first time a sitting US president did just that. Not even the worst example of it either, hell there's a legitimate debate to be had if it's even an example of it being horribly handled. I won't pretend to know the specifics, but until someone who isn't a partisan media source actually does confirm this is a big deal compared to Obamas' intelligence sharing, then I'll treat this like every other "scandal" that has occurred since he took office.

Someone who isn't a partisan media? Like who? You take your news from Fox News and Breitbart. Everyone who isn't on team Trump is partisan in favor of the DNC in your eyes. And this is a big deal. We know it is a big deal because the CIA and the NSA thought that the best course of action is to immediately inform Israel. We also know it from the way that McMaster worded his statement that didn't at all contradict WaPo article. Trump fucked up.

Zontar:
So far, nothing has stuck. I'll wait a week or two to see if this narrative is even still alive, let alone if it manages to stick for once.

Nothing has stuck? The whole Russia thing isn't going away. Trump is done. Maybe you can't see it because you're so in love with Trump but your boy is fuckin' done.

Special prosecutor has been announced and he happens to be even worse than Comey for Trump. And now there's a new story out about Paul Ryan and Kevin McCarthy talking about Trump being on Putin's payroll back in 2016. First they tried to deny that the conversation ever took place, but now they're saying how it was only a joke. Convenient, huh? We also found out that Trump and his team knew that Flynn was under investigation before the inauguration and they still gave him security clearance. On top of all of that Manafort and Flynn are now key figures in Russia probe. Then there's an investigation into Trump's hotels being used to launder Russia money. He is D-O-N-E. You can keep denying it if you want. But there's a pretty good chance that not only Trump, but other members of the Republican party are on the chopping block as well.

Adam Jensen:
He is D-O-N-E

You know, given how this is literally something I've been seeing said daily for the past 17 months, to the point where the phrase "Trump is finished" is a meme used to denote worry and/or denial in some places (no guesses, though I still have a feeling there's a 50/50 chance of getting it wrong), I'll believe it when Pence is being sworn in.

Zontar:

Adam Jensen:
He is D-O-N-E

You know, given how this is literally something I've been seeing said daily for the past 17 months, to the point where the phrase "Trump is finished" is a meme used to denote worry and/or denial in some places (no guesses, though I still have a feeling there's a 50/50 chance of getting it wrong), I'll believe it when Pence is being sworn in.

Well, unfortunately I think you have a point.

The US citizens already showcased just how big of a liar you can get away with being, when they elected the massive plonker.

It's like trying to potty-train a particularly stupid dog, and one wonders just how many blunders and cockups it takes for the US to finally realise that they ballsed up royally on this one.

Adam Jensen:

Zontar:
So far, nothing has stuck. I'll wait a week or two to see if this narrative is even still alive, let alone if it manages to stick for once.

Nothing has stuck? The whole Russia thing isn't going away. Trump is done. Maybe you can't see it because you're so in love with Trump but your boy is fuckin' done.

Special prosecutor has been announced and he happens to be even worse than Comey for Trump. And now there's a new story out about Paul Ryan and Kevin McCarthy talking about Trump being on Putin's payroll back in 2016. First they tried to deny that the conversation ever took place, but now they're saying how it was only a joke. Convenient, huh? We also found out that Trump and his team knew that Flynn was under investigation before the inauguration and they still gave him security clearance. On top of all of that Manafort and Flynn are now key figures in Russia probe. Then there's an investigation into Trump's hotels being used to launder Russia money. He is D-O-N-E. You can keep denying it if you want. But there's a pretty good chance that not only Trump, but other members of the Republican party are on the chopping block as well.

Hate to agree with Zontar, but...I will believe it when I see it. Trump being done that is. Trump wasnt done all those times he should have been during the election. He wasnt done when all that other shit happened during his presidency. And while Zontar may say it out of optimism, I say out of pessimism, I will believe it when I see it.

