Conservative Ideology 2024: NOTHING BUT LIES AND FEARMONGERING

[Typical Lax Dad]

In lawsuit against CNN, says network should have known Parnas was "a renowned liar, a fraudster, a hustler, an opportunist with delusions of grandeur..." Not good timing given phone records in intel report.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news ... ine-report

recently, Nunes also has sued a "cow" account on twitter...

r's are DEPLORABLE

He is going to be even richer!!

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2019/03/19/poli ... index.html

[jhu72]

Here's something scary:

Remember, the National Committees do in depth Opposition Research on potential sponsored candidates before throwing them in for consideration. People are more comfortable sharing gossip and innuendo with the reps from the same team than with reporters et al.

So the RNC had accumulated all the dirt on all the important Republican politicians over decades, and kept this dirt safe in their server.

Now the Russians have this dirt. Good Lord......

Fact - the Russians did hack the RNC server in the same time frame as the DNC server
Fact - the Russians never released information from the RNC server
Fact - the republican congressmen in both houses are all in the tank for Trump after being strongly opposed by many prior to his election (the chances of this happening randomly are a zillion to one)

This makes more sense than all of them being cowed by the base. Explains why those who have left congress, who should have no fear of the base, essentially remain silent. Playing this kind of game is right in the sweet spot for both Trump and Putin. Fits their MOs perfectly.

[jhu72]

One more for the good guys.

[seacoaster]

One more for the good guys.

I thought that Duncan Hunter business was all "a witch hunt"?

[dislaxxic]

Right, a lot like another famous "witch hunt", methinks...

..

[Bandito]

Please refer to my 101 media lies about Trump thread and you’ll see why. The WaPo is one of the worst sources around. They are fake news. I’m sure you check out Fox, OANN, Breitbart, the college fix and follow conservatives on Twitter right? Yawn. Move along solider! The left, academia and the media are one and the same, yet you all still couldn’t beat Trump and won’t in 2020. Better get on the Biden train and start fantasizing about kids sitting on your lap.

Actually your thread is less than impressive given how many articles have been written during that time period. You call it fake news because you don't like what it says, not because it isn't true (actually most of what the Washington Post publishes is pretty well fact based and comes with loads of backup data to show that).

Fox is less than reliable, especially outside of the hard news side (even that has a lot more problems), and OANN, Breitbart and the like are cesspools of junk news... Pravda level propaganda is a better description.

But that would be maybe too challenging to believe, I guess.

You suck down fake news. Says all I need to know about you. Michigan will be Red again. Better move!

[jhu72]

Some progress in the republican party.

[RedFromMI]

Please refer to my 101 media lies about Trump thread and you’ll see why. The WaPo is one of the worst sources around. They are fake news. I’m sure you check out Fox, OANN, Breitbart, the college fix and follow conservatives on Twitter right? Yawn. Move along solider! The left, academia and the media are one and the same, yet you all still couldn’t beat Trump and won’t in 2020. Better get on the Biden train and start fantasizing about kids sitting on your lap.

Actually your thread is less than impressive given how many articles have been written during that time period. You call it fake news because you don't like what it says, not because it isn't true (actually most of what the Washington Post publishes is pretty well fact based and comes with loads of backup data to show that).

Fox is less than reliable, especially outside of the hard news side (even that has a lot more problems), and OANN, Breitbart and the like are cesspools of junk news... Pravda level propaganda is a better description.

But that would be maybe too challenging to believe, I guess.

You suck down fake news. Says all I need to know about you. Michigan will be Red again. Better move!

I live in South Carolina, and have for 25 years. Grew up in Michigan (hence Red From MI). Washington Post does not meet the definition of "fake news" in the sense that it is fake. Only that Trump and his compatriots call it that _because_ the facts are not on their side. And if the Washington Post gets it wrong, they generally correct themselves, just like any other main stream media source.

Never have I seen Trump correct his (many!) errors in fact. He does not care to, because that is the point - he wants you to believe that what he says is true, regardless of the actual truth. That is how a demagogue works...

[seacoaster]

Meanwhile...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... story.html

"Just in time for Christmas, the Trump administration finalized the first of three new rules requiring more people to go hungry. This first rule will dump about 700,000 Americans from the food stamp rolls (officially known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP) by tightening work requirements.

