- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 33,852
There might be Russian collusion after all.
- Thread starter Dancing Fire
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2003
- Messages
- 1,948
Hi DF, here's an article that explores the alleged incidents in depth. http://www.slate.com/blogs/watching...y_about_obama_clinton_uranium_and_russia.html
It is quite a complicated story! I am happy to discuss the details with you DF, where would you like to begin?
It is quite a complicated story! I am happy to discuss the details with you DF, where would you like to begin?
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 33,852
Agree with me that the Clintons are corrupted and made millions by using their political powers.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2011
- Messages
- 193
Agree that Trump is corrupt and made a sh*t ton of money f*cking other people over.
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2003
- Messages
- 1,948
What difference does it make if I agree with that or not? The election is over and Clinton lost. If we were discussing this during the campaign, that is a question I'd seriously have to consider as a Clinton supporter. The question now is whether or not there was Trump/Russia collusion. Trump won the election and is now president of the U.S. It is important to know whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians even if the Clintons were corrupt.
As to whether or not I agree - both articles paint an extremely complicated picture. Did you read them? Neither one of them definitively concludes what you state, so no I can't just come out and agree with you that the Clintons made millions through corruption. In the same way, I don't agree that we can conclude Trump campaign collusion yet, and we may never be able to. But that doesn't change the fact that we know beyond a shadow of a doubt that Trump is corrupt and has made multi-millions by ripping people off.
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2014
- Messages
- 9,348
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 33,852
Wish I was...
. but of course I'm not qualify b/c most white Americans are racist.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 33,598
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 33,852
KennyI'm sure America has never ever interfered with a foreign election.
You are correct. Obama did try to interfere with elections in the UK and Israel.
- Joined
- Apr 30, 2005
- Messages
- 33,598
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,154
Watch the movie "Burn". It is truly great. Truly great! It shows what taking over another country (colonialism) is all about.
Review of "Burn"...http://brooklynrail.org/2004/09/film/gillo-pontecorvos-burn
Another review of "Burn"...http://www.indiewire.com/2015/11/co...lutionary-film-ever-made-by-hollywood-137726/
"Burn" on YouTube...
AGBF
Review of "Burn"...http://brooklynrail.org/2004/09/film/gillo-pontecorvos-burn
Another review of "Burn"...http://www.indiewire.com/2015/11/co...lutionary-film-ever-made-by-hollywood-137726/
"Burn" on YouTube...
AGBF
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2012
- Messages
- 1,976
Uraniun One scandal, 2 'must read' articles IMHO.
explanations of transactions/players leading to scandal
http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...ministration-doj-hillary-clinton-racketeering
Russian Ghost Stories article
http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/20/hillary-clintons-russian-ghost-stories/
explanations of transactions/players leading to scandal
http://www.nationalreview.com/artic...ministration-doj-hillary-clinton-racketeering
Russian Ghost Stories article
http://dailycaller.com/2017/10/20/hillary-clintons-russian-ghost-stories/
Attachments
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
National Review and the horrid Daily Caller are highly partisan, right wing sites. I wouldn't believe the veracity of either site. It is the same as a partisan right wing person not believing HuffPost.
