The long nightmare has just begun: Inauguration of a fraud.
- Thread starter annabenedetti
- Start date
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
And Breitbart/Newsmax/Drudge followers think they're getting the unvarnished truth. They're not.
You're saying it's okay for Breitbart to have a bias, but not okay for the Atlantic to have a bias (which they're not hiding, by the way, you're using that claim to wedge a difference that isn't there). I don't think it's possible to get unbiased news. People tend to stick with their news organizations that they think hold the correct bias (according to the viewer/reader perception of truth) but if they're curious, they'll take a look at other sites to see what they're saying, because the more they pool their information from multiple sources (and individual experts), the better off they'll be - but in the end, it's important to keep in mind that most news organizations are acutely aware of their bottom lines. It seems to me that traditional journalism has mostly faded away, replaced by pooled news sources. I don't think that's a good thing.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
[h=1]BLOCKED AGAIN: Federal Judge Puts Trump's Revised Travel Ban On Hold[/h]GREENBELT, Md. (AP) — Hours before it was to take effect, President Donald Trump's revised travel ban was put on hold Wednesday by a federal judge in Hawaii after hearing arguments that the executive order discriminates on the basis of nationality.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Even Trump's Republican defenders won't defend his wiretapping allegation anymore
President Donald Trump’s baseless claim that former President Barack Obama had tapped his phones during the election has been unraveling for so long now that it’s easy to lose sight of the fact that no Republicans of any stature remain willing to defend it — and that even Trump’s closest aides are twisting themselves into pretzels to avoid having to explicitly concede that their boss seems to have made the entire thing up.
In the past few days alone, White House spokesperson Sean Spicer used actual air quotes to suggest Trump hadn’t literally been talking about wiretapping — even though the president’s own tweets had literally been talking about wiretapping — while Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway hinted that the real culprits were tiny cameras hidden inside microwave ovens (prompting this gem of a sentence from the New York Times: “Ms. Conway clarified on Monday that she was not accusing the former president of snooping via a kitchen appliance”).
A pair of even bigger blows came on Wednesday. First, House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes — a devoted Trump ally and defender — flatly said that “clearly the president was wrong” if you take his tweets about Obama’s wiretapping “literally.”
“I don’t think there was an actual tap of Trump Tower,” Nunes said.
Next, embattled Attorney General Jeff Sessions, already under fire for misleading a Senate committee about his contacts with the Russian ambassador to the US, pushed back at his own boss when a reporter asked if he’d ever given Trump “reason to believe that he was wiretapped by the previous administration.”
“Look, the answer is no,” Sessions replied.
. . .
When Trump first made the wiretapping charge in a string of early-morning tweets earlier this month, a baffled White House quickly went into damage-control mode. [
Spicer first said the White House was asking Congress to investigate the claim but would have no further comment, then said there was “no question that something happened” and that it was up to lawmakers like Nunes to sort out what that something was. Nunes said Trump had raised a “valid question,” and added, “I don’t think we should attack the president for tweeting.”
Conway tried to deflect blame from Trump by saying that he, as president, “has information and intelligence that the rest of us do not.”
Those defenses began to crumble as Obama and his former top aides angrily denied the accusations and Conway and other White House staffers were unable to provide any evidence to bolster Trump’s accusation. The Washington Post reported that the allegation seemed to originate from an unsourced Breitbart article circulating among top Trump aides titled “Mark Levin to Congress: Investigate Obama’s ‘Silent Coup’ vs. Trump.”
. . .
Still, it’s now been almost two weeks since the initial Trump tweets, and the White House has yet to publicize anything that would substantiate them. That leaves the president and his closest aides with two equally bad options: explicitly acknowledge that the claim was baseless, the opposite of what Trump seems inclined to do, or continue trying to subtly walk it back without formally retracting it. Either path would fuel new questions about Trump’s honesty and ability to distinguish fact from conspiracy theories propagated by fringe media outlets.
There’s a third possibility, and it could be the most damaging of all. It may well turn out that Trump was right that Trump Tower was bugged but profoundly and fundamentally wrong as to who did it, and why. It wouldn’t have been Obama. It would have been the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies already investigating why so many of Trump’s closest aides were in direct contact with Russian intelligence officials in the run-up to the election.
