Slashdot Mirror

Government ordered cyber offensives designed to change the leadership of a country are an act of war.

Espionage and covert activities are a normal part of government relations. Saying Russian ads on Facebook are an "act of war" is absurd.

This is a red herring. Espionage might be a side effect of the present situation, given that some efforts were made to use secure russian communications to keep the US intelligence community from knowing what was being communicated between Russia and the Trump White house Source: http://www.businessinsider.com... But it isn't legal, and those caught are punished.

But yeah - saying Russian ads on Facebook are the source of the concept of "Acts of war", and that we dumbass 'Murricans are only thinking of that as an act of war is bullshit. It discards everything else, and is worthy of a paranoid's conspiracy theory frame of mind. Cherry picking what supports one's argument and discarding the rest.

But let's get onto Acts of war. That is the wrong term. What everyone is looking for is Casus belli, not specifically acts of war . There is a relationship, but not a direct tit for tat. A Casus belli can be just about anything. The Bush II administration declared a Casus belli on Iraq for non-compliance with the cease fire in the 1990-91 war. Lame, but an example. WW1 started with the Assassination of Archduke Ferdinand of Austria and was a Casus belli. No direct attack happened.

Actual Acts of war are incidents like the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. No questioning that. A few have been manufactured, like the Gulf of Tonkin false flag operation. But still, there is a difference between the two, and Russia and a company in England didn't physically attack the US. Now since physical acts of war preceded the internet - there might be additions to Acts of war given that we and other countries have been stupid enough to put things like the power grid on the internet.

But let's dig a little deeper.

So now we get to the hacking of both the Republican and Democrat servers, but the systematic release of only the Democrat party information. https://www.snopes.com/news/20... Interestingly a Republican from Texas also broke this, then retracted it a few moments later - which in some cases indicates the veracity of the original statement. https://www.mediaite.com/onlin... But that's pretty interesting - I wonder why the Republican data wasn't presented? And if people think that the DNC's marginalization of Bernie Sanders was bad, they conveniently forget how actively Republicans worked to destroy moderate Republicans in order to replace them with ideologically pure candidates.

So we have a really sketchy attempt to use Russian crypto equipment, selective hacked data disclosure, and an unfolding story of Russian money coming into NRA dark campaign campaign funds for the politicians they own, and more. Facebook is a blip on the screen, but disturbing on the whole because in some of the other countries it was involved in more violent activities.

Regardless, the whole Facebook issue is that Cambridge Analytica was caught once, supposedly deleted the data, didn't, then used it and more data again, and as it turns out, are a really slimey organization. https://www.youtube.com/watch?... The shock of the whole thing was that it finally proved beyond doubt that Facebook is directly involved in the Cambridge Analytica malfeasance. That they will sell your data to organizations that are pathological in nature. That some people were naive enough to not think thair data would be used in such a fashion was hammered home.

The criminals also know that they face lower odds of resistance in areas with stricter gun control laws. Crime is always lower in areas with high gun ownership rates.

Credible citations please.

You really need to get your facts from places other than "Pass it on" emails.

Apocryphal, but hey...truth is stranger than fiction!

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/cup-of-joe/

Attempts at "whataboutism" with a scandal involving social media and psychographics fail to acknowledge that Cambridge Analytica obtained data by misleading people.

... In the case of Cambridge Analytica, information was gathered from users and given to a third party under false pretenses. According to Facebook, University of Cambridge psychologist Aleksandr Kogan created a personality quiz which users could download in an app called “thisisyourdigitallife.” Kogan presented the app as a tool that would be used for academic research — but the work was paid for by Cambridge Analytica. Facebook users were not informed that their data (and that of their friends) would be deployed by a political firm hired by the Trump campaign for psychographic profiling in the upcoming election.

Rayid Ghani, chief data scientist for Obama’s 2012 campaign, wrote: We did not build any complex (certainly not the so-called psychographic) models of facebook users using their facebook data. Most of the models we built were using the publicly available “voter file” that contains information people typically provide when filling out their voter registrations forms. We did build models to understand which of a supporter’s friends we want to ask to register to vote, or to get them to vote and how likely the friend was to take action based on the ask.

