In the NYT:
"Trump Received Unsubstantiated Report That Russia Had Damaging Information About Him."
The chiefs of America’s intelligence agencies last week presented President Obama and President-elect Donald J. Trump with a summary of unsubstantiated reports that Russia had collected compromising and salacious personal information about Mr. Trump, two officials with knowledge of the briefing said.
The summary is based on memos generated by political operatives seeking to derail Mr. Trump’s candidacy. Details of the reports began circulating in the fall and were widely known among journalists and politicians in Washington.
That went up at the NYT site yesterday. This morning, there's also:
"Trump on Compromising Dossier Leak: ‘Are We Living in Nazi Germany?'"
President-elect Donald J. Trump continued his war with intelligence agencies, asking if leaks of a dossier of dirt meant we are “living in Nazi Germany.”...
From the moment the unsubstantiated but explosive intelligence report hit the internet, the questions arose: When and what would Mr. Trump tweet?
There's a link on "unsubstantiated but explosive intelligence" and it goes back to the first article. What's the "dirt"?
The memos describe sex videos involving prostitutes with Mr. Trump in a 2013 visit to a Moscow hotel. The videos were supposedly prepared as “kompromat,” or compromising material, with the possible goal of blackmailing Mr. Trump in the future.
The memos also suggest that Russian officials proposed various lucrative deals, essentially as disguised bribes in order to win influence over Mr. Trump.
The memos describe several purported meetings during the 2016 presidential campaign between Trump representatives and Russian officials to discuss matters of mutual interest, including the Russian hacking of the Democratic National Committee and Mrs. Clinton’s campaign chairman, John D. Podesta....
One of the opposition research memos quotes an unidentified Russian source as claiming that the hacking and leaking of Democratic emails was carried out “with the full knowledge and support of TRUMP and senior members of his campaign team.” In return, the memo said, “the TRUMP team had agreed to sideline Russian intervention in Ukraine as a campaign issue” because Mr. Putin “needed to cauterize the subject.”
So all that appears in the NYT, but it's not fake, because it's a true report — I assume — of what is in the "memos generated by political operatives."
The F.B.I. obtained the material long before the election, and some of the memos in the opposition research dossier are dated as early as June. But agents have struggled to confirm it, according to federal officials familiar with the investigation....
पोस्ट्स
१५० टिप्पण्या:
Yellow journalism
The Feds at DHS have blocked Althouse on my work computer. Upsetting.
Think of it as Trump news. Much like the Obama birth certificate story that Trump humped for years.
Althouse;
The simple fact that Donald J. Trump himself Tweeted about it, makes the decision to publish as the Times did not only easier, it makes it almost inevitable.
The downside, of Trump's real time, kneejerk Twitter reaction to practically everything in social media where he is mentioned.
I do think it might have been different, had Trump himself not gone off on the story.
Utter hogwash. Brian Williams now admits in his startled and befuddled schitck that the Addendum Document was not used in the Briefing because it was only for the purpose of a Bad Example of what aDisinformation false report looks like to discern one from a true report.
That is what CNN pretends is news. Fake News is twisted fact. This report is intentional pure slander.
NBC is reporting that the dossier was attached to the presentation Clapper was to give, not given to the Trump people, and not presented by Clapper.
Which seems to indicate that someone in the CIA slipped the dossier in, hoping for it to get attention. Then that person told CNN what they had done.
So someone at the CIA is trying to undermine the president elect.
I hope someone looks into the CIA agenda here. We really don't want the CIA blackmailing the president, or undermining their leadership by slipping veiled threats into the briefings.
MSM only has 4 years to smear Trump. No reason they shouldn't get a head start. Sure beats real news about Barry's blunders.
The FBI should get to the bottom of this asap and interview all involved. We don't want this hanging over Trump for the next four years like the personal e-mail server did with Secretary Clinton.
Think of it as Trump news. Much like the Obama birth certificate story that Trump humped for years.
Look, if Rick Wilson wants to be like Trump and hump this story that would be like what Trump did with the birth certificate.
But what CNN, NYT, and especially Buzzfeed have done is nothing like what Trump- a private citizen- did.
I assume this was simply a problem translating between English and Russian.
Trump, desiring the top-of-the-line service, requested the presidential suite, like where the Obama's had slept: the one with the shower fixtures made of gold.
Hilarity ensues.
Once written, twice... said...
The FBI should get to the bottom of this asap and interview all involved. We don't want this hanging over Trump for the next four years like the personal e-mail server did with Secretary Clinton.
Maybe a congressional committee or two to follow up.
Chuck advises DJT use Obama's leadership path...go passive. That is wishful thinking by Trump's enemies.
Nice try, kids, but it won't make Hillary Clinton President.
The FBI? Are you kidding? They tried to get a FISA warrant for surveillance of the Trump campaign.
Which institution did Obama *not* use for his own politics?
MayBee said...
But what CNN, NYT, and especially Buzzfeed have done is nothing like what Trump- a private citizen- did.
They reported Trump's actions as news. No difference.
Don't blame the media for reporting what the CIA and the FBI are doing!
"The F.B.I. obtained the material long before the election, and some of the memos in the opposition research dossier are dated as early as June. "
-- The FBI leaked like a sieve to damage both Trump and Clinton this election cycle. I'm amazed of all the things leaked -- this was not.
Just another slander
They reported Trump's actions as news. No difference.
You and I both know there are many different ways to report news. And they were handled completely differently.
Does this fall under "fake but accurate" or "the facts don't matter, it's the severity of the charges"?
Drudge is all over this today. Ugly implications for the CIA and their media accomplices.
What "they" are attempting to do to Trump might be why Sanders threw his supporters, along with the towel, under the bus. Is it any wonder Bernie meekly acquiesced to not dredging up things like emails and servers and tried to shepherd his flock, like a good party man, into the Hillary camp? What is happening now to Trump, like him or not, is damn distasteful and scary.
We need to get to the bottom of this. How can Trump complain? He spent years pushing to get the truth out about President Obama's birth certificate!
-- The FBI leaked like a sieve to damage both Trump and Clinton this election cycle. I'm amazed of all the things leaked -- this was not.