https://today.law.harvard.edu/berkm...rt-media-coverage-2016-presidential-campaign/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Caller
from wiki:
Controversies[edit]
False prostitution allegations[edit]
In March 2013 The Daily Caller posted interviews with two women claiming that New Jersey Democratic Senator Bob Menendez had paid them for sex while he was a guest of a campaign donor.[23] The allegation came five days before the 2012 New Jersey senate election. News organizations such as ABC News, which had also interviewed the women, the New York Times, and the New York Post declined to publish the allegations, viewing them as unsubstantiated and lacking credibility.[24][25][26] Subsequently, one of the women who accused Menendez stated that she had been paid to falsely implicate the senator and had never met him.[24][27] Menendez's office described the allegations as "manufactured" by a right-wing blog as a politically motivated smear.[28]
A few weeks later, police in the Dominican Republic announced that three women had claimed they were paid $300–425 each to lie about having had sex with Menendez.[29] Dominican law enforcement also alleged that the women had been paid to lie about Menendez by an individual claiming to work for The Daily Caller. The Daily Caller denied this allegation, stating: "At no point did any money change hands between The Daily Caller and any sources or individuals connected with this investigation".[30] Describing what it saw as the unraveling of The Daily Caller's "scoop", the Poynter Institute wrote: The Daily Caller stands by its reports, though apparently doesn't feel the need to prove its allegations right".[31]
Fox News controversy[edit]
In March 2015 Daily Caller columnist Mickey Kaus quit after editor Tucker Carlson refused to run a column critical of Fox News coverage of the immigration policy debate.[32] Carlson, who also works for Fox, reportedly did not want the Caller publishing criticism of a firm that employed him.[33]Journalist Neil Munro quit two weeks later.[34]
2016 presidential election[edit]
According to a study by Harvard University's Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society, the Daily Caller was among the most popular sites on the right during the 2016 presidential election. The study also found that the Daily Caller provided "amplification and legitimation" for "the most extreme conspiracy sites", such as Truthfeed, Infowars, Gateway Pundit and Conservative Treehouse during the 2016 presidential election.[35][36][37]The Daily Caller also "employed anti-immigrant narratives that echoed sentiments from the alt-right and white nationalists but without the explicitly racist and pro-segregation language."[36] The Daily Caller also played
a significant role in creating and disseminating stories that had little purchase outside the right-wing media ecosystem but that stoked the belief among core Trump followers that what Clinton did was not merely questionable but criminal and treasonous. In a campaign that expressed deep anti-Muslim sentiment, a repeated theme was that Hillary Clinton was seriously in hock to Muslim nations.[36]
In one of its most frequently shared stories, the Daily Caller falsely asserted that Morocco’s King Mohammed VI flew Bill Clinton on a private jet, and that this had been omitted from the Clinton Foundation's tax disclosures.[36] The Daily Caller also made the "utterly unsubstantiated and unsourced claim" that Hillary Clinton got Environmental Protection Agency "head Lisa Jackson to try to shut down Mosaic Fertilizer, described as America’s largest phosphate mining company, in exchange for a $15 million donation to the Clinton Foundation from King Mohammed VI of Morocco, ostensibly to benefit Morocco’s state-owned phosphate company."[36]
Encouragement of violence against protesters[edit]
In January 2017, the Daily Caller posted a video which encouraged violence against protesters.[38][39][40][41] The video in question showed a car plowing through protesters, with the headline "Here's A Reel Of Cars Plowing Through Protesters Trying To Block The Road" and set to a cover of Ludacris' "Move Bitch."[38] The video drew attention in August 2017 when a white supremacist plowed his car through a group of counterprotesters at a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville.[38] After the video attracted attention, the Daily Caller deleted it from its website.[38][41]
The Southern Poverty Law Center subsequently criticized the Daily Caller, saying that it had a "white nationalist problem".[42] SPLC also said that two other contributors to the Daily Caller had ties to white nationalist groups.[42]
Articles by white supremacist Jason Kessler[edit]
The Daily Caller has posted articles by Jason Kessler, a white supremacist who organized a rally of hundreds of white nationalists in Charlottesville.[43][44] Before Kessler posted his article, it was known that he had spoken at white supremacist gatherings.[45] After Kessler received attention for his organizing of the Charlottesville white supremacist rally, the Daily Caller removed his articles from its website,[46] but the Caller's Executive Editor defended Kessler's articles.[47]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_C._McCarthy
from wiki bio of Andrew C McCarthy right wing writer at the National Review.