President Donald Trump’s baseless claim that former President Barack Obama had tapped his phones during the election has been unraveling for so long now that it’s easy to lose sight of the fact that no Republicans of any stature remain willing to defend it — and that even Trump’s closest aides are twisting themselves into pretzels to avoid having to explicitly concede that their boss seems to have made the entire thing up.
In the past few days alone, White House spokesperson Sean Spicer used actual air quotes to suggest Trump hadn’t literally been talking about wiretapping — even though the president’s own tweets had literally been talking about wiretapping — while Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway hinted that the real culprits were tiny cameras hidden inside microwave ovens (prompting this gem of a sentence from the New York Times: “Ms. Conway clarified on Monday that she was not accusing the former president of snooping via a kitchen appliance”).
A pair of even bigger blows came on Wednesday. First, House Intelligence Committee Chair Devin Nunes — a devoted Trump ally and defender — flatly said that “clearly the president was wrong” if you take his tweets about Obama’s wiretapping “literally.”
“I don’t think there was an actual tap of Trump Tower,” Nunes said.
Next, embattled Attorney General Jeff Sessions, already under fire for misleading a Senate committee about his contacts with the Russian ambassador to the US, pushed back at his own boss when a reporter asked if he’d ever given Trump “reason to believe that he was wiretapped by the previous administration.”
“Look, the answer is no,” Sessions replied.
. . .
When Trump first made the wiretapping charge in a string of early-morning tweets earlier this month, a baffled White House quickly went into damage-control mode. [
Spicer first said the White House was asking Congress to investigate the claim but would have no further comment, then said there was “no question that something happened” and that it was up to lawmakers like Nunes to sort out what that something was. Nunes said Trump had raised a “valid question,” and added, “I don’t think we should attack the president for tweeting.”
Conway tried to deflect blame from Trump by saying that he, as president, “has information and intelligence that the rest of us do not.”
Those defenses began to crumble as Obama and his former top aides angrily denied the accusations and Conway and other White House staffers were unable to provide any evidence to bolster Trump’s accusation. The Washington Post reported that the allegation seemed to originate from an unsourced Breitbart article circulating among top Trump aides titled “Mark Levin to Congress: Investigate Obama’s ‘Silent Coup’ vs. Trump.”
. . .
Still, it’s now been almost two weeks since the initial Trump tweets, and the White House has yet to publicize anything that would substantiate them. That leaves the president and his closest aides with two equally bad options: explicitly acknowledge that the claim was baseless, the opposite of what Trump seems inclined to do, or continue trying to subtly walk it back without formally retracting it. Either path would fuel new questions about Trump’s honesty and ability to distinguish fact from conspiracy theories propagated by fringe media outlets.
There’s a third possibility, and it could be the most damaging of all. It may well turn out that Trump was right that Trump Tower was bugged but profoundly and fundamentally wrong as to who did it, and why. It wouldn’t have been Obama. It would have been the FBI and other federal law enforcement agencies already investigating why so many of Trump’s closest aides were in direct contact with Russian intelligence officials in the run-up to the election.
ClimateSanity
New member
What standing does Hawaii have to block this ban?
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
This is a great twist on the famous (in some circles, anyway) Invisible Gorilla study, in which viewers fail to see a large man in a gorilla suit pass through a group of basketball players they're watching because they've been asked to look for a specific requested piece of information about the individual team members. He passes right through the group - and still, on average, 50% of people simply don't even notice he's there because their brain is so occupied with the task they've been given, and our brains are wired to block out sensory information we don't find useful when we're focused on attending to a specific cognitive activity. (Which is one of the reasons eyewitness testimony is notoriously unreliable.)
Anyway: Here's a newer study in which radiologists skilled in looking for tiny lung nodules were given lung slides that had a gorilla image in them, and 84% missed it completely while reviewing the slide. They're skilled, they're experienced - and still they didn't notice the gorilla on the slide.