They were talking about it on 4Chan in October or November, so it was out there. Just didnt get attention.
Rick Wilson was trying to get attention to it, but people wouldn't bite.
"Chuck advises DJT use Obama's leadership path...go passive."
-- Obama, he of the phone and pen, was... "passive"?
Injunction against critical sock puppetry
We need to get to the bottom of this. How can Trump complain? He spent years pushing to get the truth out about President Obama's birth certificate!
I'm trying to remember Trump having the CIA and the FBI doing his bidding on the birth certificate story.
The memos describe sex videos involving prostitutes with Mr. Trump in a 2013 visit to a Moscow hotel
We can only hope that someone will bring this up at Trump's press conference.
I imagine his response would be along the lines of, "I'm a famous billionaire who owns a modeling agency in New York. Why in the world would I need to hire prostitutes? Piss-ant."
All of which tends to confirm Trump's suspicions about the intelligence of the "intelligence community", doesn't it?
The news cycle constantly favors Trump. Constantly. Any thinking person has to look at this and roll their eyes.
From the NYT article:
Intelligence officials were concerned that the information would leak before they informed Mr. Trump of its existence, said the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak about it publicly.
The intelligence officials were:
1) James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence
2) Jeh Johnson, Director of Homeland Security
These are the same two intelligence officials who published the Joint Statement from the Department Of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security on October 7, 2016.
Those two intelligence officials alone -- among our country's 17 intelligence agencies -- took the initiative to try to scare the US public with the idea that that the Kremlin was trying to help Trump win the Presidential election.
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07/joint-statement-department-homeland-security-and-office-director-national
I'm confused now about the story. Now it is known to have been fake, and used as an example of something fake, but the media reported it as true?
tcrosse said...
"Nice try, kids, but it won't make Hillary Clinton President."
TaaDaa! Thread winner.
The dumb asses on the left are working overtime to make Pence president. Careful what you wish for, ladies.
The report that this dodgey dossier was put together by a former British intelligence officer is particularly delicious. The Brits have a notoriously inventive press--who routinely make up stories--and that tradition carries over into their intelligence services. (Research the words Blair, Iraq, and dodgey dossier). This chap was probably sacked by MI6 for poor analysis and caught a gig with the Clinton campaign. Well, he had to give them something, right?
Personally, I am still waiting for the fabled Michelle Obama "whitey" video to surface, as well as that rumored W Bush dancing naked on a bar in Texas photo. Get Dan Rather on it and he'll come up with something fake but accurate.
Trump may have done all this stuff, but no one has been able to verify it. All of this was around during the Clinton campaign, but no one would publish it.
Sid Vicious Blumenthal strikes again.
In their attempt to destroy Trump I think Buzzfeed may have inadvertently done him a favor.
Prior to the release of this everybody was talking about Jake Tapper's report and the disturbing implications resulting from it. Now Buzzfeed has sucked the air out of the serious discussion and instead everybody is focusing on a report that is rather suspect; hell, judging by the number of reporters saying they passed on publishing it I thinks it's fair to say that most of the media doesn't even believe it.
Instead of focusing on Trump's disturbing affinity for Putin everybody is just going to be making piss jokes. Instead of being forced to answer serious questions about national security concerns Trump will be able to just dismiss it all as a smear job by click bait websites (and so will his fans).
They just gave him an easy out on any issue concerning his relationship with Russia.
Instead of focusing on Trump's disturbing affinity for Putin
Christopher, can you answer a few questions for me? What do you think of the "reset" button? What do you think of letting a Putin-backed company get a major part of our uranium reserves under SoS Clinton and POTUS Obama? What do you think of Obama telling Vlad he'd have more flexibility after his election?
What does a "disturbing affinity" entail?
Hasn't 4chan already said this is a hoax they started?
Why, yes, they did.
LAYERS of fact-checkers.
LAYERS.
Are we forgetting that the Secret Service sleeping with prostitutes all over the world was supposedly a big yawner?
I'd also question who could have done more for Putin than Clinton and Obama have the last 8 years.
Matthew Sablan said...
I'm confused now about the story. Now it is known to have been fake, and used as an example of something fake, but the media reported it as true
The story is: We are the CIA and we will destroy the future President if he criticizes us
From the moment the unsubstantiated but explosive intelligence report hit the internet, the questions arose: When and what would Mr. Trump tweet?
Now that's some Teflon.
Presently there are confirmation hearings for cabinet members, the stage is being set for ACA repeal/replace/reform/tweak, new tax policy is being written into legislative form.
Good cover.
This creates an interesting template for any future slow news day:
1) Receive opposition research, true or false, substantiated or not
2) Report on the existence of opposition research
3) Feel free to quote extensively from the opposition research in your story.
Unless Trump killed Vince Foster, I'm not interested.
Why won't Trump release his tax returns like every other past president? What is he hiding? Is he hiding extensive ties with Russia?
Christopher, can you answer a few questions for me? What do you think of the "reset" button? What do you think of letting a Putin-backed company get a major part of our uranium reserves under SoS Clinton and POTUS Obama? What do you think of Obama telling Vlad he'd have more flexibility after his election?
Your entire post is predicated on the belief that I somehow approve of those actions by Clinton and Obama which is idiotic. One set of sins doesn't cancel out the other.
That the previous administration was naive and full of hubris in their interactions with Russia doesn't mean that we shouldn't care about Trump's odd crush on Putin or some of Trump's advisers' links to him.
Maybee--that should be "attempt to destroy".
Remember when Nancy Pelosi was shouting that she was never told that the CIA was actually waterboarding a few people? A story appearred from nowhere capturing Jane Harmon (who was Pelosi's rival in the Dem caucus) in an embarassing telephone call with Israeli agents promising cooperation. Pelosi shut up immediately and went off to the Middle East on a fact finding mission for two weeks. She never raised the "no one told me" line again. My analysis: the CIA fired a shot across Pelosi's bow by leaking the Harmon tapes.
That is what they do.