I mean, Trump should have been done when Clinton got more votes, but here we are

Zontar:

Adam Jensen:
He is D-O-N-E

You know, given how this is literally something I've been seeing said daily for the past 17 months, to the point where the phrase "Trump is finished" is a meme used to denote worry and/or denial in some places (no guesses, though I still have a feeling there's a 50/50 chance of getting it wrong), I'll believe it when Pence is being sworn in.

The man who can't see what's wrong with this picture has no right to judge on the Trump front. Since you won't acknowledge any of this, your words fall on deaf ears.

MrFalconfly:

Well, unfortunately I think you have a point.

The US citizens already showcased just how big of a liar you can get away with being, when they elected the massive plonker.

It's like trying to potty-train a particularly stupid dog, and one wonders just how many blunders and cockups it takes for the US to finally realise that they ballsed up royally on this one.

You know, as I see it Trump and hies cronies are an illness and the american justice system is Americas immune system. If it works it's gonna get rid of them one way or another. If it doesn't... well, America as we know it is gonna turn into another corrupt, impoverished banana republic. Which would be quite sad because it used to be a great country and it still has a lot of great people. Artists, scientists, intellectuals. You know, I've been saying we, that being Germany but really, Europe in general should open its borders for americans wanting to get away what their country is turning into. Might also stop the mentally disabled from decrying the "islamization of Germany".

But, you know, that's a worst case scenario, they might recover from this and be stronger for it. The pendulum has to swing in the other direction sooner or later. At least you'd think so.

Zontar:

Exley97:

In reverse order...
1. Yes, there is ample evidence Russian threat actor were behind the DNC hack from both government and private sector sources.
2. No, there's not even "circumstantial" evidence Seth Rich was involved with Wikileaks.
3.
WIKILEAKS
DID NOT STATE
ITS SOURCE
WAS A DNC INSIDER.

If 1 is true, why have every single one of those sources made the choice to keep it to themselves?
If 2 and 3 are true, who faked the Wikileaks message making that claim?

First, regarding Russia....dude, even the Republicans acknowledge what you continue to deny:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/house-majority-leader-to-colleagues-in-2016-i-think-putin-pays-trump/2017/05/17/515f6f8a-3aff-11e7-8854-21f359183e8c_story.html

Second, why don't you cite the "official" Wikileaks message you're referring to?

Zontar:

Trump saved my nations (as well as yours) from the TPP, he's going to have to do a fuck of a lot more for me to even pretend he wasn't great for myself, most of my family, most of the people I know, and hell most of the people I've ever met. The TPP was about as close to an existential threat to my people as we've seen since the Separatist movement almost tore this country in half. Like hell am I going to pretend that the man singlehandedly responsible for killing it isn't worth praise for that because of his giving intelligence on a common enemy to those who are effectively a temporary ally of convenience due to realpolitik, especially from a group who without a hint of irony or self awareness compare him to dictators where the very fact they can make such comparisons objectively disprove their claims in itself.

If you think Trump was out for anybody but himself and his bottom line by killing the TPP then you are more delusional than I first thought. Everything Trump does is to further his own interest before anything else.
And saying that Trump is not a dictator because people can call him a dictator without winding up dead or in prison is a very weak argument. The man has a history of displaying dictatorial tendencies. He has repeatedly attacked the press, he has repeatedly used minorities as a scapegoat (mostly Muslims) and has encouraged violence towards anyone who disagrees with him, has expressed a desire to jail political opponents. That's not getting into how much he seems to praise and admire current dictators, mainly Putin.

Catnip1024:
Cynicism works fine. It's politics. Distrust everything you hear until you receive legitimate confirmation. Obama was born in Africa? Pics or gtfo. The Russians have a sex-tape on Trump? Pics or gtfo (albeit horrible pics).

Let me illustrate the problem with your process here.

Should I be cynical of the fact that Obama claims to be an American-born Christian, or should I be cynical of claims that he is not? Or should I be cynical about both, and therefore believe nothing because nothing iis trustworthy.