Opinions[edit]
He has defended the practice of waterboarding as not necessarily being torture, and as necessary in some situations to prosecute the War on Terror[7][8] whilst admitting that "waterboarding is close enough to torture that reasonable minds can differ on whether it is torture".[9]
During the 2008 presidential election campaign, McCarthy wrote a number of posts on the National Review's Corner blog stating that he thought that Democratic Presidential candidate, Barack Obama, was not serious about protecting US national security against threats from radical Islam and elsewhere, and that Obama had a number of troubling ties and associations with leftist radicals.
In an opinion posted on the blog 'the Corner' on October 22, 2008,[10] McCarthy wrote "I believe that the issue of Obama's personal radicalism, including his collaboration with radical, America-hating Leftists, should have been disqualifying."
In May 2009, McCarthy provided details of a letter declining an invitation from Attorney General Eric Holder for a round-table meeting with PresidentBarack Obama concerning the status of people detained in the War on Terror. McCarthy noted his dissension with the administration in their policies regarding the detainees.[11] On December 5, 2009 he came out publicly against prosecuting Islamic terrorists in civil courts rather than military tribunals, saying "A war is a war. A war is not a crime, and you don’t bring your enemies to a courthouse."[6]
McCarthy has recently spoken out against the War in Afghanistan, saying that the War benefits the Afghans while hurting American interests, and that the United States should be concerned solely with its interests.
Coupled with his national security conservatism, McCarthy also espouses strong fiscal conservative views on entitlement spending, and favors the abolition of Medicare, which he calls a fraud and a Ponzi scheme greater than that perpetrated by Bernie Madoff.[12] He says that the goals of the original proponents of Medicare were to get a foot in the door with "a Trojan Horse, whose proponents wanted universal compulsory socialized medicine."
McCarthy opposed the 2017 Shayrat missile strike.[13]
Publications[edit]
https://today.law.harvard.edu/berkm...rt-media-coverage-2016-presidential-campaign/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Daily_Caller
from wiki:
Controversies[edit]
False prostitution allegations[edit]
In March 2013 The Daily Caller posted interviews with two women claiming that New Jersey Democratic Senator Bob Menendez had paid them for sex while he was a guest of a campaign donor.[23] The allegation came five days before the 2012 New Jersey senate election. News organizations such as ABC News, which had also interviewed the women, the New York Times, and the New York Post declined to publish the allegations, viewing them as unsubstantiated and lacking credibility.[24][25][26] Subsequently, one of the women who accused Menendez stated that she had been paid to falsely implicate the senator and had never met him.[24][27] Menendez's office described the allegations as "manufactured" by a right-wing blog as a politically motivated smear.[28]
A few weeks later, police in the Dominican Republic announced that three women had claimed they were paid $300–425 each to lie about having had sex with Menendez.[29] Dominican law enforcement also alleged that the women had been paid to lie about Menendez by an individual claiming to work for The Daily Caller. The Daily Caller denied this allegation, stating: "At no point did any money change hands between The Daily Caller and any sources or individuals connected with this investigation".[30] Describing what it saw as the unraveling of The Daily Caller's "scoop", the Poynter Institute wrote: The Daily Caller stands by its reports, though apparently doesn't feel the need to prove its allegations right".[31]
Fox News controversy[edit]
In March 2015 Daily Caller columnist Mickey Kaus quit after editor Tucker Carlson refused to run a column critical of Fox News coverage of the immigration policy debate.[32] Carlson, who also works for Fox, reportedly did not want the Caller publishing criticism of a firm that employed him.[33]Journalist Neil Munro quit two weeks later.[34]
2016 presidential election[edit]
According to a study by Harvard University's Berkman Klein Center for Internet and Society, the Daily Caller was among the most popular sites on the right during the 2016 presidential election. The study also found that the Daily Caller provided "amplification and legitimation" for "the most extreme conspiracy sites", such as Truthfeed, Infowars, Gateway Pundit and Conservative Treehouse during the 2016 presidential election.[35][36][37]The Daily Caller also "employed anti-immigrant narratives that echoed sentiments from the alt-right and white nationalists but without the explicitly racist and pro-segregation language."[36] The Daily Caller also played