Having decided the term Fake News is their new hallmark the DNC-Media complex is busy cranking out example after example of fake news in a misguided, Pyrrhic, kamikaze mission to destroy themselves in the hope it tarnishes Trump's shine. Sad.
Buzzfeed now can be sued for publishing the entire "dossier" without verifying anything. Did they miss the whole Gawker episode last year?
"Why won't Trump release his tax returns like every other past president? What is he hiding? Is he hiding extensive ties with Russia?"
-- Have you looked through the financial documents he HAS released? Have you looked at the tax returns of any other past president?
Why would you assume he is hiding extensive ties to Russia in his tax returns, when the other financial disclosures about his companies would cover that, not his personal taxes?
Henry said...
Unless Trump killed Vince Foster, I'm not interested.
I heard Trump killed him and then ate his still beating heart as part of a pagan ritual. I have hired investigators to follow up on this story.
By the way, there is some prostitution going on here, and it is not in Moscow.
This CIA ploy will not destroy the President, but it will cause DJT to draw a redline. Why is the CIA so bold. I suspect the Pizzagate disclosures are so devastating that it has required a pre-emotive attack to accuse the good guys of what the bad guys have done since 1960.
Kompromat blackmail is the biggest tool in governance. That is why the paedophile rings are used by the CIA to have complete loyalty from the politicians compromised who cannot otherwise be bribed.
Trump is not controllable by the CIA. In fact he plans to control them. The recent running gun battle between CIA and NSA agents on the streets of Manhattan is evidence of his threat to their game.
Your entire post is predicated on the belief that I somehow approve of those actions by Clinton and Obama which is idiotic. One set of sins doesn't cancel out the other.
Except one set of sins was actually foreign policy that empowered Russia and gave them greater standing in the world.
And Trump's sin is not being verbally belligerent against them so far.
Luckily our lefty commenters know a lot about Russia and about Putin and the fact that he once ran the KGB. As deep thinkers and students of history they are well aware of the fact that the KGB shoots straight and never pulls nasty tricks on people or countries.
They are still not sure about the meaning of disinformation and its uses and how the very stupid are especially susceptible of being its victims.
Nobody goes to Russia and thinks their hotel room is not being surveilled. Only a rich lefty would be stupid enough to think that Russian hookers were there just for the money.
They reported Trump's actions as news. No difference.
They were NOT "Trump's actions." They were fake stories created either as an exercise or as a desperate attempt to smear him.
It has already been admitted by the source to be not true.
If the CIA was really involved in this, it is time for Trump to adopt Jack Kennedy's advice. "Don't get mad, get even."
The CIA is about twice the size, at least, as it should be. They could not detect Aldrich Ames over 20 years of his treason.
I'm so glad Scott Walker fired Liz Mair, and any Republican who hires Rick Wilson doesn't deserve a vote.
Thank you FBI thank you CIA and thank you Buzzfeed for inoculating Trump against any (maybe all) future "intelligence leaks" now that this obvious hoax has gone global. The Press Who Cried Wolf is a slow, slow learner, ain't it?
Fake, but let's talk about it for weeks.
ARM: "I have hired investigators to follow up on this story."
Lol
ARM pretending to possess excess disposable cash!
Talk about #Fakenews!
He's already declared Russia not an enemy. can't have that. Both countries have no wish or justification to spend so much of their GDP on preparing or a "Fake News" war. Wait until they release the CGI version of exactly what they claim. They do it all the time in today's movies. So what are you going to believe, Putin or their and our people who have all wrong incentives? The fake news is less about news than the intends to drain the swamp o the military industrial complex where the military has every reason to hype a fictional danger to increase budgets for little return other than to the already wealthy defense contractors and seat warmers in Northern Virginia that Mattis has no use for, he wants a military he can be proud to lead, with enough money to take care of his soldiers. About 10% of what we're spending today. Good by F35 and all those weapons we have no expectation of using. The Cold War is so last century. Be ready and equipped to fight two land wars simultaneously in Europe, give me a break. Ok, don't do it all at once, in the trump style. Cut 30%. Then declare our largest trading partner (China) a friend too (that the area has some business issues, with, profit sharing key) bingo, China's reunified, takes care of the nut in NK, SK and Japan reconcile. And the US military is 10% of its size, mostly for research just in case of a crisis. And the nuclear stockpile mostly gone since the military do not want to pay for a weapon that they know they'll never use per all the war-games they've ever fought. Mattis will only want people that know how to fight, and they don't live in Northern Virginia. Was nice knowing you. No wonder house prices are falling in Northern VA?
I really like the fact that Trump's steady refusal to diss Putin is interpreted as "love" or "admiration" (yeah I know he has made kind references to Putin, but none as obvious and supplicant as a "reset" button, mind you) by the DNC-Media complex, and even some NRO types. Josh Earnest has Soviet era posters in his condo and was praised for it. Sanders honeymooned in the USSR. Obama secretly pledges to be "more flexible" toward Russia after he's reelected, but it's Trump who they smear.
Do they have any credibility left to lose?
They could not detect Aldrich Ames over 20 years of his treason.
You mean the Aldrich Ames that was the first to blow Valarie Plame's cover to Russia, years before Bush took office?
Wait 'til 4Chan does a story about Hillary and Huma and a colostomy bag.
It's all part of the Obama scorched-earth exit strategy. If he didn't want this in the "report" it wouldn't be there.
To Obama, a peaceful transition means he smiles and talks while the dirty work goes on behind the scenes. He's a duck gliding along the surface of the lake, while the real work gets done below the water line.
Smoke and mirrors. Public face vs private face.
It is nice to see that ARM has emerged from under the chemically induced cloud that impacted his posting performance last night.
The real test is can he sustain that?
The Press Who Cried Wolf is a slow, slow learner, ain't it?
I reiterate, most journalists are dumb rich kids who couldn't hack it in law school, so their parents got them into J-school instead..
I suspect at this point it doesnt matter what is true and what isn't. There is no trustworthy way to check any of this, nor is there anyone left with a generally accepted reputation for probity.