Obama's birth certificate? To be cynical, it's a forgery. Witnesses to the birth? To be cynical, they're liars. And so on.

If you deviate from cynicism, you wind up allowing your personal biases to come to the fore.

No. Like I said, cynicism (in the modern sense at least) is a mental attitude of distrust, pessimism and thinking the worst. It IS a bias.

You are confusing it with skepticism, which has a variety of meanings but in a more modern philosophical bent (as per the above comment) represents a methodical process of rationalistion and reasonable doubt.

I'm not moving the goalposts. I'm defending my original post which went out prior to later developments. An unnamed source alone is not sufficient to condemn somebody.

You said, and anyone can go back and read it:

"I said it before, and I'll say it again - unnamed sources are as good as fake news for all the journalistic accountability that is in place."

But that isn't true, is it?

McMarbles:
It amazes me that people keep trying to engage with someone who clearly has zero intention of arguing in good faith, but what do I know.

I like it. Keeps my teeth sharp, so to speak.

twistedmic:

If you think Trump was out for anybody but himself and his bottom line by killing the TPP then you are more delusional than I first thought. Everything Trump does is to further his own interest before anything else.

You know what, maybe he was. Maybe he did put his life on the line (two assassination attempts have been made so far, even if horribly planned ones) and left his billionaire lifestyle to enter politics to get his interests pushed instead of just donating money to both parties like everyone else does.

I don't care. What he has done has already saved the livelihoods of tens of millions of Americans, and even my own and those of many of the people I know. The only argument one could possible make at this point is that Sanders, had he won, would not have been as spineless in that position then he was after he lost the nomination and would have killed it himself. Trump, even if the allegations are true and the information really is sensitive, has a long way to go if you want me to have a rational reason to dislike him.

Because here's something a lot of you people just don't seem to get: my supporting Trump was rational, it was in my self interest, it was not any of the things the left wing media keeps trying to pretend it was (being tricked, being stupid, etc.) but simple self interest and nothing more. As politics usually is.

For people who seem to try and make everything about money by putting a dollar value on it, I'd think coastal urbanites would understand that.

Agema:

I'm not moving the goalposts. I'm defending my original post which went out prior to later developments. An unnamed source alone is not sufficient to condemn somebody.

You said, and anyone can go back and read it:

"I said it before, and I'll say it again - unnamed sources are as good as fake news for all the journalistic accountability that is in place."

But that isn't true, is it?

That remains true. If you don't know who the source is, you can't accurately decide whether or not they have an agenda. Regardless of any arbitrary opinion you may have about the particular agency through which this gets reported. It could be false information, it could be misrepresented information, it could be true information the release of which was timed for particular ends. There is no way to even come to an opinion if you don't know where the information is from.

Saelune:

McMarbles:
It amazes me that people keep trying to engage with someone who clearly has zero intention of arguing in good faith, but what do I know.

Zontar, despite not being a US citizen, is the purest representation of Pro-Trump on this forum. Sure, there are more than a few right-wingers, but alot of them are well, not as blatantly pro-Trump, atleast not in the way Zontar is.

So, unless Spicer, Conway, Bannon, or Trump himself want to step in personally, it is Zontar who most represents the Trump side here, and thus is who gets alot of focus on. Plus he is very active.

I dont think many of us really think we can change Zontar's views, but by proving him wrong at every turn, we prove wrong Trump's supporters and the defenses they use.

The other right-wing users represent more the general right, while Zontar is more Trump's Right-Wing.

Viewing politics as a game creates stupid people who don't care about what's right or wrong but rather if they can win.

It would be more productive to discuss and argue the topic at hand rather than play identity politics with roleplayers.

Rule of Thumb:

When the discussion organically descends from the topical level to the relational or identity level, the issue is no longer about the topic but rather about our social roles and power in relation to each other.