a significant role in creating and disseminating stories that had little purchase outside the right-wing media ecosystem but that stoked the belief among core Trump followers that what Clinton did was not merely questionable but criminal and treasonous. In a campaign that expressed deep anti-Muslim sentiment, a repeated theme was that Hillary Clinton was seriously in hock to Muslim nations.[36]
In one of its most frequently shared stories, the Daily Caller falsely asserted that Morocco’s King Mohammed VI flew Bill Clinton on a private jet, and that this had been omitted from the Clinton Foundation's tax disclosures.[36] The Daily Caller also made the "utterly unsubstantiated and unsourced claim" that Hillary Clinton got Environmental Protection Agency "head Lisa Jackson to try to shut down Mosaic Fertilizer, described as America’s largest phosphate mining company, in exchange for a $15 million donation to the Clinton Foundation from King Mohammed VI of Morocco, ostensibly to benefit Morocco’s state-owned phosphate company."[36]
Encouragement of violence against protesters[edit]
In January 2017, the Daily Caller posted a video which encouraged violence against protesters.[38][39][40][41] The video in question showed a car plowing through protesters, with the headline "Here's A Reel Of Cars Plowing Through Protesters Trying To Block The Road" and set to a cover of Ludacris' "Move Bitch."[38] The video drew attention in August 2017 when a white supremacist plowed his car through a group of counterprotesters at a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville.[38] After the video attracted attention, the Daily Caller deleted it from its website.[38][41]
The Southern Poverty Law Center subsequently criticized the Daily Caller, saying that it had a "white nationalist problem".[42] SPLC also said that two other contributors to the Daily Caller had ties to white nationalist groups.[42]
Articles by white supremacist Jason Kessler[edit]
The Daily Caller has posted articles by Jason Kessler, a white supremacist who organized a rally of hundreds of white nationalists in Charlottesville.[43][44] Before Kessler posted his article, it was known that he had spoken at white supremacist gatherings.[45] After Kessler received attention for his organizing of the Charlottesville white supremacist rally, the Daily Caller removed his articles from its website,[46] but the Caller's Executive Editor defended Kessler's articles.[47]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_C._McCarthy
from wiki bio of Andrew C McCarthy right wing writer at the National Review.
Opinions[edit]
He has defended the practice of waterboarding as not necessarily being torture, and as necessary in some situations to prosecute the War on Terror[7][8] whilst admitting that "waterboarding is close enough to torture that reasonable minds can differ on whether it is torture".[9]
During the 2008 presidential election campaign, McCarthy wrote a number of posts on the National Review's Corner blog stating that he thought that Democratic Presidential candidate, Barack Obama, was not serious about protecting US national security against threats from radical Islam and elsewhere, and that Obama had a number of troubling ties and associations with leftist radicals.
In an opinion posted on the blog 'the Corner' on October 22, 2008,[10] McCarthy wrote "I believe that the issue of Obama's personal radicalism, including his collaboration with radical, America-hating Leftists, should have been disqualifying."
In May 2009, McCarthy provided details of a letter declining an invitation from Attorney General Eric Holder for a round-table meeting with PresidentBarack Obama concerning the status of people detained in the War on Terror. McCarthy noted his dissension with the administration in their policies regarding the detainees.[11] On December 5, 2009 he came out publicly against prosecuting Islamic terrorists in civil courts rather than military tribunals, saying "A war is a war. A war is not a crime, and you don’t bring your enemies to a courthouse."[6]
McCarthy has recently spoken out against the War in Afghanistan, saying that the War benefits the Afghans while hurting American interests, and that the United States should be concerned solely with its interests.
Coupled with his national security conservatism, McCarthy also espouses strong fiscal conservative views on entitlement spending, and favors the abolition of Medicare, which he calls a fraud and a Ponzi scheme greater than that perpetrated by Bernie Madoff.[12] He says that the goals of the original proponents of Medicare were to get a foot in the door with "a Trojan Horse, whose proponents wanted universal compulsory socialized medicine."
