Conrad Twitty

[scottw]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Baby Steps

well..this is the Conrad Twitty thread after all...

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

You didn't mention CNN or MSNBC in your list, but even they aren't "fake news", but they are ideological networks with a very clear bias.

They were covered by affiliates and etc. I also don't believe you can't see the difference between what Obama said on (on a handful of occasions) and a repeated effort to demonize and discredit any media that criticizes or is negative of him, to the point of calling journalism the enemy or the people. That it's Stalin, Mao, Putin territory.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by zimmy

They were covered by affiliates and etc. I also don't believe you can't see the difference between what Obama said on (on a handful of occasions) and a repeated effort to demonize and discredit any media that criticizes or is negative of him,

There is no difference in quality. The one who does it only once is not less guilty of it than another who has done it 100 times. And if the repeated effort by one to do it is less than that of another whose repeated effort is of a greater number, they both are guilty of the same thing. There is no magic number that makes the quality of the "crime" less meaningful. Being guilty of murdering one person is not being less guilty of murder than is one who has committed ten murders. It is nonsense to create some notion that the number of times a wrong is done diminishes the wrong as that number goes down. Stop this silly need for there to be equivalence in order to make a point. It is even a given that once someone gets away with a supposed no-no, others will follow with even more no-no's since the precedence clears the way. The quantity of no-no's will naturally rise once the gate is open.

to the point of calling journalism the enemy or the people. That it's Stalin, Mao, Putin territory.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump did not say "journalism" is the enemy of the people. And "enemy of the people" is simply a phrase made up of specific English words. It has an intrinsic meaning as it is applied to a given situation, regardless of whoever used the phrase before nor for whatever motive or circumstance they used it. It would be nonsense to disallow the use of that string of words for anything other than a Stalinesque statement. That, in itself, would be applying a Stalin like imposition on language--a sort of dictatorship against free use of language.

It so happens that the phrase has been used and recorded several times throughout history, going back at least to the great Roman or Greek civilizations. It was even used as a title for a play by Ibsen. None of them were referring to Stalin, or Mao, or Putin as a reference point for their meaning. Picking on a use of it by Communist dictators is obviously an attempt to equate (there's that equivalence nonsense again) Trump with them. The specific way that Trump seems to mean it is that what he believes is false reporting and erroneous media analysis is a danger to society as it engenders ideas that can lead to the opposite of what people want and need. Ergo, in that respect, it is an enemy of the peoples will and well being.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Originally Posted by wdmso View Post
They the right and Trump supporters refuse to see a pattern of behavior from Trump from this topic to attacking the FBI CIA

The "left" used to see destructive patterns of behavior by the FBI and CIA. But now, when they're showing some outlandish patterns of behavior in order to remove Trump, all is pure and just.

Attacking The media in general

No, just the fake media. But not State news AKA Fox

Obviously, Trump is focusing on fake stuff that attacks him. Should he be responding to every bit of fakery that's in the media? OMG, the tweets would fill the Federal Register.

Treating to remove security clearances ,

Those whose behavior does not comport with their agency codes, should have their security clearances revoked.
If it was not a political move, why announce it in a tweet, especially since two of the people no longer had clearances anyways

Duh . . . everything a politician does is a political move. Trump is unique in that many of his moves are on Twitter.

no longer releasing phone transcripts ..

Big deal. I find it more disturbing that transcripts requested by Congress from aforesaid agencies are being stonewalled, not released, or so heavily redacted that critical information cannot be seen.
Is it an issue that Mike Pompeo stonewalled etc. Congress on his discussions re Putin with Trump, I think both issues are very similar Is it an issue for you? and Congress needs to do it's own work.

Part of its work is oversight of various agencies. Is it an issue for you that federal agencies become so powerful that they can do as they wish without answering to Congress? That they have the unchecked power to destroy the life of any American citizen simply by saying that it would endanger national security if they answered questions regarding matters that would limit their power or would expose the malfeasance they impose on us not only to supposedly protect us, but also destroy any of us that they wished to, even for political reasons rather than so-called national security?

lying about paying people off

Yeah, I recall you defending Hillary for covering up her husbands lying and philandering. Yeah, that's a whataboutism. And it's true. People in power, most of them, lie to save face. It was OK for others. Not for Trump. Get over it.
Quantity counts

Can you verify that quantity counts in regards to the evil of lying?

Russia calling 25 indictments a which hunt or poor Treatment of immigrants ...