The Russian angle seems very silly on the face of it. Russia is not a terribly important geopolitical player, in no way a vital threat to US interests. Lacking the economy or military, short of unusable nuclear weapons, which are leftovers from the Soviet Union. There is no religious-ideological threat from communism, it is dead in Russia. If Russia is a threat to anyone its about a salami-slice piece of one of its immediate neighbors, all of them economic liabilities, none of which is worth holding, much less fighting for.
I really wonder what they expect Putin to do, why he is such a bogeyman. The Soviet Union was creating puppet states right and left, threatening to blitzkrieg its way to the English channel, or at least Finlandize Western Europe. I don't think modern Russia can, or wants to, Finlandize Latvia, and I dont think they have the military or the finances or the will to blitzkrieg the Ukraine, much less Poland, much less maintain costly garrisons in a hostile nation that cant pay for them.
The worst thing Russia has done to the US is participate (with the Saudis and Qatar) in financially supporting US environmentalists to try slow down development of fracking, which has a direct bearing on actual Russian interests. If people are looking for political scandals of intrusive foreign influence on US domestic politics, thats the biggest one ever, probably.
In political-economic terms Russia is just another middling country.
China is a much, much bigger deal.
Who didn't laugh when they reached the nugget: that Trump supposedly paid prostitutes to piss on each other to disrespect the bed because the Obamas used it?
Once written, twice... said...
The FBI should get to the bottom of this asap and interview all involved. We don't want this hanging over Trump for the next four years like the personal e-mail server did with Secretary Clinton.
Why is the left incapable of distinguishing between "false" and "truth I'm pretending isn't important"? Or is he so far in the tank he's convinced himself Clinton didn't use a personal server for her email? Nutters.
The truth is becoming more and more difficult to discern through all the noise. There was a time, not too long ago, where I would not have believed that something like this could realistically occur in the modern USA. This is the sort of stuff you read about from a comfortable distance, that occurs in banana republics and former Eastern Block nations and you think to yourself "Man, I'm glad I don't live in that hell hole!" or whatever.
All sorts of stories, innuendos, and general disinformation have turned everything into mud. None of the players are entirely trustworthy or beyond reproach. We have people on the left actually defending the CIA and people on the right questioning it. Everything has been politicized.
Who didn't laugh when they reached the nugget: that Trump supposedly paid prostitutes to piss on each other to disrespect the bed because because the Obama's used it?
Yeah, that's the tell. Than't not revenge.
If Trump wanted revenge he'd get himself elected President and set about reviving a moribund economy and reversing Obama's signature "achievements" in his first few days in office.
Thank God that could never happen.
"Presently there are confirmation hearings for cabinet members, the stage is being set for ACA repeal/replace/reform/tweak, new tax policy is being written into legislative form.
Good cover."
And this is what is so hilarious. While the Left shits the bed, accomplishing nothing but added layers of bulletproofing for Trump, the conservative agenda rolls on virtually unimpeded. Trump isn't even President yet. Not to overdo the fecal metaphors, but the last couple of months have reduced the Left into a gigantic ideological spastic colon.
Why he might even convince companies to locate jobs in the US instead of overseas before he even took the oath of office!
I really, really need to pray more. The schadenfreude I am feeling on a daily basis has got to be sinful.
Trump's lawyer says he has never been to Prague and his passport proves it. Case closed.
And why didn't the MSM check with the Moscow Ritz Carleton. Easy to do so.
Nonapod said:
There was a time, not too long ago, where I would not have believed that something like this could realistically occur in the modern USA. This is the sort of stuff you read about from a comfortable distance, that occurs in banana republics and former Eastern Block nations and you think to yourself "Man, I'm glad I don't live in that hell hole!" or whatever.
That time you remember was before we were "fundamentally transformed." Everything I feared would happen over the past 8 years has, and then some.
Exxon has better intelligence operatives in Russia than the CIA's diplomatic cover operatives. There are probably a dozen CIA NOCs officers who also work for Exxon. A dozen or so years ago, Congress passed a good law that lets CIA NOCs keep their private sector salaries that exceed their government pay and encouraged recruitment of existing private sector employees from multi-national companies with the approval of the companies higher ups.
People so blinded by their hatred that they can't think straight? Or people who don't think so straight under any circumstance?
Honestly, such lousy, lousy strategists. If I hated and feared Trump as much as these clowns claim to hate and fear him, I'd be trying to develop a longer-term effective strategy, not frantically playing National Enquirer and blowing my last shred of credibility before the dude's even sworn in. (No diss intended to the producers of that more honest, more professional scandal-sheet.)
Again, 4Chan did it. They thought it was funny. NBC is run by idiots
trad-guy: Chuck advises...
That's the funny part right there.
No real Brit would ever refer to "football" as "soccer".
Because the only thing more credible than oppo research is unused oppo research.
What happened to Inga?
As disinformation goes, it's halfway between farce and genius. Trump really does put a gilt edge on everything so the golden shower thing does have a kind of simulacrum of reality. He's also rather fastidious. That speaks against it, but like all salacious rumors it will stick around. Anytime he surrounds himself with gold furnishings one will inevitably think of golden showers......Also, how do you say "I did not have golden showers with that woman" and still maintain your dignity.
"Unverified" is the fig leaf that NBC, Buzzfeed, CNN are using," We always said that the reports were unverified." Like the involvement of LBJ in the JFK assassination is unverified? Like the allegations in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion are unverified. If the MSM were determined to render themselves completely unreliable before Trump is sworn in, they couldn't go about it any better.
unsubstantiated but explosive
This is the other side of the "fake but accurate" coin.
What part of FAKE don't you people understand? Stop talking like it's real.
Trump could clear a lot of this up if he released his tax returns, but he won't why not. In the mean time, I haveI sent several detectives, very good people, to Russia to check this out and will get back to you on what they find. ( still waiting for that report from Hawaii ).
chickelit won the thread with the first comment--yellow journalism.
traditionalguy said...
Chuck advises DJT use Obama's leadership path...go passive. That is wishful thinking by Trump's enemies.