McCarthy opposed the 2017 Shayrat missile strike.[13]
Publications[edit]
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2012
- Messages
- 1,976
The exact same can be claimed for left leaning 'news/opinion' organizations--my post is not about defending your discrediting a report, rather trying to stick to the facts. I do not want to get caught up in that vitriol, please don't go there.
One simply cannot ignore the details surrounding the people, the relationships etc...the actual facts reported...which are critical to forming context in this continuing Saga. That was & is the only point to my post.
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
That is what I said, reading the far right sites like Daily Caller and Nat Review is akin to reading Huff Post and Salon. I cannot and will not read the Daily Caller, it's just a fake news site with total slanted Tucker ideas, National Review has been around forever, they, like the NYTimes will slant their views to the conservative (or the NYTimes the democratiic side). Much of what comes out of the right and left is spin. I take my spin with a grain of salt to a pound of salt with right wing sites.
The exact same can be claimed for left leaning 'news/opinion' organizations--my post is not about defending your discrediting a report, rather trying to stick to the facts. I do not want to get caught up in that vitriol, please don't go there.
One simply cannot ignore the details surrounding the people, the relationships etc...the actual facts reported...which are critical to forming context in this continuing Saga. That was & is the only point to my post.
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 7,329
As long as you recognize that others take NYT, WaPo, and HuffPo with that same grain of salt.
I won't even look at Salon or Vox.
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
Facts are facts:
https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/
https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/
The exact same can be claimed for left leaning 'news/opinion' organizations--my post is not about defending your discrediting a report, rather trying to stick to the facts. I do not want to get caught up in that vitriol, please don't go there.
One simply cannot ignore the details surrounding the people, the relationships etc...the actual facts reported...which are critical to forming context in this continuing Saga. That was & is the only point to my post.
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2012
- Messages
- 1,976
Ignore the spin, the opinion etc. Cut through the clutter so to speak. Lets not turn this into another right/left diatribe. 
Concentrate on the transactional details. The meetings, the actions etc., the people & financial actions. Just the where-what-when, stick to the facts.
That's what I was trying to accomplish. Not going to defend the news organizations & opinions of these or other news sites. Just trying to contribute to the thread with some informational/factual context.
Concentrate on the transactional details. The meetings, the actions etc., the people & financial actions. Just the where-what-when, stick to the facts.
That's what I was trying to accomplish. Not going to defend the news organizations & opinions of these or other news sites. Just trying to contribute to the thread with some informational/factual context.
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
I'd comit hari kari b4 reading Breitbart (matter of fact I support the group who are trying to get companies to stop advertising on Breitbart). Town Caller, Western Journalism, Newsmax, to name just a few. I once traced a story back on right wing press to find out in the end it was some idiot who tweeted incorrectly. Fox has yet to tell us that O'Reilly had fox pay out 35 million to settle charges on harrassment. http://thehill.com/homenews/media/3...arassment-settlement-while-at-fox-news-report
I trust the Hill. Although they have yet to call out General Flynn to apologize to Congresswoman Frederica Wilson, he was way out of line to call out the Congresswoman. Lost total creds with me.
So basically I read Fox daily (hate their new site it's too much verbage) for laughs and yuks, I read the Hill several times a day, while they lean right they report fairly, as in they report they don't give opinion and if they do, they call it OPINION and they often say this is an opinion, I like that. They also report on the left, as in report, no opinion.
I don't read salon or huff post. I read the NYTimes, CNN, NBCnews, CBSnews, Google news, BBC news and I watch the PBS News Hour every night.
I trust the Hill. Although they have yet to call out General Flynn to apologize to Congresswoman Frederica Wilson, he was way out of line to call out the Congresswoman. Lost total creds with me.
So basically I read Fox daily (hate their new site it's too much verbage) for laughs and yuks, I read the Hill several times a day, while they lean right they report fairly, as in they report they don't give opinion and if they do, they call it OPINION and they often say this is an opinion, I like that. They also report on the left, as in report, no opinion.