I'm not a big fan of such discussions as they lead to nothing being accomplished beyond furthered feelings of division.

Zontar:

Trump, even if the allegations are true and the information really is sensitive, has a long way to go if you want me to have a rational reason to dislike him.

They are true, he admitted that he shared the information. And the information was sensitive. It was extremely sensitive. And it was not his information to share. It came from another country and Trump sharing that information put people's lives at risk.

Because here's something a lot of you people just don't seem to get: my supporting Trump was rational, it was in my self interest, it was not any of the things the left wing media keeps trying to pretend it was (being tricked, being stupid, etc.) but simple self interest and nothing more. As politics usually is.

That actually makes it worse, in my opinion. That makes you look like a white-supremacist, misogynistic, Islamophobic hatemonger. Trump is a despicable person, regardless of political and religious affiliation. He has swindled countless people. He has sexually assaulted and harassed multiple women. He has made racist remarks. He has mocked disabled people. He is a pathological liar.

Epyc Wynn:

Saelune:

McMarbles:
It amazes me that people keep trying to engage with someone who clearly has zero intention of arguing in good faith, but what do I know.

Zontar, despite not being a US citizen, is the purest representation of Pro-Trump on this forum. Sure, there are more than a few right-wingers, but alot of them are well, not as blatantly pro-Trump, atleast not in the way Zontar is.

So, unless Spicer, Conway, Bannon, or Trump himself want to step in personally, it is Zontar who most represents the Trump side here, and thus is who gets alot of focus on. Plus he is very active.

I dont think many of us really think we can change Zontar's views, but by proving him wrong at every turn, we prove wrong Trump's supporters and the defenses they use.

The other right-wing users represent more the general right, while Zontar is more Trump's Right-Wing.

Viewing politics as a game creates stupid people who don't care about what's right or wrong but rather if they can win.

It would be more productive to discuss and argue the topic at hand rather than play identity politics with roleplayers.

Rule of Thumb:

When the discussion organically descends from the topical level to the relational or identity level, the issue is no longer about the topic but rather about our social roles and power in relation to each other.

I'm not a big fan of such discussions as they lead to nothing being accomplished beyond furthered feelings of division.

Identity politics ARE politics, atleast as long as equal rights are the core of every political action. As long as Republicans oppose LGBT rights, as long as Republicans oppose a woman's right to choose and protect rapists, as long as Republicans oppose Mexicans, and Muslims, and blacks, and the poor, as long as thse things happen, identity politics, IS politics.

twistedmic:
That makes you look like a white-supremacist, misogynistic, Islamophobic hatemonger.

No, it doesn't, and the fact many on the left believe this is why blue collar workers have taken a sharp right turn and are unlikely to go back any time soon: because our economic self interest is at stake, and we have to pick between a person who's promising to protect it, and one who's calling us every name in the book while wearing a suit that costs at least a month's wage and making a salary we couldn't hope for.

Really, how anyone could see this state of politics and expect the blue collar workers of the country to do anything else then vote for Trump speaks volumes of the failure of the American education system, both the lower and higher sides of it given how many in university or with such a high level of education somehow thought active hostility towards an entire class was going to win it over instead of pushing it into the arms of the ones promising to protect them from such hostility.

Trump 2020. Worst case scenario is it all burns to the ground instead of things being made great again, and if that happens, well they say what goes around comes around don't they?

Epyc Wynn:

I'm not a big fan of such discussions as they lead to nothing being accomplished beyond furthered feelings of division.

I'm kind of in a no-loose senario regarding the left's obsession with identity politics. On the one hand if they keep at it the right will keep winning since moderate whites are continuing to be pushed to the right due to either 1) not buying it and wanting something else, or 2) actually buying it and realising that a wing that both embraces identity politics and hates the majority will never represent their interests.

On the other hand, if they do stop the right will likely pick up the slack and actually get rid of people like the neocons Ryan and McCain for something actually worth supporting.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here