But I didn't do that at all. I didn't "advise" anything. Here, in this very comments thread, people can read my original words. I stated as fact the notion that journalistically, the Times would have found it easier to not cover the story, as long as Trump himself said nothing about it. But the Times treats the Trump Twitter feed as news -- as a statement by the President-elect -- over the objections of some on the left, even:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/business/media/if-trump-tweets-it-is-it-news-a-quandary-for-the-news-media.html?_r=0
Why won't Trump release his tax returns like every other past president? What is he hiding? Is he hiding extensive ties with Russia?
Well, he did say he'll release his tax returns when Obama releases his college transcripts. But the main reason he hasn't is because it's none of your damn business.
Russia also has little interest in US trade policy or IP or investment flows, which one assumes will be much affected by the new administration.
This all is a huge deal to the Chinese and much of the international financial coterie, who put their bets on the wrong horse. And these people, unlike Russia, have the money to spend on US politics and agents of influence.
Perhaps some actual intelligence agency, if there any such things anymore, may want to follow the money.
Darrell said...
What part of FAKE don't you people understand? Stop talking like it's real.
"If it weren't real why would people keep talking about it" - attrib. Vince Foster.
Watching Spicer pummel CNN at the news conference on CNN is delicious.
roesch/voltaire said...
In the mean time, I have sent several detectives, very good people, to Russia to check this out and will get back to you on what they find.
I got those guys. They are great.
QUESTION FOR THE ALTHOUSE COMMENTARIAT:
Which one is more "fake" news:
A) Barack Obama's original birth certificate has not been produced. There exists public-record information (Honolulu newspapers, etc.) that reflect Barack Obama's birth in that city on his acknowledged birthdate, and the identity of his universally-accepted mother, Ann Dunham. And, there is no official, law enforcement or intelligence service investigation of same.
OR;
B) U.S. intelligence services have in fact investigated and/or briefed officials about indications that Russians have compromising information on the President-elect of the United States.
Which one is more "fake" news:
Boy, did you miss the point throughout the thread.
They're both fake. But the way "A" was treated by the mainstream press as opposed to "B" is like night and day.
Chuck, you think that birth certificate produced by the Daily Kos for Obama was real? Then you have a lot more problems than I thought.
If it's unsubstantiated it's still fake. Like all the reports of rumors of terrible things happening at the Superdome during Katrina, which never happened. Rumors and unsubstantiated reports apparently are news if and only if they discredit Republicans.
Meanwhile in the Real News
"'Demon possessed doll' blinks and nods head before entire room shakes leaving young girl terrified"
Russia could have produced a better fake birth certificate for Obama if he had asked.
If I love Amaryllis,
She gives me fruit and flowers:
But if we love these ladies,
We must give golden showers.
Give them gold, that sell love,
Give me the nut-brown lass,
Who, when we court and kiss,
She cries, “Forsooth, let go!”
But when we come where comfort is,
She never will say no.
Second verse from "I care not for these Ladies" Thomas Campion
Darrell said...
Chuck, you think that birth certificate produced by the Daily Kos for Obama was real? Then you have a lot more problems than I thought.
So, Darrell; you think that there is a legitimate story, in relation to questions about Obama's birth? Constitutional/presidential eligibility questions? I just want to be clear. And I want to know what sort of conspiracy theories are entertained on Althouse.blogspot.com.
for democrats, this story seems to serve the same function as the birther story did for republicans.
I know the birth certificate Obama put on the Official website is fake. It was a "fuck you" to people asking. It would never be accepted by any Federal agency requiring a birth certificate. Now as to the reason why he doesn't have or does not want to show his birth certificate, I couldn't begin to speculate. But when a person lies, it's usually not a good sign.
Dan Rather could not be reached for comment.
I think he's teaching a college course on journalism.
You really can't make this stuff up.
Darrell; I feel as though I will regret asking this. Your claim that the document posted on the White House website is "fake" makes me want to write you off as an unserious and even demented crank. But I'll persist; do you have any reason to think that the form and existence of any birth certificate for Barack Obama has any public importance?
Golden showers fill your eyes,
Spies await you when you rise.
Hope springs eternal in the anti-Trump breast.
do you have any reason to think that the form and existence of any birth certificate for Barack Obama has any public importance?
Why are you harping on this? Who gives a fuck anymore?
You're comparing the two stories as though they've been equally treated. They're not. Focus on that.
did the FISA court issue a warrant and did the FBI monitor Trump campaign aides in the run up to the election?
this is the question everyone should want answered. if so, what did Obama hear, what did Loretta lynch hear, and how deep does this conspiracy go from people in the Obama administration.
very disturbing things are being done by the Obama admin
Trump himself pumped the fake news story about Obama's birth certificate! What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. I'm "harping" on this to remind everybody what a lousy representative Donald Trump is, for practically anything.
I have seen CNN's reporting on the Russian kompromat story. It's a million times more careful than Trump's own bloviating about how he's got his own investigators in Hawaii, and that they were finding amazing things.
CNN -- indeed no major news organization -- is reporting on the truth of any anti-Trump allegations. They are reporting what multiple senior intelligence officials are saying, about what Trump himself was briefed on. They are accurately reporting the background of the story, as well.
The real original birth certificate almost certainly has some soap-opera/National Enquirer value in it, else it would have appeared. It would have been in the family papers for sure and Obama himself probably has a copy.
I believe some of the college records may have some personally embarassing item, such as BO using a different name or giving a different birthplace, as he did to his original literary agency which wrote him up as born in Kenya. Since this was part of his resume at the time its not unlikely he was telling this story earlier.
If nothing else, it seems he told some interesting fibs.
"Once written, twice... said...
Why won't Trump release his tax returns like every other past president? What is he hiding? Is he hiding extensive ties with Russia?"
Every other one? Are you sure?
Chuck, as someone who's defended you here in the past, I gotta say, siding with CNN/the Media on this bullshit isn't a good look, man.
It's a bullshit story, built on bullshit. How many reporters did you see tweet yesterday "yeah, political operatives sent me some of this stuff during the campaign, but no one could verify any of it so we never mentioned it?" I saw 3, and 2 of those are hard Leftys.