For decades, the federal food stamp program has had strict work requirements. Non-disabled adults without custody of minor children can receive no more than three months of food benefits within a three-year period, unless they meet 20-hour-per-week work requirements. Even in a time of historically low national unemployment, this can still be a high bar for people with less education, unstable housing, little control over their work hours, mental or physical health challenges, unreliable transportation or criminal records.

As a result, federal law has allowed states to get temporary waivers for this three-month cutoff in areas where joblessness is higher.

Both red and blue states have gotten these waivers over the years, using them to help residents in areas with fewer job opportunities — for instance, people in rural areas. Today, 36 states have waivers in place for parts of their state where unemployment is highest, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Last year, in a Republican-led push, Congress considered ratcheting up SNAP’s work requirements but ultimately decided against it. So instead, the Trump administration simply decided to take matters into its own hands by making it much more difficult for states to apply for these waivers.

For instance, while it used to be the case that a state could receive a waiver if it had experienced a sudden and sharp increase in unemployment, it can now qualify only if its average unemployment rate over the past 24 months is both 20 percent above the national average and also at least 6 percent.

There are a few reasons you might consider this misguided. Some are moral, others economic.

“SNAP is supposed to be an anti-hunger program, full stop,” says Craig Gundersen, a University of Illinois economist who specializes in food insecurity.

And though helping or encouraging people to experience the “dignity of work” is a laudable goal, he and other experts I spoke to say there is little evidence that food stamp receipt discourages work. Most food-stamp beneficiaries already have jobs; among those who don’t, or who don’t work sufficient hours, it is difficult to believe that the only thing keeping them from meeting this requirement is that it doesn’t suck enough to be poor.

The population affected by this new rule, after all, involves the neediest — on average, they make just 18 percent of the poverty line — so it’s not as though food stamps enable them to live a life of comfort and convenience. Especially when you consider that their average monthly SNAP benefits are $165, or about $1.83 per meal.

Then there are the macroeconomic considerations.

One of the selling points of SNAP, like other means-tested safety-net programs, is that it is countercyclical. When recession hits and people lose work, SNAP rolls swell with little to no intervention needed from policymakers. This helps struggling families, yes, but it also blunts the blow of the recession to the overall economy and helps it recover faster. For this reason, food stamps are called an “automatic fiscal stabilizer.”

In fact, SNAP spending during a recession has among the biggest bang for the buck of all fiscal measures. For every additional dollar spent on food stamps, overall economic activity rises by as much as $1.50, according to research from the Agriculture Department.

A recession may or may not be imminent, but we’re late enough in the business cycle that we should be thinking about a plan for the next one. In fact, some policymakers already are. Presidential candidate Sen. Michael F. Bennet (D-Colo.), for instance, has proposed ramping up these safety-net programs so that they automatically kick in with greater force when the economy needs them most, rather than waiting for an increasingly dysfunctional Congress to act.

By contrast, the Trump administration is pushing people off the rolls and making it more difficult for state policymakers to respond the next time there is a sudden spike in unemployment. Which means Trump officials aren’t just exporting anti-poor antipathy to the states; they’re exporting Washington’s policy gridlock, too."

Better to be a farmer/recipient of artificial aid due to tariff wars I guess.

[cradleandshoot]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics ... spartandhp This guy is the reason the Republicans are such idiots. You should not pretend to walk the high road when you don't know where it starts.

[DocBarrister]

Article in the Washington Post, apparently directed at some MAGA Trump supporters on this forum.

To GOP hypocrites: I never want to hear about Hillary Clinton’s emails again

He began his presidency, in February 2017, by reviewing classified documents and having a highly sensitive discussion about North Korea with the Japanese prime minister not in a SCIF (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) but in front of fellow diners on a packed terrace at Mar-a-Lago.
In May 2017, he revealed top-secret intelligence to the Russian foreign minister and Russian ambassador during a meeting in the Oval Office, thereby potentially blowing a source of information about the Islamic State. In 2018, he reportedly discussed with wealthy donors at a Manhattan fundraiser the classified details of a battle between U.S. forces and Russian mercenaries in Syria.
In October of this year, Trump revealed details about the raid on Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi that, as NBC News noted, “were either highly classified or tactically sensitive, and their disclosure by the president made intelligence and military officials cringe.” And, according to a White House whistleblower, Trump overruled the opposition of security officials to grant top-secret security clearances to Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump.

