Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

everlast75

Ultros wrote: »

It still amazes me the stranglehold grip the media has on people even after all the botched bombshells, it's at least half a dozen now. When all these stories that turn out untrue only go in one direction, there clearly is serious bias and a lack of professionalism. The truth matters not, only sensationalism for revenue.

List the dozen.



And even If that's true, that means nearly 2 years of reporting on trump is accurate save 12 days (on the basis that there's a bombshell every single day with this sh1tshow of an admin). That's a very healthy accuracy rating you've given the press there!

Dohnjoe

Ultros wrote: »

It still amazes me the stranglehold grip the media has on people even after all the botched bombshells, it's at least half a dozen now. When all these stories that turn out untrue only go in one direction, there clearly is serious bias and a lack of professionalism. The truth matters not, only sensationalism for revenue.

The media reported a significant claim that could be false. Likewise, Muellers claim could be false (personally I think his claim is true) but the media has to report it due to it's significant nature. If the US president stands up and makes a false claim, the media reports on it. Their job is to report, if a newsworthy claim is unverified, it's usually stipulated in the article/report

Aside from that is there a general bias against Trump? yes absolutely, he's a deeply divisive and unpopular figure outside his support base. Likewise there's a general bias against e.g. the N Korean leader and Philippines leader.

Timberrrrrrrr

Ultros wrote: »

It still amazes me the stranglehold grip the media has on people even after all the botched bombshells, it's at least half a dozen now. When all these stories that turn out untrue only go in one direction, there clearly is serious bias and a lack of professionalism. The truth matters not, only sensationalism for revenue.

You have just described Donald Trump perfectly with that one line.

pixelburp

Maybe I fell asleep in the interim, but were / are buzzfeed considered reputable in the first place? I had heard in passing they were leaning more into "proper" journalism but their beating heart and origin is click bait bullsh*t, can't be that much a surprise their investigative stuff shows to be equally sketchy... unless is aeration among otherwise good content?

As said though, this hurts everyone and just adds fuel to the sports fan trump supporters who'll claim victim complex.

Dohnjoe

pixelburp wrote: »

As said though, this hurts everyone and just adds fuel to the sports fan trump supporters who'll claim victim complex.

Not at all, it makes the Mueller investigation look even more credible and principled. A "witch-hunt" would not be refuting a damaging claim to Trump.

pixelburp

Dohnjoe wrote: »

Not at all, it makes the Mueller investigation look even more credible and principled. A "witch-hunt" would not be refuting a damaging claim to Trump.

In the eyes of the rational, yes. In the eyes of those who have built a bizarro underdog, victimisation narrative around Trump, this will just verify their prejudices about "the liberal media"

aloyisious

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Maybe not after all. Mueller team would have to come out and refute this claim by Buzzfeed if it was fake.

That would be revealing exactly what it had kept under wraps, so not a good idea. The investigation stated the Buzzfeed story was not ACCURATE which is sufficient. It could actually mean that there was only on or two verifications [evidence or witness] of Cohen's claim. It will cause Buzzfeed to go back and make whatever admissions and changes needed.

everlast75

pixelburp wrote: »

In the eyes of the rational, yes. In the eyes of those who have built a bizarro underdog, victimisation narrative around Trump, this will just verify their prejudices about "the liberal media"

You can't rationalise with those people so best not waste your effort trying.


The statement from mueller does not dispute that trump told Cohen to do it. It takes issue with the characterisation of how it happened. There's a difference.

Buzzfeed are 100% on their story. They claim to have seen the proof first hand. This isn't a "he said she said".

Congress have always said "if this is true" and merely committed to investigating it. Trump supporters should have nothing to worry about, so long as it never happened of course.

Can we take a moment to acknowledge Trump witness tampering with Cohen live on Fox News btw. In any other presidency, it would be a scandal in its own right.

Dohnjoe

pixelburp wrote: »

In the eyes of the rational, yes. In the eyes of those who have built a bizarro underdog, victimisation narrative around Trump, this will just verify their prejudices about "the liberal media"

True, but Trump has between 37% to 40% support in the US. That's a significant chunk of the population. Not all of them are the "swivel-eyed loons" that dwell in The_Donald. A decent portion of them will see the news that Mueller's team has (potentially) corrected false info about Trump. It can only boost Mueller's credibility and veracity in their eyes. If Mueller does reveal bombshells, it will be more difficult to discount them to the "moderate" Trump supporters.