What changed? Nothing, as far as I can tell--the only update is that Obama and Trump were given a 2 page summary of the bullshit in a briefing, and based on that "news" the Media found a hook to run the story and spread the bullshit.
Buzzfeed can't verify anything but ran the info. Then the NYTimes and major outlets get to report on what Buzzfeed ran, and that's how they get to push this story that they all know they can't back up.
The immediate source of the dossier is apparently a Dem. political operations group! NPR described them as "a private company" which is all you need to know about NPR--they know they can't say "non-partisan" so they just stick to "private."
NPR had on two lawyers (worked in Bush & Obama WHs I think) to talk about conflicts of interest and they brought the story up and sourced the allegations to Harry Reid. Something like "the Senate leader brought this to light last year." So, yeah, Sen Reid brags about lying about Mitt Romney, proudly, but for some reason the Media is still taking him as some sort of valid trustworthy source.
Bullshit on stilts. You know better, Chuck.
You have no credibility left, Chuck. You were wrong with everything you said during the campaign. You guaranteed that Trump was not going to win Michigan. Shouldn't you off yourself or something to make good on that guarantee? Or how about just disappearing?
Chuck said...I do think it might have been different, had Trump himself not gone off on the story.
No you don't. You don't unless you're an idiot. If he had said nothing the story would be "Donald Trump so far has not addressed X."
Come on, Chuck, don't be stupid.
I used to think that nobody could be dumb enough to believe the National Enquirer’s articles such as some famous person giving birth to a 4-headed Martian baby, yet they were still able to sell newspapers to a large audience. We have now made those National Enquirer stories seem to be sober and rational compared to this latest fictional story about Trump. Has the Left totally lost its collective mind? The answer of course is yes. The response to anyone who brings up this story should be: do you realize that you making yourself look like a complete fool to believe such a story.
Roesch/Voltaire writes “Trump could clear a lot of this up if he released his tax returns, but he won't why not.”
The reason he doesn’t is that all of those 1099s issued by the Kremlin will be a dead giveaway.
Chuck has a point, he thinks. All he said was Trump would never be attacked if he ignores the attackers, Ipso facto, Trump alone attacks himself by Twitter.
Once written, twice... said...The FBI should get to the bottom of this asap and interview all involved. We don't want this hanging over Trump for the next four years like the personal e-mail server did with Secretary Clinton.
The dossier alleges current espionage activities by unnamed U.S. citizens, genius. The FBI is already supposed to prevent and investigate and prosecute that kind of thing. If the bullshit allegations are true then the administration of Barack Obama has yet again failed to protect the nation. Is that what you want to say now, Once? That you agree the Obama admin has been so shitty in terms of national security (failing to prevent cyber attacks, spying, etc) that the unsupported allegation that U.S. citizens have been successfully engaging in widespread espionage activities on behalf of Russia is not just plausible, but likely true?
That's a pretty harsh judgment on President Obama's tenure, Once. Maybe you're right, though.
Poor Chuck.
So many dreams and hopes shattered.
"Chuck said...
Trump himself pumped the fake news story about Obama's birth certificate! What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. I'm "harping" on this to remind everybody what a lousy representative Donald Trump is, for practically anything."
We don't need a reminder. You're a one trick pony. We see through your bullshit. I'm surprised anyone engages you.
My goodness. Just how hapless has the obambi admin been?
Astonishing incompetence that only lefties and some "lifelong Republicans" could support.
Sequence:
Some one complies a list of rumors and allegations relating to Trump. The list is saved and promoted by a Dem-supporting "private company." The list includes a bunch of Russian-related bullshit. Mainstream reporters receive the list and some try to verify info on it, but no one can and consequently no one runs any of the info even though presumably they'd all love to crack that story (making one assume it's either all bullshit or all non-verifiable). As part of briefings to the Pres and Pres-elect the US intelligence community includes a summary saying "here's some shit some people say the Russians have, or some shit the Russians say they have, which is probably all bullshit." That info is included so that the relevant people won't be surprised if some other agency says "this rumor's going around" or something like that--not as an endorsement of the info but as notice of what allegations might be made (however uncredible).
Then Trump pisses off the CIA and/or FBI and/or NSA.
Someone w/in one of those agencies leaks the fact that the Prez. and Prez-elect were briefed on this info. That leaker can be confirmed to work for a US agency, so the Media has their hook--the can say "a credible source" gave them the info that the Prez was briefed, and of course at that point they get to talk about what the briefing might have included. The alleged credibility of the leaker targeting Trump now gets to rub off on the unsupported allegations that are supposedly contained in the briefing itself. Viola.
Smear job, plain and simple. One fucked up part is that in info Buzzfeed ran individual people in Trump's camp were named. We basically have the Media putting stories out there accusing named American citizens of being spies...while simultaneously saying "we don't vouch for the accuracy of this info."
How is that different from Pizzagate, again? You know, the shit the Media JUST stopped talking about/blaming the Right for causing?
ARM wrote: I heard Trump killed him and then ate his still beating heart as part of a pagan ritual. I have hired investigators to follow up on this story.
From your fingers to the CIA's next report.
Trump himself pumped the fake news story about Obama's birth certificate! What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. I'm "harping" on this to remind everybody what a lousy representative Donald Trump is, for practically anything.
Thanks, Chuck, but don't do me any favors. We don't need to rehash the fact that the choice was binary.
That said - it doesn't matter what Trump did. It matters, and I'm repeating myself here, that the media treated story A differently than story B. Regarding A, they treated it as a non-story precisely BECAUSE Trump said anything about it. Regarding B, they're acting like it's a true story even when they KNOW it isn't.
Enough with the strawmen already. Address the point.
But you know, it's probably a good thing in terms of setting the Trump team expectations w/r/t the Media and Enternainment/Pop Culture institutions, really. As a celebrity himself Trump was probably vulnerable to co-option by those Leftists--he's someone with a giant ego who seems to crave positive attention and praise from the Left-dominated Media & related institutions above all. Trump's socially leftist, and if the possibility of winning praise from those people existed he'd probably be willing to sell out his core supporters for good headlines, etc.