But all these security breaches pale by comparison with Trump’s promiscuous use of a cellphone to conduct top-secret conversations. My Post colleagues Paul Sonne, Josh Dawsey, Ellen Nakashima and Greg Miller report that “Trump has routinely communicated with his personal lawyer, Rudolph W. Giuliani, and other individuals speaking on cellphones vulnerable to monitoring by Russian and other foreign intelligence services.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions ... far-worse/


DocBarrister

[youthathletics]

See what happens when a precedent is set for the greater bad. gee...thanks Hillary and now Schiff.

[old salt]

See what happens when a precedent is set for the greater bad. gee...thanks Hillary and now Schiff.

The Secret Service couldn't get Obama to give up his Blackberry, so they tried to engineer a secure BB for him.
https://money.cnn.com/2014/05/22/techno ... index.html
The only problem, the person on the other end needed to use a similarly modified BB.
Bottom line -- unless both parties are on a STU III secure landline, you've got to trust the individuals not to disclose anything critical.
I'd trust Obama to do that. Trump & Hilary -- not so much.

[youthathletics]

See what happens when a precedent is set for the greater bad. gee...thanks Hillary and now Schiff.

The Secret Service couldn't get Obama to give up his Blackberry, so they tried to engineer a secure BB for him.
https://money.cnn.com/2014/05/22/techno ... index.html
The only problem, the person on the other end needed to use a similarly modified BB.
Bottom line -- unless both parties are on a STU III secure landline, you've got to trust the individuals not to disclose anything critical.
I'd trust Obama to do that. Trump & Hilary -- not so much.

From Trump: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/sta ... 18273?s=20

Fake News @CNN is reporting that I am “still using personal cell phone for calls despite repeated security warnings.” This is totally false information and reporting. I haven’t had a personal cell phone for years. Only use government approved and issued phones. Retract!

7:23 PM · Dec 6, 2019·Twitter for iPhone.

Can CNN be impeached?

[MDlaxfan76]

See what happens when a precedent is set for the greater bad. gee...thanks Hillary and now Schiff.

The Secret Service couldn't get Obama to give up his Blackberry, so they tried to engineer a secure BB for him.
https://money.cnn.com/2014/05/22/techno ... index.html
The only problem, the person on the other end needed to use a similarly modified BB.
Bottom line -- unless both parties are on a STU III secure landline, you've got to trust the individuals not to disclose anything critical.
I'd trust Obama to do that. Trump & Hilary -- not so much.

Correct.
My VC fund invested in a company whose tech is now in use in a whole lot of secure peer to peer encrypted cell communications.

But it requires peer to peer.

Agree on 'trust' too.

youth, you do understand that Trump is simply saying he doesn't pay for the cell phone he uses?
He's using a 'personal' govt' issued cell phone (as opposed to secured and monitored land line) to make calls that aren't monitored, logged, much less listened into for transcription?

Any surprise that he doesn't pay for them???

CNN's reporting is accurate, Trump's trying to pretend otherwise.

But here's the question, is he really so dumb as to think that because the gov't issues a cell phone to him it's actually secure, or does he just think his voters are that dumb?

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://politicaltribune.org/jim-jordan ... ngressman/

[youthathletics]

See what happens when a precedent is set for the greater bad. gee...thanks Hillary and now Schiff.

The Secret Service couldn't get Obama to give up his Blackberry, so they tried to engineer a secure BB for him.
https://money.cnn.com/2014/05/22/techno ... index.html
The only problem, the person on the other end needed to use a similarly modified BB.
Bottom line -- unless both parties are on a STU III secure landline, you've got to trust the individuals not to disclose anything critical.
I'd trust Obama to do that. Trump & Hilary -- not so much.

Correct.
My VC fund invested in a company whose tech is now in use in a whole lot of secure peer to peer encrypted cell communications.

But it requires peer to peer.