The indictments were optic BS for public consumption. There was never any chance the Russians could be prosecuted. The first 13 Russians called Mueller's bluff and actually volunteered to go to trial--Mueller let that go, he had nothing. The next twelve, as Mueller knew that he didn't have the power to prosecute or convict them of anything, were again optics--this time to make it appear to the US public that by not showing up they had something to hide that would reflect on Trump. But this time Putin called Mueller's bluff by agreeing to letting the 12 be interrogated if the Russians could interrogate a couple of Americans who they had accused of crimes against Russia.
The indicted are not all Russians. There are also some convictions. The investigations not over, why does everyone, including Trump, assume that they will find something to connect the campaign to Russia, time will tell


Why are there now these investigations of matters (some of which well predate Trump's political campaign) that have little, if anything, to do directly with Trump, or if they do, were not about Russian election interference and not even illegal, happening now, and why is every anti-Trumper wanting them to be about Trump and hope that they will find something, Russia or anything else, that will make it feasible to impeach Trump or put him in jail?

or poor Treatment of immigrants and more

More BS, as in the photo of "undocumented" children under blankets in a cage--those were photos taken during the Obama administration. The whole issue was a law that pre-existed Trump.
Have all the children been reunited with their parents yet, reports that I have heard are that they have not and some may never be. Is that acceptable?

Apparently, there are various technical and legal problems in uniting some of the children with their parents, for instance there were those who brought the children here that were not actually their parents or even related to them. There were even parents who did not want to be reunited. And there were parents who could not be found or whose whereabouts were unknown.


And their response is unison like Parrots.. but but but Obama or Clinton or Benghazi or uranium 1 now Twitter shadowing ( all debunked 1000 times over ) zero indictments .....

Not debunked. Besides, those are whataboutisms, which you don't approve of. What indictments that actually relate to Trump colluding with the Russians?
Yes they have all been debunked, lets see where the investigation leads on this one, it is currently much shorter than Benghazi


Benghazi was not debunked. It clearly showed Hillary's incompetence and unfitness for the office of POTUS. Uranium 1 is still an open question (should be thoroughly investigated like the Trump collusion thing). And what indictments are there for Trump colluding with Russians? And why is a mere indictment something to crow about?

I have said it before theses issues involving Trump are not made up or OMG he wore a Brown suit or he had his feet on the oval office desk moments ....

These are actual quantifiable actions and policy's and thoughts based on Facts supported by written words ,video , audio .... they cant be wished away by closing your eyes or just them or calling them partisan attacks ..

Actually, they are spin or irrelevant, and can be called partisan attacks.
If they are irrelevant then why do you care, in other cases they are unspinning false information provided by the WH

I don't care. wdmso brought them up, not me.

Every Administration spins things to fit their narrative but understands the ramifications if they get caught and deals with them.
This administration just insists that they are correct almost no matter what happens

You make it sound that such is unique to the Trump administration rather than the actuality of it being a universal response of all administrations.

But what scares me the most is Many people who consider themselves Patriots don't have a problem with any of it ..

Do you consider yourself a patriot?

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by detbuch

Do you consider yourself a patriot?

Yes I am a Patriot proud of his country for what it does and have attitude or sense of responsibility

What I am Not is a Nationalist posing as a Patriot proud of his country no matter what it does out of a feeling of blind arrogance.

someone else provided the definitions.. which are spot on, how I see myself in todays America Thanks for asking

[scottw]

Conrad Twitty is a Patriot

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Yes I am a Patriot proud of his country for what it does and have attitude or sense of responsibility

In that respect, you are not different than those who support Trump's policies.

And I wasn't asking you if you're a patriot. I assumed from your posts that you are. I asked Pete F. He's the one who brought it up by questioning the patriotism of those who don't think like he does.

What I am Not is a Nationalist posing as a Patriot proud of his country no matter what it does out of a feeling of blind arrogance.

The idea that a nationalist cannot be a patriot is nonsense. And your implication that some of us who approve of Trump's policies are blindly arrogant is, actually, arrogant.

And nationalism comes in degrees. There is the form of it realized in our time of an existing global conscience. The old notion that other nations than our own had a lesser quality, were lacking in the goodness and rightness of ours, has been replaced with the idea that whether others are good, or right, or beautiful, or ugly, each nation looks to maintain its own goodness and rightness and beauty. Each has the equal right and duty to be the best it can under its own terms. That is not a matter of hate or discrimination. It is a matter of each nation doing what is best for its people.

someone else provided the definitions.. which are spot on, how I see myself in todays America Thanks for asking

I never doubted that you were proud and confident of how you see yourself. But when you make ad hominem statements about other's so-called arrogance, you diminish the shine of your glowing self perception.

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by scottw

Conrad Twitty is a Patriot

No, it is Comrade Tweety. That was an autocorrect issue. He isn't a patriot, he is a giant orange Soviet loving baby.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device