Here's the article and an image of the lung slide with the gorilla: Why Even Radiologists Can Miss A Gorilla Hiding In Plain Sight
Relating the study to this thread, and anything related to bias in the news - whether you're a Trump supporter or have never been a Trump supporter and never plan on being a Trump supporter, it's good to think about the closing lines of the article:
Regarding the 83% who missed the gorilla:
That inattentional blindness can go more than one way. We can see danger everywhere when it isn't, and we can look right at danger and not recognize what we're seeing. And I know each person who reads that is going to interpret it through their own personal filter, which means there will be as many ways of thinking about it as there are readers.
Anyway: Here's a newer study in which radiologists skilled in looking for tiny lung nodules were given lung slides that had a gorilla image in them, and 84% missed it completely while reviewing the slide. They're skilled, they're experienced - and still they didn't notice the gorilla on the slide.
Here's the article and an image of the lung slide with the gorilla: Why Even Radiologists Can Miss A Gorilla Hiding In Plain Sight
Relating the study to this thread, and anything related to bias in the news - whether you're a Trump supporter or have never been a Trump supporter and never plan on being a Trump supporter, it's good to think about the closing lines of the article:
Regarding the 83% who missed the gorilla:
This wasn't because the eyes of the radiologists didn't happen to fall on the large, angry gorilla. Instead, the problem was in the way their brains had framed what they were doing. They were looking for cancer nodules, not gorillas. "They look right at it, but because they're not looking for a gorilla, they don't see that it's a gorilla," Drew says.
In other words, what we're thinking about — what we're focused on — filters the world around us so aggressively that it literally shapes what we see. So, Drew says, we need to think carefully about the instructions we give to professional searchers like radiologists or people looking for terrorist activity, because what we tell them to look for will in part determine what they see and don't see.
In other words, what we're thinking about — what we're focused on — filters the world around us so aggressively that it literally shapes what we see. So, Drew says, we need to think carefully about the instructions we give to professional searchers like radiologists or people looking for terrorist activity, because what we tell them to look for will in part determine what they see and don't see.
That inattentional blindness can go more than one way. We can see danger everywhere when it isn't, and we can look right at danger and not recognize what we're seeing. And I know each person who reads that is going to interpret it through their own personal filter, which means there will be as many ways of thinking about it as there are readers.
ClimateSanity
New member
Obama had the British surveil Trump so that he could keep his fingerprints off it.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Is that from Breitbart?
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
I don't know, but apparently it does.
Watson bluntly rejected the federal government's claims that the new directive does not target Islam because it is focused on six countries that account for less than 9 percent of the world's Muslims.
"The illogic of the Government’s contentions is palpable," wrote Watson, an appointee of President Barack Obama. "The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed. The Court declines to relegate its Establishment Clause analysis to a purely mathematical exercise."
However, look what came from the 9th circuit:
As the White House mulled the possibility of an appeal of the latest ruling, there was one piece of good news for Trump's team: roughly two hours after Watson issued the new restraining order, five 9th Circuit judges formally declared that the original appeals panel made a "fundamental error" by refusing to let Trump proceed with his first order.
The dissenters' move does not alter that earlier ruling but could be seen as a signal to other judges or even the Supreme Court...
Atta boy Trump!
Yep - the Trumple Shuttle continues to fly straight center into its own, self-induced "no fly" zones.
What an incompetent.
By the way, what I said about his being up to ending up in bed with China, Japan, Mexico...has proven true.
Not to mention over a ton in weight in Ivanka's fasion line not only once more made in, and shipped from China recently, but another order for more.
Trump suckered his base and good.
Really sad.
ClimateSanity
New member
Immigration is the purvue of the President. He has to clearly violate the Constitution in order to take away his prerogative. Hawaii must prove a violation of the establishment clause. They haven't come close, so they are acting unconstitutionally.
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
ClimateSanity
New member
https://www.google.com/amp/insider.foxnews.com/amp/article
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
ClimateSanity
New member
https://www.google.com/amp/insider.foxnews.com/amp/article/54847
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
ClimateSanity
New member
Judge Nap: Obama 'Went Outside Chain of Command,' Used British Spy Agency to Surveil Trump
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
From your link:
In a statement to Fox News, a UK government spokesperson responded, saying that "no part of this story is true."
ClimateSanity
New member
ClimateSanity
New member
He used four sources too. That makes give liars,,?
Sent from my XT1254 using TheologyOnline mobile app
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
Is the British government lying?
