Sign in to follow this  
deicer

Trump 2.0 Continues

Recommended Posts

This isn't the truth?

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-mueller-report-fake-news-media-james-comey-latest-a8877456.html

If special counsel Robert Mueller‘s investigation makes one thing clear, it’s that many of the news reports that President Donald Trump branded as “fake news“ were, in fact, very real news indeed.

While Mr Mueller’s report didn’t establish a criminal conspiracy and was “unable” to conclude that obstruction of justice occurred – contrary to hours of speculation among cable-news pundits during Mr Mueller’s long investigation – it also largely validated news accounts that Trump dismissed or disparaged.

Instead, at least in the Mueller team’s analysis, the fake news seems to have flowed not from the media but from the other direction.

His report, released Thursday, cites multiple instances in which Trump and White House aides misled or lied to journalists or in public statements as the investigation was unfolding.

On the day of Mr Mueller’s appointment, in May 2017, for example, White House aides said Trump reacted calmly to the news.

In fact, according to Mr Mueller’s report, Trump’s first reaction was anything but calm.

According to notes taken by an aide, Trump responded by saying: “Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I’m f***ed ... This is the worst thing that ever happened to me.”

White House press secretary Sarah Sanders told reporters repeatedly in May 2017 that she personally had heard from “countless members of the FBI” that they were “grateful and thankful” to Trump for firing FBI director James Comey.

That never happened, Mr Mueller said. He wrote that Ms Sanders later acknowledged to investigators that her comments were “not founded on anything”.

Trump also dictated a press statement saying that he had fired Mr Comey based on the recommendations of Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

But Mr Mueller found that Trump had already decided to fire James Comey before Gen Rosenstein had weighed in.

Mr Trump backed down and later publicly acknowledged he intended to fire Mr Comey regardless of Gen Rosenstein’s memo after unnamed Justice Department officials “made clear to him” that they would “resist” the bogus justification, Mr Mueller said.

Incoming White House aides also lied about press accounts they knew were accurate.

Former national security adviser Michael Flynn directed an aide, KT McFarland, to call Washington Post columnist David Ignatius during the presidential transition in January 2017 and deny Mr Ignatius’ reporting about Mr Flynn’s conversations with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak.

Ms McFarland “knew she was providing false information” when she called Mr Ignatius to dispute his surmise that Mr Flynn had discussed removing sanctions on Russia with Sergey Kislyak. (Prompted by Ms McFarland’s call, The Post updated the column to note that a “Trump official” denied that Mr Flynn discussed sanctions.)

Mr Trump and his aides also knocked down an accurate New York Times story in May 2017 reporting that the president had asked Mr Comey for loyalty during a private dinner several months before his firing.

Mr Trump even lied about who invited whom to dinner:

He told NBC News anchor Lester Holt in an interview that month Mr Comey had asked for it because “he wanted to stay on”. 

Mr Mueller found evidence that the president extended the invitation to Mr Comey on 27 January.

On the eve of Mr Comey’s testimony to Congress that May, Mr Trump sought to raise questions about his credibility, when – as Mr Mueller found – it was Trump’s credibility that was questionable.

At the time, Trump tweeted, “James Comey better hope there are no ‘tapes’ of our conversation before he starts leaking to the press!”

Mr Comey’s contemporaneous accounts of his meeting with Mr Trump and corroboration from his FBI colleagues also show that another New York Times story, branded as “fake news” by the president, was true.

The Times reported that Trump had asked Mr Comey to end the investigation of Mr Flynn; Mr Mueller found “substantial evidence” that this was true, despite Mr Trump publicly saying otherwise.

Mr Trump also tried to persuade then-White House Counsel Donald McGahn to deny stories in The Washington Post and the Times in early 2018 that Trump had asked Mr McGahn to fire Mr Mueller about seven months earlier.

Mr McGahn refused repeatedly to undercut the stories because he knew they were “accurate in reporting on the President’s effort to have the Special Counsel removed”.

Mr Mueller noted that Trump “challenged” his lawyer for taking notes of their conversation.

“Why do you take notes?” he asked Mr McGahn, according to the report. “Lawyers don’t take notes. I never had a lawyer who took notes.”

Mr McGahn said he kept notes because he is a “real lawyer” and to establish a record.