Agree on 'trust' too.

youth, you do understand that Trump is simply saying he doesn't pay for the cell phone he uses?
He's using a 'personal' govt' issued cell phone (as opposed to secured and monitored land line) to make calls that aren't monitored, logged, much less listened into for transcription?

Any surprise that he doesn't pay for them???

CNN's reporting is accurate, Trump's trying to pretend otherwise.

But here's the question, is he really so dumb as to think that because the gov't issues a cell phone to him it's actually secure, or does he just think his voters are that dumb?

Who said the conversations he is having on the iPhone are or need to be secure in nature? Not defending him, just saying the iPhone may solely be used for immediate notifications/communication in order to pick up the red phone or go radio silent. Why is it you immediately want to throw him or anyone you do not agree with under a bus, and craftily attempt to call them stupid....just seems self righteous.

[Typical Lax Dad]

See what happens when a precedent is set for the greater bad. gee...thanks Hillary and now Schiff.

The Secret Service couldn't get Obama to give up his Blackberry, so they tried to engineer a secure BB for him.
https://money.cnn.com/2014/05/22/techno ... index.html
The only problem, the person on the other end needed to use a similarly modified BB.
Bottom line -- unless both parties are on a STU III secure landline, you've got to trust the individuals not to disclose anything critical.
I'd trust Obama to do that. Trump & Hilary -- not so much.

Correct.
My VC fund invested in a company whose tech is now in use in a whole lot of secure peer to peer encrypted cell communications.

But it requires peer to peer.

Agree on 'trust' too.

youth, you do understand that Trump is simply saying he doesn't pay for the cell phone he uses?
He's using a 'personal' govt' issued cell phone (as opposed to secured and monitored land line) to make calls that aren't monitored, logged, much less listened into for transcription?

Any surprise that he doesn't pay for them???

CNN's reporting is accurate, Trump's trying to pretend otherwise.

But here's the question, is he really so dumb as to think that because the gov't issues a cell phone to him it's actually secure, or does he just think his voters are that dumb?

Who said the conversations he is having on the iPhone are or need to be secure in nature? Not defending him, just saying the iPhone may solely be used for immediate notifications/communication in order to pick up the red phone or go radio silent. Why is it you immediately want to throw him or anyone you do not agree with under a bus, and craftily attempt to call them stupid....just seems self righteous.

Who said it? The same people that said Hillary was wreck-less!

[youthathletics]

See what happens when a precedent is set for the greater bad. gee...thanks Hillary and now Schiff.

The Secret Service couldn't get Obama to give up his Blackberry, so they tried to engineer a secure BB for him.
https://money.cnn.com/2014/05/22/techno ... index.html
The only problem, the person on the other end needed to use a similarly modified BB.
Bottom line -- unless both parties are on a STU III secure landline, you've got to trust the individuals not to disclose anything critical.
I'd trust Obama to do that. Trump & Hilary -- not so much.

Correct.
My VC fund invested in a company whose tech is now in use in a whole lot of secure peer to peer encrypted cell communications.

But it requires peer to peer.

Agree on 'trust' too.

youth, you do understand that Trump is simply saying he doesn't pay for the cell phone he uses?
He's using a 'personal' govt' issued cell phone (as opposed to secured and monitored land line) to make calls that aren't monitored, logged, much less listened into for transcription?

Any surprise that he doesn't pay for them???

CNN's reporting is accurate, Trump's trying to pretend otherwise.

But here's the question, is he really so dumb as to think that because the gov't issues a cell phone to him it's actually secure, or does he just think his voters are that dumb?

Who said the conversations he is having on the iPhone are or need to be secure in nature? Not defending him, just saying the iPhone may solely be used for immediate notifications/communication in order to pick up the red phone or go radio silent. Why is it you immediately want to throw him or anyone you do not agree with under a bus, and craftily attempt to call them stupid....just seems self righteous.

Who said it? The same people that said Hillary was wreck-less!

Is she a president? But since you brought her up, her server was not gov’t issued and hidden in a bathroom closet, setup by some overseas connected IT crook, then ‘wiped clean’ with a cloth.

[ggait]

Apparently, Trump doesn't care if the Ruskies or other countries listen in. He uses a personal device so that the people in the WH won't know who he is talking too.

Butter-emails!!!!