Igotadose

Dohnjoe wrote: »

True, but Trump has between 37% to 40% support in the US. That's a significant chunk of the population. Not all of them are the "swivel-eyed loons" that dwell in The_Donald. A decent portion of them will see the news that Mueller's team has (potentially) corrected false info about Trump. It can only boost Mueller's credibility and veracity in their eyes. If Mueller does reveal bombshells, it will be more difficult to discount them to the "moderate" Trump supporters.

You assume that even the 'moderate' Trump supporters have a functional ability to reason. I doubt it. They'll use this to reassure themselves that Trump's always been telling them the truth about everything.

The "swivel-eyed" loons online are a small percentage of the 'I'm no racist but Obama was a terrible president because reasons and Hilary roasted infants for jollies' typical Trump backer.

aloyisious

Ultros wrote: »

It still amazes me the stranglehold grip the media has on people even after all the botched bombshells, it's at least half a dozen now. When all these stories that turn out untrue only go in one direction, there clearly is serious bias and a lack of professionalism. The truth matters not, only sensationalism for revenue.

I thoroughly agree with you on the truth and sensationalism bit. With Don letting off bombshells all the time it's hard to get through the rubble to find if there is any truth in what he says. The shellshock he's deliberately caused to the US understanding of what truth is and what is truth is not good for the US. With his lawyers aiding and abetting him, the US will be in PTSD for years to come.

Christy42

The buzzfeed story should be ditched until verified. They should know by now the media is not allowed make mistakes. Only the administration may lie in this game. I am not sure if they over reached in side claims or the main one but they messed up.

We still have collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russians. The fact that he and his legal team knew about this and did not back up Mueller's investigation should simply go down as withholding information.

Heck even withholding funds from Puerto Rico should be enough to see him sacked but there is no serious checks and balances to remove a president from office if his party refuses to accept anything.

Thargor

I was setting up a Kodi box for my neighbor this morning and we ended up watching a bit of Hannity on the Fox News stream, to say he was making hay out of this was an understatement.

everlast75

Thargor wrote: »

I was setting up a Kodi box for my neighbor this morning and we ended up watching a bit of Hannity on the Fox News stream, to say he was making hay out of this was an understatement.

Well... he also made hay of Obama wearing a tan suit, so..

everlast75

Christy42 wrote: »

The buzzfeed story should be ditched until verified. They should know by now the media is not allowed make mistakes. Only the administration may lie in this game. I am not sure if they over reached in side claims or the main one but they messed up

The SC would not have accepted the cohen guilty plea to lying re Trump Tower unless they had evidence that he *did* lie. That means corroborating proof... from other sources.

It is standard in every single case so that someone doesn't take the fall for someone else who may walk free. They simply won't accept a guily plea unless and until you prove you did it.

The story is solid. The statement by the SC is not an unequivocal denial of the entire story. That would have been very simple to do.


It could not be as their own filings re Cohen's sentencing accepts that he did it. It appears the only aspect which could be up for dispute is that there is evidence that Trump told him to do it, or a semantic point on how buzzfeed reported the nature of that evidence. It is not beyond the realm of possibility that the SC wants to keep those cards close to their chest in that regard

26000 Elephants

everlast75 wrote: »

The story is solid. The statement by the SC is not an unequivocal denial of the entire story. That would have been very simple to do.

Indeed. The language was very specific. We are talking details, not the overall story. I mean, Cohen's own Nov 30th filling clearly states he lied to congress "in accordance with [Trump's] directives". Where buzzfeed may have deviated from accuracy is in alleging a "direct" instruction. It was more probably indirect, although that would be equally illegal.

everlast75

https://twitter.com/justicedems/status/1086685568766038020?s=19

I don't advocate violence, however i would have been severely, SEVERELY tested.

Make America great again indeed....

FrostyJack

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/justicedems/status/1086685568766038020?s=19

I don't advocate violence, however i would have been severely, SEVERELY tested.

Make America great again indeed....

What are they chanting? Stupid phone speakers are rubbish so can't make it out. I read the thread, they are from a Catholic school and they have been named and shamed already.

robinph

So Trump is apparently about to offer a temporary deal for the Dreamers in exchange for his wall. The offer is expected to be rejected though.

If nothing else it might show that Trump is learning how negotiations work though.

NTC

FrostyJack wrote: »

What are they chanting? Stupid phone speakers are rubbish so can't make it out. I read the thread, they are from a Catholic school and they have been named and shamed already.

I read on Twitter or Reddit that they were chanting "Build the Wall, Build the wall"

Open to corrention as I don't have a link to where i saw it.

salmocab

NTC wrote: »

I read on Twitter or Reddit that they were chanting "Build the Wall, Build the wall"

Open to corrention as I don't have a link to where i saw it.