Mr Trump replied, “I’ve had a lot of great lawyers, like Roy Cohn. He did not take notes.’’

Mr Cohn, who was chief counsel to Senator Joseph McCarthy, during Mr McCarthy’s communist-hunting hearings in the 1950s, was disbarred by a New York court in 1986 because of “dishonesty, fraud, deceit and misrepresentation”.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The NYT fake news ??  No WAYYYYYY  !

NYT Finally Acknowledges That Steele Dossier Might Not Be That Factual

The salacious and uncorroborated “dossier” compiled by ex-British Intelligence officer Christopher Steele was used by the media to justify its endless attacks on President Donald Trump and accuse him of treason.

 

The dossier was never anything more than opposition research paid for by Fusion GPS – and not even good opposition research at that. Steele reported rumors and gossip, including some Internet comments, to bolster his report.

What wasn’t corroborated was downright debunked by Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report, including the allegations that former Trump attorney Michael Cohen went to Prague to meet with Russians.

Now, after two years of using the dossier to perpetuate the “collusion” narrative, the New York Times has finally acknowledged what those of us not parroting the collusion delusion have known for years – the dossier was garbage.

“[T]he release on Thursday of the report by the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, underscored what had grown clearer for months — that while many Trump aides had welcomed contacts with the Russians, some of the most sensational claims in the dossier appeared to be false, and others were impossible to prove. Mr. Mueller’s report contained over a dozen passing references to the document’s claims but no overall assessment of why so much did not check out,” the Times reported.

The dossier will now be the subject of at least two inquiries – one from congressional Republicans and one from the Department of Justice’s Inspector General, who is looking into whether the FBI improperly relied on the propaganda document to obtain a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court warrant to spy on Trump adviser Carter Page.

(Side note: The Times is one of the outlets that denounced Attorney General William Barr for saying the FBI was “spying” on the Trump campaign, yet when talking about the warrant for Page, the newspaper uses the term “eavesdrop.” Spying, eavesdropping, surveilling, what’s the difference?)

The FBI, according to the Times, appears to have been suspicious of the dossier since early 2017. That, however, was right around the time media outlets reported on the existence of the dossier – and Buzzfeed published the unverified document in a breach of journalistic ethics – and so the fact that the FBI doubted the dossier’s credibility was never part of the story.

Instead, media outlets like the Times spent years talking to “sources” – some of whom were likely Fusion GPS operatives – claiming Mueller had evidence supporting claims in the dossier.

Those who have been beating the drum about the false “collusion” narrative took to Twitter to criticize the Times’ Johnny-come-lately routine.

The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway jokingly paraphrased the Times’ main point from their article.

“NYT: ‘Ha ha, funny story, you'll never believe it. That dossier we spent years defending as legitimate and a worthy basis for FISA wiretaps on citizens is so unfounded it might actually be Russian disinformation, just like the collusion skeptics warned,’" she tweeted.

Journalist Lee Smith wrote: “Note from @nytimes to readers: we won a Pulitzer for our Trump-Russia collusion reporting but now we think the document that the whole story based on, the Steele dossier, might be problematic.”

Journalist Patrick Poole tweeted: “This is very telling. It was clear in Jan 2017 that this was likely part Russian disinformation since **the very first page** of Steele’s dossier reveals his Source B is “a former top level intelligence officer still active in the Kremlin.” 2+ years later they’re just catching up.”

https://www.dailywire.com/news/46240/nyt-finally-acknowledges-steele-dossier-might-not-ashe-schow

 

 

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-daily-wire/

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, deicer said:

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-daily-wire/

These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes.

The armchair academics

Amateur attempts at such tools already exist, and have found plenty of fans. Google “media bias,” and you’ll find Media Bias/Fact Check, run by armchair media analyst Dave Van Zandt. The site’s methodology is simple: Van Zandt and his team rate each outlet from 0 to 10 on the categories of biased wording and headlines, factuality and sourcing, story choices (“does the source report news from both sides”), and political affiliation.

A similar effort is “The Media Bias Chart,” or simply, “The Chart.”Created by Colorado patent attorney Vanessa Otero, the chart has gone through several methodological iterations, but currently is based on her evaluation of outlets’ stories on dimensions of veracity, fairness, and expression.