I don't read salon or huff post. I read the NYTimes, CNN, NBCnews, CBSnews, Google news, BBC news and I watch the PBS News Hour every night.
As long as you recognize that others take NYT, WaPo, and HuffPo with that same grain of salt.
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
Personally I don't care where it goes. I have read the facts and I don't see where the Clintons were doing quid pro quo. I was informing you that the sites you quoted are biased and I cannot believe what they write. It's part of the narrative.
Ignore the spin, the opinion etc. Cut through the clutter so to speak. Lets not turn this into another right/left diatribe.
Concentrate on the transactional details. The meetings, the actions etc., the people & financial actions. Just the where-what-when, stick to the facts.
That's what I was trying to accomplish. Not going to defend the news organizations & opinions of these or other news sites. Just trying to contribute to the thread with some informational/factual context.
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 7,329
Kate I was funning with you. Hence the winky.
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
Okay here we go: this is the report that started the whole thing up again.
http://thehill.com/policy/national-...sian-bribery-plot-before-obama-administration
I have read this over 4x and there is no facts that state Clinton did anything wrong. Innuendo, but no facts.
http://thehill.com/policy/national-...sian-bribery-plot-before-obama-administration
I have read this over 4x and there is no facts that state Clinton did anything wrong. Innuendo, but no facts.
Ignore the spin, the opinion etc. Cut through the clutter so to speak. Lets not turn this into another right/left diatribe.
Concentrate on the transactional details. The meetings, the actions etc., the people & financial actions. Just the where-what-when, stick to the facts.
That's what I was trying to accomplish. Not going to defend the news organizations & opinions of these or other news sites. Just trying to contribute to the thread with some informational/factual context.
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2012
- Messages
- 7,329
That is not really the point here. The whole thing is about illegal shady dealings and agencies not providing information to those who might have needed it to make important decisions, whether than be purposely or inadvertently. The optics are terrible for the Clinton Foundation and Obama's DOJ.
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2012
- Messages
- 2,417
I'm sure America has never ever interfered with a foreign election.
If by "interfered with" you meant took out the opposition by nefarious means, no the USA would never do that.
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
It certainly is a point to me. Well certainly the FBI should have done something, but that doesn't mean nor do they show a direct correlation between Bill Clinton and the Russians and the donations. I can say unequivocally that Putin dislikes Hilary Clinton. No the optics are not 'terrible' for the Clinton Foundation, now if you want to say that people who BELIEVE the Clintons are bad or something like that and they want to convince themselves that the Clintons did something here then I would agree with that. As to Obama, before I make judgement on him and what he knew I'd like to read a statement from him, which I will look for. Illegal and shady dealing were going on between the Russians and contractors. I've read about that all my life with contractors but that doesn't make it any better.
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 33,852
The left wingers don't wanna hear anything negative about the Dem. party. All they do is to trash Trump everyday. There are too many left winger media stations. MSNBC, ABC,CBS, NBC,CNN...vs 1 FOX NEWS.One simply cannot ignore the details surrounding the people, the relationships etc...the actual facts reported...which are critical to forming context in this continuing Saga. That was & is the only point to my post.
- Joined
- May 11, 2013
- Messages
- 7,570
There is no direct correlation that this was quid pro quo, People WANT that to be because they don't like the Clintons, for some unfathomable reasons to me they consistently and constantly attribute nefarious actions to these people to the point where it is ridiculous. Take the Clinton Foundation, it's a good organization and has done a lot of great things, BUT the right doesn't EVER seem to get it. They see what isn't there because of pre-judgement of the Clintons. It's a useless exercise for us to chat about this because what has been written and said over 40 years is just ingrained in people's minds and facts just don't work.
Did You Miss the Jewels of the Weeks for August 2024?
Did You Miss the Jewels of the Weeks for August 2024? - 09/01
Did You Miss the Throwback Thursdays for August 2024?
Did You Miss the Throwback Thursdays for August 2024? - 08/29
300x240.png)