This shit should make it crystal clear, though. These people will stop at nothing to tear him down--they'll flush away whatever standards and ethics they pretend to have and go after him and his associates personally with any available slander.
It's got to be war, total war--they've got to treat the Media as a hostile force at all times.
I'm not sure what to do about the intelligence services. This kind of shit should be troubling to everyone--elements of the gov. working to discredit and disgrace the President--but of course the Left will suddenly decide that rogue intelligence agents attacking elected officals are cool and/or brave. Sure seems like a baaaaad precedent, to me.
Trump should only issue Press credentials to the LA Times. They were the only ones to consistently have him in the lead.
I Callahan:
The media -- rightly -- treated the Birther story as bullshit, because it is bullshit.
The media -- correctly -- are reporting the Trump/Russia story as unconfirmed allegations, but nevertheless allegations that Trump himself, along with the President and the Senate leadership were all briefed on. That much, I expect, is both true and significant.
Sean Hannity, of course, is waiting for Julian Assange to confirm details before he goes with the story.
There is no "the media." There is NPR, and then Rush Limbaugh. There is the CNN, and then Fox News. There is an editorial board at the New York Times, but another one at the Wall Street Journal. There is Paul Krugman, and Ann Coulter. There is Lawrence O'Donnell, and Bill O'Reilly. Maureen Dowd, and Bill Kristol.
"The media -- correctly -- are reporting the Trump/Russia story as unconfirmed allegations, but nevertheless allegations that Trump himself, along with the President and the Senate leadership were all briefed on"
-- They were not briefed on it. Something news agencies/media could have learned if they bothered to try, as NBC did.
traditionalguy said...
Chuck has a point, he thinks. All he said was Trump would never be attacked if he ignores the attackers, Ipso facto, Trump alone attacks himself by Twitter.
I said no such thing, you stupid fuckhead. If you are going to quote me, then quote me.
Of course is going to be attacked. He'll be attacked, even if he did nothing but quietly pursue a conservative that I would personally love.
But that isn't Trump. Trump's specialty is being the loudest, most arrogant, most reckless and biggest asshole in the world. And so that puts him into a place where there's going to be just a little bit of hostility and criticism, ya know?
Matthew Sablan:
My friend, your link to "Hot Air," whatever that is, makes a good point. It confirms, maybe, that the briefers didn't verbally "brief" Trump on the Russian allegation. It also confirms the existence of those allegations at those exceptionally high levels, within briefing and/or contextual materials.
Matthew I accept your point and it is well taken.
They're just a blog who had the link to NBC; but I thought linking straight to NBC would be rude since I found it through them, so it is only fair to give them the clicks.
HoodlumDoodlum: Chuck, as someone who's defended you here in the past, I gotta say, siding with CNN/the Media on this bullshit isn't a good look, man.
[...]
Bullshit on stilts. You know better, Chuck.
The look suits him just fine, he presents as what he is. Chuck isn't a "Hillary supporter" or a "Republican" (or a "lifelong Republican", lol), or anything but a man invested in the status quo. The status quo ante-Trump provides a comfy (and for some, remunerative) niche for la-la-land "conservatives" exemplified by the sort of beltway/acela court jesters who fill the masthead of, say, National Review. (Though you can find them on either coast or any major metropolis.)
That little niche constitutes the mental framework (which he labels "real conservatism", or "principled conservatism") through which he processes all events. What will maintain its received world view is good, what threatens it is bad. Trump appears to threaten this status quo in a way which, say, Hillary did not, so naturally Chuck is going to be more concerned with the actions of Trump and "trumpkins".
It's pointless to get exasperated by his apparent inability to see the "real point" or any "bigger picture". The "real point" and the "big picture" to him is that Trump is the real danger. That a partisan press peddles bullshit in a partisan fashion is not an existential threat to "real conservatism". ("Real conservatism" can, and does, do just fine under the reign of partisan progressivism.) Trump is -- or at least, they think he is.
By 'real conservatism' does he really mean 'neo-conservatism'? IMO, the Neocon movement is where the GOP went off the rails.
mockturtle: By 'real conservatism' does he really mean 'neo-conservatism'?
As far as I can make out, "real conservatism" is the post-war neoliberal consensus + neo-connery.
It's the last refuge of my critics.
When there is no answer to, "Trump is a Birther, a Truther, a Vaxxer and a draft dodger," the only remaining retort is, "Chuck is really a Democrat. He's not a real Republican."
Chuck at 10:22 AM
Which one is more "fake" news: A) Barack Obama's original birth certificate has not been produced. ...
Because the US Constitution includes a birth-related requirement for the US President, the electorate should be provided the government's best evidence about a Presidential candidate's birth circumstances.
In the case of Barack Obama, the electorate was provided with an anonymous clerk's summary of the original document, and Obama refused to provide the original document for four years. The original document was a state government's one-page civil-registry record from the year 1961.
The citizens who requested that this document be provided were denounced as racists. Rather than provide this document, Obama was happy to let the issue be discussed in terms of racism accusations for his first four years as US President.
The request that the best document be provided was not an issue of "fake news". Rather it was an issue of whether the electorate should be satisfied with an anonymous clerk's summary of Obama's long-form birth certificate.
The people who denounced this valid request for a state government's one-page civil registry record from the year 1961 as racist are the same people who are furious that Trump has not provided his voluminous tax records covering many years.
The people who denounced this valid request for a state government's one-page civil registry record from the year 1961 as racist are the same people who are furious that Trump has not provided his voluminous tax records covering many years.
Hey, man; I actually agree with that!
And there is a converse: The same people who are defending Trump, from claims that he should provide a public review of his filed income tax returns, are the same people who just aren't satisfied with Barack Obama's State of Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth.
Now; among the former group (non-birthers and Trump tax questioners) are Republicans and Democrats alike, serious people who have held the highest positions of responsibility in and out of government, and generally well-informed intelligent people.
Among the latter group (Birthers and defenders of Trump's tax obfuscation) are ONLY the Tea Baggiest of Trump devotees.
Chuck said... [hush][hide comment]
Among the latter group (Birthers and defenders of Trump's tax obfuscation) are ONLY the Tea Baggiest of Trump devotees.