Both efforts suffer from the very problem they’re trying to address: Their subjective assessments leave room for human biases, or even simple inconsistencies, to creep in. Compared to Gentzkow and Shapiro, the five to 20 stories typically judged on these sites represent but a drop of mainstream news outlets’ production.

Then there are the organizations with declared agendas. The Media Research Center and Media Matters for America scour the news for evidence of left-wing and right-wing bias, respectively. The MRC’s vice president for research and publications, Brent Baker, doesn’t see a need to agree a suite of universal bias measures, because he’s confident in the organization’s existing quantitative methodology.

The reality is, we’ve been finding, I think very effectively for 30 years now, [that] the media are tilted to the left,” Baker says.

 

https://www.cjr.org/innovations/measure-media-bias-partisan.php

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is most important that is being glossed over is that it isn't about left or right bias.  It is about the line I highlighted in my post.

"publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. "

It is the willful spreading of untruths to forward the bias.

If it was reporting truly on the facts, then maybe it would be admissible.

However, as seen through the U.S. election, and as highlighted in another thread, it is far too easy to manipulate news to achieve that bias.  And shouting it out over and over again still doesn't make it fact, or right.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, deicer said:

publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. "

And the EXACT same phrase can be attributed to Leftist leaning sources ad nauseam. CNN, NYT, MSNBC, CBC, Toronto Star etc etc So what’s your point?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

let it play out.  What could go wrong?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference couldn’t be more stark..

 

Leadership under Trudeau

court in China has sentenced a Canadian citizen to death for producing and trafficking methamphetamine. Fan Wei is the second Canadian to be sentenced to death this year. 

***********I*I*******

China has stopped all canola imports from Canada, industry group says

https://globalnews.ca/news/5084425/china-stops-buying-canadian-canola/

 

************************************

 

Compared to...

Leadership under Trump

 

A US-China trade deal is ‘possible’ by next Friday, sources say

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/01/trump-news-us-china-trade-deal-possible-by-next-friday.html

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what does a private citizen being arrested and convicted in China of drug trafficking have to do with Trudeau leadership?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, boestar said:

what does a private citizen being arrested and convicted in China of drug trafficking have to do with Trudeau leadership?

You don’t think the arrest of that Chinese Huawei exec affected China / Canadian relations? Why would the Chinese simply not deport the person back to Canada.?  Why make an example on the world stage? This is all about China making a point...Screw with Chinese citizens, we will return the treatment 10 fold. Notice you don’t see China threatening to hang Americans? Trudeau has totally F***ed relations with China on numerous fronts.

Remember the McCallum affair?  >>> Canada is a frightened bird >>>  https://globalnews.ca/news/4896922/china-canada-media-john-mccallum/

First Canola, now peas and soybeans.  https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canada-china-trade-1.5114989

Rome is burning while Trudeau virtue signals....and Canadians are paying the price for his stupidity. Tax $$$$ will pay for this >>  https://globalnews.ca/news/5223407/federal-support-canola-farmers/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

personally I think the guy should hang but that's just my opinion regardless of the political motivation.  They guy broke the law in a foreign land and when in a foreign land we are governed by THEIR laws and values not Canadian ones.  He willfully and knowingly committed the crime and if this is the punishment then so be it.

These people do these things knowing that they will be extradited home and receive a lighter sentence.  frankly I hope all countries follow suit.  Maybe it will actually become a deterrent

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And yet another push back from China.....this all lies entirely at the feet of Trudeau and his policies.

 

Now pigs: China blocks imports from two Canadian pork producers amid diplomatic row

Canada is the world's third-largest pork exporter

https://business.financialpost.com/commodities/agriculture/exclusive-china-blocks-imports-from-two-canadian-pork-producers-amid-diplomatic-spat

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, boestar said:

These people do these things knowing that they will be extradited home and receive a lighter sentence.  frankly I hope all countries follow suit.  Maybe it will actually become a deterrent

Unless of course your name is Omar Khadr . A proven convicted terrorist...then Trudeau panders to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At first I thought this had to be a satire piece, alas, no....  Highlights for emphasis are mine.

Trump, Putin discussed Mueller report and agreed no collusion, White House says

President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke Friday and both agreed "there was no collusion" between Moscow and Trump's 2016 presidential campaign, White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said.