If that’s true then I hope the history teacher in that school is busying himself doing up a CV

rossie1977

pixelburp wrote: »

Maybe I fell asleep in the interim, but were / are buzzfeed considered reputable in the first place? I had heard in passing they were leaning more into "proper" journalism but their beating heart and origin is click bait bullsh*t, can't be that much a surprise their investigative stuff shows to be equally sketchy... unless is aeration among otherwise good content?

As said though, this hurts everyone and just adds fuel to the sports fan trump supporters who'll claim victim complex.

Two guys that reported the BuzzFeed story, one is Pulitzer prize winner for investigative reporting and the other a Pulitzer finalist.

Whatever about BuzzFeed itself, these two have serious credentials.

Penn

robinph wrote: »

So Trump is apparently about to offer a temporary deal for the Dreamers in exchange for his wall. The offer is expected to be rejected though.

If nothing else it might show that Trump is learning how negotiations work though.

From what I saw in a tweet, the Supreme Court yesterday decided their calendar for the year and decided not to hear a case about DACA this year, so DACA stays in place for another year regardless. Trump is offering something that's not needed for this year, and he'd quite possibly renege on. It'd be foolish for the Dems to accept that deal.

ancapailldorcha

rossie1977 wrote: »

Two guys that reported the BuzzFeed story, one is Pulitzer prize winner for investigative reporting and the other a Pulitzer finalist.

Whatever about BuzzFeed itself, these two have serious credentials.

Buzzfeed news is a serious organisation that operates under the same umbrella as the clickbait site which belies its credentials as an outlet.

pixelburp

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Buzzfeed news is a serious organisation that operates under the same umbrella as the clickbait site which belies its credentials as an outlet.

Right, that's what I have a hard time with; to launch a grown up investigative branch directly tied and named for a site of clickbait detritus seemed foolish in trying to establish credentials. Messing up this story feels like proof not to take them serious for now

martingriff

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/justicedems/status/1086685568766038020?s=19

I don't advocate violence, however i would have been severely, SEVERELY tested.

Make America great again indeed....

I was going to ask am I missing something here also on phone so speakers not great the realised listening to the wrong chanting by the 2

Sweetemotion

Igotadose wrote: »

You assume that even the 'moderate' Trump supporters have a functional ability to reason. I doubt it. They'll use this to reassure themselves that Trump's always been telling them the truth about everything.

The "swivel-eyed" loons online are a small percentage of the 'I'm no racist but Obama was a terrible president because reasons and Hilary roasted infants for jollies' typical Trump backer.

That is just insane.

mattser

Two years in today, and guess who's still POTUS ?
Tens of thousands of posts later.
Some people predicted it would last only weeks/months.
It's fairly imminent admittedly, but bloody hell, he's taken a lot of people here on an absolute merry go round.

Manic Moran

FrostyJack wrote: »

What are they chanting? Stupid phone speakers are rubbish so can't make it out. I read the thread, they are from a Catholic school and they have been named and shamed already.

So I'm looking at the longer videos from that incident, and it seems that somehow the Indigenous People's March and the March for Life (anti-abortion, not anti-immigration) crowd got mixed up.

So apparently they started off being students doing daft but harmless student things.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6avKSz3d4I

Then the two protests got intermingled, apparently by the native american contingent moving to the students.
https://twitter.com/mariajudy_/status/1086681831804674048

Mr Phillips then moves through the crowd, stops right in front of the kid who moves neither forwards, backwards, nor says a word, and sings in his face.
https://youtu.be/sIG5ZB0fw1k

Whatever the truth behind this (and I'm sure everyone is editing the heck out of things), I strongly suspect the story is not what is initially going around. Most of the repeats of the video I've seen have been the last one above, but starting almost a minute in.

Calina

Manic Moran wrote: »

So I'm looking at the longer videos from that incident, and it seems that somehow the Indigenous People's March and the March for Life (anti-abortion, not anti-immigration) crowd got mixed up.

So apparently they started off being students doing daft but harmless student things.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6avKSz3d4I

Then the two protests got intermingled, apparently by the native american contingent moving to the students.
https://twitter.com/mariajudy_/status/1086681831804674048

Mr Phillips then moves through the crowd, stops right in front of the kid who moves neither forwards, backwards, nor says a word, and sings in his face.
https://youtu.be/sIG5ZB0fw1k

Whatever the truth behind this (and I'm sure everyone is editing the heck out of things), I strongly suspect the story is not what is initially going around. Most of the repeats of the video I've seen have been the last one above, but starting almost a minute in.

Jesus you don't want those kids to be accountable do you?