This is why people don't trust your self-identification. Only the crazed left uses the term Tea Bagger to mean extremists. In reality they abjured the very things the left claims are extreme in favor of fiscal sanity. Somehow the left branded them - among themselves - as the very opposite of reality. And here you are parroting it.
I really should add about the foregoing comment...
The people who denounced this valid request for a state government's one-page civil registry record from the year 1961 as racist are the same people who are furious that Trump has not provided his voluminous tax records covering many years.
No one has any basis to denounce Obama critics as "racist." We are all sick and tired of that shit.
Since his farewell address ended last night, I have heard nonstop commentaries about how Obama was "blocked" from his agenda by Republicans in congress, with veiled and not so veiled references to race. Bullshit.
Obama came into office with a big majority in the House, and a supermajority in the Senate. The Dems blew that. They blew it as comprehensively as anyone could blow it.
The Obama elections were actually the racialist outliers. Blacks turned out in record, unprecedented numbers in 2008 and 2012, with Obama on the ballot. Turned out, to vote for Brother Obama. And they didn't bother to vote in anything like those numbers, in 2010, 2014 and 2016. The numbers don't lie. The racialist vote, was the pro-Obama vote.
Rick I use "Teabag" very rarely, advisedly and consciously. As it should be used.
You mostly right, nigga.
If this was true, I would expect Brian Williams to have been at that hotel..witnessing the urine flowing under the door into the hallway.
Chuck has indeed used "Teabag" as it should be used: to demonstrate that the user is an irredeemably swinish and irretrievably stupid commenter who should be shunned by all decent people. It's an infallible sign. Not that we really needed a sign by this point.
Chuck said...The media -- correctly -- are reporting the Trump/Russia story as unconfirmed allegations, but nevertheless allegations that Trump himself, along with the President and the Senate leadership were all briefed on. That much, I expect, is both true and significant.
Focus on "significant" Chuck. You're asserting it's significant. That's called begging the question--the entire argument here is over whether it's significant or not, and you're just assuming/asserting that it is.
There exist any number of unsubstantiated rumors and allegations involving Trump. True.
Some of those allegations involve Russia. True, probably.
Members of the intelligence community included a notice regarding the existence of some of those rumors and allegations in materials discussing Russian intelligence/counterintelligence activity. True, probably.
Ok? Now, from that you and the Media conclude "this is significant, this has deep and powerful meaning, this is something that should be seen as harmful to Trump and for which Trump should be made to answer. Giving these unsubstantiated allegations air, and the imprimatur of the respectable Media, is good and valid, and down right important for the public good."
That conclusion does not at all follow from the stated facts, Chuck. That's why it's a bullshit story. Short of ANY confirmation/substantiation of any of the allegations there's not a story at all--as members of that same Media concluded during the campaign when political operatives tried to push that same unsubstantiated material to harm Trump's chances of being elected. Nothing has changed since then. The unsubstantiated rumors are no more more likely to be true, and have received no additional support or substantiation. You know, the kind of thing the Media is supposed to get before running a story. Right?
So, to summarize, YOU are the one saying this is significant. You and the Media. Your support for that assertion appears to be "well Trump sucks and so this story that harms Trump should be run, even though in any other circumstance no one would run it."
Chuck at 1:53 PM
And there is a converse: The same people who are defending Trump, from claims that he should provide a public review of his filed income tax returns, are the same people who just aren't satisfied with Barack Obama's State of Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth.
Here is a proper comparison:
The same people who are defending Trump from claims that he should provide a public review of his filed income tax returns are the same people who criticized Obama for his refusal to provide a state government's one-page civil-registry record from the year 1961.
-----
I never have cared about any candidate's tax returns. I would care only if a candidate were convicted for fraudulent returns.
I was satisfied when Obama did provide his long-form birth certificate. Obama's act established a good precedent for future Presidential candidates to follow when birth circumstances become an issue.
It's "significant", yet he ahouldn't have addressed it.
Got it.
The media -- rightly -- treated the Birther story as bullshit, because it is bullshit.
The media -- correctly -- are reporting the Trump/Russia story as unconfirmed allegations, but nevertheless allegations that Trump himself, along with the President and the Senate leadership were all briefed on. That much, I expect, is both true and significant.
One issue:
They advised Trump that they were false. Making the reporting even worse. They weren't "unconfirmed" --- the intel chiefs said they were outright false.
There is no "the media." There is NPR, and then Rush Limbaugh. There is the CNN, and then Fox News. There is an editorial board at the New York Times, but another one at the Wall Street Journal. There is Paul Krugman, and Ann Coulter. There is Lawrence O'Donnell, and Bill O'Reilly. Maureen Dowd, and Bill Kristol.
I'd argue that assuming Journolist was a one-time event would be highly naive.
Curious George:
"Chuck said...
Trump himself pumped the fake news story about Obama's birth certificate! What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. I'm "harping" on this to remind everybody what a lousy representative Donald Trump is, for practically anything."
We don't need a reminder. You're a one trick pony. We see through your bullshit. I'm surprised anyone engages you.
But Trump the private citizen (in 2009) is JUST LIKE media giant CNN in the delusional world of Trump contrarianism. Yep, Trump questioning the lying liar president's fishy origin story is the exact same thing as a formerlky respectable media outlet airing false reports that had already been flagged as false last summer. Exactly the same, Chuck. Thank God YOU never made any public pronouncements that could come back to haunt you!
Chuck said...
Rick I use "Teabag" very rarely, advisedly and consciously. As it should be used.
You mostly right, nigga.
You really are a complete asshole, Chuck.
No respectable PERSON would ever use the term teabagger to refer to conservatives who organized to oppose the disastrous tax and spend policies of both parties, much less one who had any respect for the constitution. You illustrate this perfectly with your use of the N word, another term that has NO PLACE in political discussions. That you have internalized and adopted the terminology of the extreme far left is the best indicator that your whole "lifelong Republican" act is a shtick for purposes of posting your crap here.
The fact you don't know what HotAir is but can quote Kos and MSNBC is another troll-tell.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा