President-elect Trump

[sexobon]

That lends credence to the argument that Clinton supporters should be seen and not heard.

[classicman]

... much like their candidate.

[Pamela]

What a load of bs that story of the Russians hacking/influencing our election is. There is no upside to Trump winning from the Russian perspective. Clinton was easily blackmailable if she wouldn't play ball. Trump is not.

Talk about fake news!

How do I imbed a youtube video? I can never get that to work!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QR-uBdeEVF8

[tw]

Originally Posted by Pamela

What a load of bs that story of the Russians hacking/influencing our election is.

Extremist neo-cons say that when talk show hosts have told them how to think. Meanwhile professionals who do this stuff (ie Fort Meade) accurately say this is a great concern. Since extremists are so easily manipulated by such propaganda techniques. Since neo-cons do not know how to separate facts from emotional misinformation.

Same techniques also proved to most Americans that smoking cigarettes increase health. If most adults knew how to think for themselves, then those Russian antics would be irrelevant. But we know most adults are not officer material. Same type people were what Hitler called his brownshirts. So easily manipulated by misinformation, deception, context, and soundbytes.

We also know why Putin wanted Trump. Chess players easily manipulate and run circles around thin skinned, emotional, and not cerebral counter parties. He expects many good years running circles around the emotional, thin skinned, poorly educated, and Christie type bully Trump.

[sexobon]

Originally Posted by tw

... We also know why Putin wanted Trump. ...

So he would have more opportunities to flirt with Melania. If Hillary had taken better care of herself, maybe got some plastic surgery even, we wouldn't be in this situation. But she let herself go, didn't she.

[Griff]

Originally Posted by tw

Extremist neo-cons say...

Here's the problem, neo-conservatism is an ideology that started with conservative Democrats. The aggressive militarism espoused by them in foreign policy is not distinguishable from HRC's positions. Please update your scare words to match reality.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Griff

Here's the problem, neo-conservatism is an ideology that started with conservative Democrats.

Wacko extremist Democrats who then became wacko extremist Republican. Neo-con extremism existed long before that. Another legendary example was Sen Joseph McCarthy whose extremist lies destroyed so many lives. Completely different from moderates - Democrats or Republicans. Stop foolishly dumping all in one pot.

Moderates learn facts; then make a conclusion. Wacko extremists (neo-cons) have a conclusion based in emotion (or rhetoric); first learning facts be damned.

Only the naive would believe Russian hacking is mythical or not a concern. Especially when so many adults are so easily manipulated even by fictional news sites or Bill O'Reilly that intentionally creates such lies. Especially when so many adults knew smoking cigarettes increased health. Or loved it when we massacred 5000 American soldiers on what was clearly a lie about Saddam's WMDs. Extremist lies (like speeches that promote hate) are dangerous when left unexposed.

Unfortunately many adults are not officer material; are easily manipulated by outright lies. Rhetoric taught them to disparage and hate; to not bother learning how the world works. Extremists even deny that Russians hacked to promote a thin-skinned and knee-jerk president.

[classicman]

Here ya go ...

[BigV]

The guy (and reince priebus and Conway elsewhere) on the right hit several of the points in the poster at the top of the Debating. / Arguing thread. His/their flaws of logic are painful to watch. Trump's team is very selective, deliberately and carefully choosing what evidence and sources they reference when responding to the questions from interviewers.


And I think this news item is a typical illustration of the disconnect in our shared experience of the reporting of things that are going on in the world. It's sadly clear that different sides the issues also bring different rules and standards to the conversation. Senator McCain evoked Senator Moynihan today saying "facts are stubborn things" when he expressed his support for an investigation of this issue.

[classicman]

So many concerned that Trump may be cozy with Russia had absolutely no problem with Obama telling Putin he'll be more flexible after the election (wink wink/nudge nudge) Oh, and remember Obama making fun of Romney in the debate for calling Russia a geopolitical threat.
Yeh, you're a mental midgit. Your predictable thin-skinned, knee-jerk posts are irrelevant. You can STFU now. Your hypocrisy is nauseating.

[glatt]

The Washington Post is reporting that scientists are unsure of a Trump presidency and beleive there is a decent chance he will remove climate data from government records. So there is now a coordinated effort underway to identify and prioritize all government hosted climate data and copy it and back it up to independent servers in other countries.

Maybe they are paranoid. Maybe they are wise.

Apparently a couple of days ago, Trump's transition team asked the Department of Energy for the names of everyone who has worked on climate change research in that agency, including private contractors. Why would they ask for that list of names? What possible motivation could they have?


Don't believe the press? This is the actual list of questions sent to the Department of Energy.

What are the names?



And what programs are important to Obama?

[Undertoad]

Originally Posted by glatt

The Washington Post is reporting that scientists are unsure of a Trump presidency and beleive there is a decent chance he will remove climate data from government records.

How's that going?

[Undertoad]

If the Washington Post makes a connection between not knowing why a question was asked of the Department of Energy, and a hysterical movement of a minority of scientists concerning data that is not developed or kept by the Department of Energy,

A) Is that news?

That's my only question. Because not knowing why a question was asked and drawing conclusions on that basis is not journalism. It's fucking conspiracy theory.

[Happy Monkey]

Hysterical? Conspiracy theory?

Only if you think that Trump and the people he appoints will be more restrained than Canadians.

“Canada had some of the top climate change scientists in the world working, and they were stopped in their tracks,” as were leading ocean and fisheries researchers, he says. “The world as a whole is going to feel the consequences of that.”

Perhaps the most controversial feature of Harper’s administration was its reported “muzzling” of federal scientists.

For years, departments set strict rules over how and when scientists could discuss their research with the media, the public, and even other scientists. Journalists had to run interview requests through communication officers, often having to submit questions in advance. Environment Canada scientists required specific approval before speaking publicly on issues like climate change and polar bears, while researchers at the Natural Resources Canada needed pre-approval to give interviews on topics like “climate change” and “oil sands.” Scientists couldn’t travel to some conferences, or when they did were sometimes shadowed by media liaisons.

[xoxoxoBruce]

While Donald Trump was on the phone taking that congratulatory phone call from the president of Turkey, in that same call, Mr. Trump brought up to the president of Turkey by name that executive from the Doğan company, the guy who was the key guy on Trump’s big twin towers in Istanbul.”

Noting that Trump praised the man to Turkish President Erdoğan.

“On December 1st, the top representative of the Doğan company, in Turkey’s capital city, got arrested by the Turkish police. Again, Trump as president-elect had taken an official call from the Turkish president and used that occasion to tell the Turkish president how much this one particular company meant to him, going so far as to name specific executives.”

“I mean, the Trump family and the president-elect themselves, they stand to make millions of dollars from their relationship with the Doğan group in Turkey. That will stop if they get locked up,” she continued. “So they started locking them up. Nice leverage, right? It would be one thing if it was business leverage — but it’s leverage against all of us as Americans.”

link