Sanders said that the two briefly discussed special counsel Robert Mueller's report "essentially in the context of that it's over and there was no collusion." She added that she was "pretty sure both leaders were very well aware of (the Mueller report's finding) long before this call took place" because it was "something we've said for the better part of two and a half years."

When asked if they also discussed election meddling by Russia that Mueller detailed in his report, she said that the administration is committed to securing American elections and blasted the Obama administration for not taking action in 2016.

"This administration, unlike the previous one, takes election meddling seriously," she said.

Trump later confirmed the call in a Friday tweet in which called the accusation of collusion the "Russian Hoax."

"Had a long and very good conversation with President Putin of Russia. As I have always said, long before the Witch Hunt started, getting along with Russia, China, and everyone is a good thing, not a bad thing," he tweeted. "We discussed Trade, Venezuela, Ukraine, North Korea, Nuclear Arms Control and even the 'Russian Hoax.' Very productive talk!"

Since Mueller's findings were released by Attorney General William Barr in March and the full report was released last month, Trump has continued to claim vindication. Mueller's report, which lays out Russia's attempts to influence the 2016 election, notes "that the campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts." However, Mueller said in the report that he did not find a provable criminal conspiracy.

During Mueller’s probe, he indicted twenty-five Russian nationals and three Russian companies for hacking and a disinformation campaign targeting Americans on social media.

Trump previously came under fire from Republicans and Democrats for suggesting that Russia was not the culprit during a Helsinki summit with Putin last year, despite American intelligence agencies concluding that the country interfered in the election. He later walked back his comments.

Sanders also answered a question about whether White House counsel Don McGahn would testify before Congress as Democrats ramp up their oversight investigations into the administration. McGahn was a key witness in one of the 10 episodes of potential obstruction of justice by Trump that Mueller outlined in the report.

She also said that they discussed the crisis in Venezuela and the administration's need for a peaceful transition of power in the country and delivering aid to the country. Trump and Putin also talked about the need for Russia to put pressure on North Korea to denuclearize.

CORRECTION (May 3,2019, 1:51 p.m. ET): An earlier version of this article incorrectly included one topic that White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Presidents Trump and Putin discussed on Friday. They did not discuss the possibility of former White House counsel Don McGahn appearing before Congress. Sanders was answering a question from reporters about whether McGahn would testify before Congress.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So,,,,

They must be happy because this is 'what they voted for'! 

Now it's coming to Ontario, Alberta, etc.......

https://www.businessinsider.com/us-budget-deficit-hits-record-february-national-debt-2019-3

The US budget deficit hit $234 billion in the month of February, up 8.7% compared to the same month last year.

The February budget deficit was also the highest one-month deficit on record, eclipsing the previous record set in 2012.

The deficit is growing as the GOP tax law slows revenue intake and the bipartisan budget deal drives up spending.

The US posted a record budget deficit in the month of February, according to a new report form the Treasury Department.

The budget deficit for February came in at $234 billion, according to the Treasury, higher than the previous monthly record of $231.7 billion set in 2012. The deficit was also 8.7% higher than the $215.2 billion deficit posted in February 2018.

The budget deficit measures the shortfall of government revenues compared to what the government spends. Recent legislative changes have driven the deficit up to its highest levels since the financial crisis.

The deficit for the first five months of the government's 2019 fiscal year, which runs from October 2018 through October 2019, hit $544.2 billion — up 40% from the first five months of fiscal year 2018.

The growing deficit has been fueled by two big factors. First, President Donald Trump's and the GOP's tax reform law — named the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) — has caused revenues to slide. According to the Treasury, revenue for the first five months of fiscal year 2019 is down a little less than 1% compared to the same period the year before.

Second, spending is soaring due to the bipartisan budget compromise from early 2018 and long-term programs. Spending for the start of fiscal year 2019 is up 9% compared to the same time period last fiscal year.

The news comes as concerns about the debt have piled up in recent months. The budget deficit for the full 2018 fiscal year hit $779 billion, the highest since 2012. The US also issued just over $1.3 trillion in new debt during the 2018 calendar year, the most for any calendar year since 2010.

Based on projections from the Congressional Budget Office, it won't get any better with the deficit expected to top $1 trillion by fiscal year 2022. Even the president's own budget estimated that the deficit will top $1 trillion next fiscal year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this