We only contacted the people who had given us access and permission to get their own email address. We did not get any contact information for their friend and did not (and could not ) contact any of their friends directly. All we could do was ask our “primary” supporters to contact their friends and we would recommend who those friends were based on the data they allowed us to access.

they argued, successfully, that they weren't a "News" organization and were in fact an entertainment network. That's how they get away with running opinion pieces and news stories side by side without notice or a pause.

No. Much as I loathe Fox News, I'd rather see them strung up for actual, documented abuses rather than an urban legend that was debunked years ago. First, it was a single station rather than the entire network. Second, it was a management dispute with a particular employee, not a dispute over the station's truthiness in general. And finally, while the court awarded the plaintiff damages, it made a specific note that it was not a question of the station's truthfulness but a personal dispute between station management and the employee. Absolutely, network news -- including both Fox and CNN -- tilt their news to favor their POV, but you can't pin it all on Fox and pretend the others are objective.

How many other red-flags are they ignoring?

With regard to the recent tragic high-school shooting in Florida, the police ignored the biggest red flag of all: the Instagram photo of Ncolas Cruz in a MAGA hat.

And yes, it's really him.

https://goo.gl/images/Bsw9Hy

https://www.snopes.com/fact-ch...

Snopes link on wiretapping at Trump Tower.

They list a whole bunch of stories and Obama officials that say it never happened and Trump lied. We now have a list of all the people who obtained a FISA warrant on Carter Page, how it was renewed 3 times, and how they used Russian propaganda to obtain it. Just about every "fact" listed in the Snopes article is easily provably wrong, every single one of them. Every Obama official listed lied, many of them under oath, but Snopes doesn't care about facts they just want to report when people say things that fit with their narrative.

If they can't get a story bigger than Watergate correct, they have completely failed as a fact checker. They literally printed proven lies on a fact check site.

FISA Rules: Carter Page was target of FISA warrant. Gives FBI ability to wiretap him, anyone he contacts, and anyone they contact, which would have been the entire Trump campaign. They renewed it 3 times AFTER Trump was elected and never charged Page with anything. To renew you would have had to prove you found something worth charging.

Leeland Yee was just logically protecting his source of income. He was certainly not pro-gun. According to Snopes:

https://www.snopes.com/was-yee-arrested-for-gun-trafficking/

The issue was much more complicated than you present it. He fought hard to ban guns which means he loves the people and hates violence. He knew guns would be trafficked into CA anyway, so why not take a piece of it? The Republicans try to make what he did more than it was because they're just taking advantage of the situation.

its a place of employment and it should be politically and culturally sterile. find another forum do express yourself outside of work.

The problem is that when you work for a company like Google, there is no place "outside of work". Employees are encouraged to spend their spare time at work. They don't go out to lunch. And they're even encouraged to pursue their hobbies while at work.

Interesting you brought that up. The graphic showing an incredible number of school shootings came thru our political discussion site and was *immediately* fact checked.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DW...

The data behind that graphic was posted within minutes...

https://www.snopes.com/2018/02...

[q]Firearm attacks during school hours: 7 (incidents resulting in injuries or deaths: 5)

22 January: Italy High School, Italy, Texas â" A 16-year-old student opened fire with a semi-automatic handgun in the school cafeteria, wounding another student.

22 January: NET Charter High School, Gentilly, Louisiana â" An unknown person fired shots at students from a vehicle in the school parking lot. One person was injured (though not by gunfire).

23 January: Marshall County High School, Benton, Kentucky â" A 15-year-old student opened fire with a handgun on school grounds, killing two and injuring 17.

25 January: Murphy High School, Mobile, Alabama â" A student fired a handgun into the air during a fight with another student. No injuries were reported.

26 January: Dearborn High School, Dearborn, Michigan â" Shots were fired during a fight in the school parking lot. No injuries were reported.

31 January: Lincoln High School, Philadelphia â" A fight during a basketball game resulted in the shooting death of a 32-year-old man outside the school.

14 February: Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, Parkland, Florida â" A 19-year-old former student opened fire with a semi-automatic rifle, killing 17 and injuring 14.

Firearm attacks NOT occurring during school hours: 2 (incidents resulting in injuries or deaths: 2)

20 January: Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina â" A 21-year-old was shot and killed during a fight at a party on school grounds.

5 February: â" Oxon Hill High School, Oxon Hill, Maryland â" A student was shot and injured in the school parking lot during an attempted robbery.

Shots fired during school hours, unknown reason: 2 (no injuries)

10 January: California State University, San Bernardino, California â" Bullets were fired through a window, with no suspects or motive identified.

8 February: Metropolitan High School, New York, NY â" A student fired a gun into the floor of a classroom.

Unintentional gunfire during school hours: 3 (incidents resulting in injuries or deaths: 1)

10 January: Greyson College, Denison, Texas â" A student fired a weapon belonging to an adviser, believing it wasnâ(TM)t loaded. No injuries were reported.

1 February: Salvador B. Castro Middle School, Los Angeles â" A semi-automatic rifle brought to school by a 12-year-old student accidentally went off. Four students were injured.

5 February: Harmony Learning Center, Maplewood, Minnesota â" A third-grader pressed the trigger of a law enforcement officerâ(TM)s handgun. The weapon went off but no one was injured.

Suicide attempts during school hours: 1 (resulting in death)

10 January: Coronado Elementary School, Sierra Vista, Arizona â" A middle school student shot himself in the bathroom of the school and was pronounced dead at the scene.

Stray bullets hitting school buildings during school hours: 1 (no injuries)

4 January: New Start High School, near Seattle â" Bullets fired by an unidentified shooter entered an administrative office. No injuries were reported.

Stray bullets hitting school buildings NOT occurring during school hours: 1 (no injuries)

15 January: Wiley College, Marshall, Texas â" Gunshots fired from a vehicle in the parking lot of a college dorm entered through a window, but did not injure residents.

Even tho liberals are against guns, more are for factual data.

False.

It's the usual sort of lie - twist definitions to include accidental shots in a firing range near a school, or unassociated suicides in the parking lot, and you can really rack up those numbers.

I'm surprised Everytown didn't include paintgun and pellet guns in their list, like they did back in 2015.

Unbunch your panties. One is too many and there have been about 11 that I would count from the link you provided.

False.

It's the usual sort of lie - twist definitions to include accidental shots in a firing range near a school, or unassociated suicides in the parking lot, and you can really rack up those numbers.

I'm surprised Everytown didn't include paintgun and pellet guns in their list, like they did back in 2015.

Yep.

Really?

http://www.judicialwatch.org/w...

https://thepoliticalinsider.co...

https://lasvegassun.com/news/2...

https://www.ice.gov/news/relea...

https://www.ice.gov/news/relea...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

https://www.justice.gov/usao-w...

http://www.breitbart.com/big-g...

https://www.snopes.com/cascade...

The shooter was a Trumper. Snopes article with references. Stop trying to pretend this guy was a democrat.

Really? Which well regulated militia was Nikolas Cruz a part of?

According to his own Instagram profile, he was part of the #MAGA army.

https://www.snopes.com/did-sho...

Millions of people remember Sinbad starring in a '90s comedy called 'Shazaam'

Donald Trump claims global warming is a myth... and yet he's building sea walls for his golf resort in Ireland to protect it against the sea level rising!

He doesn't say it's a myth, he says it's a hoax.

He agrees that the climate is changing, but believes that it's not due to man-made changes in the environment.

Trump never said climate is changing, Kellyanne Conway claimed he believed that, which is completely in line with their standard practice of spinning Trump's outrageous statements into orthodox GOP doctrine.

Conway tells us nothing about what Trump believes, Trump is absolutely notorious for contradicting his administration's official positions, his spokespeople, and even himself.

Trump only ever has two kinds of comments about climate change, either some variation of "it's a hoax" or "it's cold, therefore no global warming!". The position you give Trump is something far more nuanced than he's ever expressed himself.

Donald Trump claims global warming is a myth... and yet he's building sea walls for his golf resort in Ireland to protect it against the sea level rising!

He doesn't say it's a myth, he says it's a hoax.

He agrees that the climate is changing, but believes that it's not due to man-made changes in the environment.

> In October a Washington post article showed that while it was originally funded in 2015 by Republican donors, the Clinton campaign began funding the research in 2016 as opposition research.

Odd, I'm not seeing updates on Snopes Can you point me to the article I might have missed? Also, that AP report saying it was originally funded by the Washington Free Beacon was later *retracted* from what I saw, though it was widely passed around. You can see here for further information on that topic. Feel free to check their sources, as well.

So you might need even more fact checking, no? Feel free to do the same to me! I'm sure there are things I don't know and I look forward to any evidence you have which I have not seen.

Right, and pretty much any truly-interesting political statement is going to be about what strategy is best. And what strategy is best, depends on what your goals and values are. They're totally subjective.
Imagine a political statement like "the federal reserve should raise [or lower, take your pick] the interest rate by 0.25%." You can't tell someone else whether or not that's true or false for them. At best you can tell them whether or not it's a good idea for achieving what you want.

To be fair: neither snopes nor politifact fact checks opinions. None of the examples you made up are the kinds of things either one runs an article factchecking. They fact check only the things expressed as facts.

There is a saying "you are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts." I agree with that.

Snopes about was Trump or his campaign wiretapped before the election. They pretty much list it as false.

they do not. If you actuallty read the article you're citing, you'd note that it discusses the claim and the evidence for it, but does not rate it either true nor false.
https://www.snopes.com/2017/03/04/trump-accuses-obama-of-tapping-phones/

The closest thing to such a conclusion is the statement "the President’s tweets offered no documentation or evidence for the charges he was leveling at his predecessor in the White House." Saying that "the president didn't offer documentation or evidence" is not the same as saying it's false.

FISA warrant gotten on Carter Page Oct 21. Allows wiretapping of Page, his contacts, and their contacts, which includes all of Trump campaign. I know the day, who it was on, who signed off on it, and the judge that approved it. Snopes couldn't seem to figure that out, but they are great fact checkers?

So, you're complaining that they didn't include information released in the Nunes memo that wasn't released until eleven months after they wrote the article? Really, they can't. This was about as fair as it could be: they rated it neither true nor false, but pointed out that there wasn't any documentation, which was true at the time

Snopes is completely wrong on one of the most political articles with completely proven facts to back up how it is false.

It didn't rate the statement either true or false. It was, in fact, excruciatingly accurate as to what was available at the time,

I just picked that one because I assumed they would be incorrect, and was not surprised. I haven't seen an accurate truthful Snopes in about 5 years now.

You haven't yet cited an untruthful one.
Let's do the experiment; I'm curious. Try picking one at random: https://www.snopes.com/random/ and tell me whether it's true or false.

Snopes about was Trump or his campaign wiretapped before the election. They pretty much list it as false.

they do not. If you actuallty read the article you're citing, you'd note that it discusses the claim and the evidence for it, but does not rate it either true nor false.
https://www.snopes.com/2017/03/04/trump-accuses-obama-of-tapping-phones/

The closest thing to such a conclusion is the statement "the President’s tweets offered no documentation or evidence for the charges he was leveling at his predecessor in the White House." Saying that "the president didn't offer documentation or evidence" is not the same as saying it's false.

FISA warrant gotten on Carter Page Oct 21. Allows wiretapping of Page, his contacts, and their contacts, which includes all of Trump campaign. I know the day, who it was on, who signed off on it, and the judge that approved it. Snopes couldn't seem to figure that out, but they are great fact checkers?

So, you're complaining that they didn't include information released in the Nunes memo that wasn't released until eleven months after they wrote the article? Really, they can't. This was about as fair as it could be: they rated it neither true nor false, but pointed out that there wasn't any documentation, which was true at the time

Snopes is completely wrong on one of the most political articles with completely proven facts to back up how it is false.

It didn't rate the statement either true or false. It was, in fact, excruciatingly accurate as to what was available at the time,

I just picked that one because I assumed they would be incorrect, and was not surprised. I haven't seen an accurate truthful Snopes in about 5 years now.

You haven't yet cited an untruthful one.
Let's do the experiment; I'm curious. Try picking one at random: https://www.snopes.com/random/ and tell me whether it's true or false.

Snopes about was Trump or his campaign wiretapped before the election. They pretty much list it as false.

they do not. If you actuallty read the article you're citing, you'd note that it discusses the claim and the evidence for it, but does not rate it either true nor false.
https://www.snopes.com/2017/03/04/trump-accuses-obama-of-tapping-phones/

The closest thing to such a conclusion is the statement "the President’s tweets offered no documentation or evidence for the charges he was leveling at his predecessor in the White House." Saying that "the president didn't offer documentation or evidence" is not the same as saying it's false.

FISA warrant gotten on Carter Page Oct 21. Allows wiretapping of Page, his contacts, and their contacts, which includes all of Trump campaign. I know the day, who it was on, who signed off on it, and the judge that approved it. Snopes couldn't seem to figure that out, but they are great fact checkers?

So, you're complaining that they didn't include information released in the Nunes memo that wasn't released until eleven months after they wrote the article? Really, they can't. This was about as fair as it could be: they rated it neither true nor false, but pointed out that there wasn't any documentation, which was true at the time

Snopes is completely wrong on one of the most political articles with completely proven facts to back up how it is false.

It didn't rate the statement either true or false. It was, in fact, excruciatingly accurate as to what was available at the time,

I just picked that one because I assumed they would be incorrect, and was not surprised. I haven't seen an accurate truthful Snopes in about 5 years now.

You haven't yet cited an untruthful one.
Let's do the experiment; I'm curious. Try picking one at random: https://www.snopes.com/random/ and tell me whether it's true or false.

Sites like Snopes and Politifact do an admirable job of identifying false information

Bullshit. They politicize the hell out of it. Something is either true or false. They are both filled with "True, but" conditionals.

Snopes.com and Politifact both have categories of "mixed" (snopes) or "half true" (politifact), yes. And they explain what parts are true and what parts are false. You know what? Sometimes politicians (or other people) say things that are part true and partly not true. That's not "politicizing it"-- that is recognizing the real world

Many things are not simply true or false. Many times they are misleading. Both of these sites do a good job in identifying misleading information and label them as such.

Exactly. And, more important, they cite sources so you can go look at the information and decide for yourself. That's what I really want: links to data. And that's what the fake news is always missing.

Snopes about was Trump or his campaign wiretapped before the election. They pretty much list it as false.

FISA warrant gotten on Carter Page Oct 21. Allows wiretapping of Page, his contacts, and their contacts, which includes all of Trump campaign. I know the day, who it was on, who signed off on it, and the judge that approved it. Snopes couldn't seem to figure that out, but they are great fact checkers?

Snopes is completely wrong on one of the most political articles with completely proven facts to back up how it is false.
I just picked that one because I assumed they would be incorrect, and was not surprised. I haven't seen an accurate truthful Snopes in about 5 years now.

The closest thing to "RUSSIANS hacked US power grid" that the WAPO appears to have ever tweeted is this: https://twitter.com/washington...

Breaking: Russian hackers penetrated U.S. electricity grid through a utility in Vermont

Which is true. Where is this inaccurate tweet you speak of?

I'm not interested in supporting WAPO here, I'm just suspicious when people frequently claim that tweets and articles exist but don't bother linking to them.

This is a FALSE statement that should be deleted by WaPo. Come on, do some research at least. Snopes says Mostly False and an article here http://fortune.com/2017/01/06/vermont-utility-burlington-electric-manager/ which says the electric grid was not penetrated and WaPo posted the story without even contacting the utility first.

False news is not limited to the right.

Like this evidence?

The liberals on the other hand are led by college educated people that disbelieve and fight against the fake news.

Keep living in that echo chamber.

Elias and his law firm, Perkins Coie, retained the company in April 2016 on behalf of the Clinton campaign and the DNC. Before that agreement, Fusion GPS’s research into Trump was funded by an unknown Republican client during the GOP primary. The Clinton campaign and the DNC, through the law firm, continued to fund Fusion GPS’s research through the end of October 2016, days before Election Day.

Remember that, STARTED by a republicant, NOT hillary

Imagine being a colossal prick that claims "they" (being the democratic party) stormed out of the state of the union. But hey, why tell the truth eh?

Right here is why you are a liar or just quite uninformed and programmed to believe whatever fox tells you..

What I also find interesting is you think that somehow a person getting up and walking out of Trump's speech implies he hates America? This is a free country and exercising ones right to stand up and depart for any reason is their business and not subject to your approval.

Fuck, that's weak. Let's circle back when Trump does his farewell speech, 'mmkay? https://www.snopes.com/is-bara...

Wireless #G networks are used extensively to access Internet and this would be a way for the Government to easily shut that down and/or restrict access to it. Several times Trump has called for an Internet "kill switch" or other measures. From Snopes (and other places):

On 7 December 2015, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump addressed a crowd of supporters at the U.S.S. Yorktown in South Carolina. During that appearance, Trump invoked a vague approach to campaign issues as he proposed restricting access for some individuals to the internet:

"We have to go see Bill Gates and a lot of different people that really understand what’s happening. We have to talk to them about, maybe in certain areas, closing that Internet up in some way Somebody will say, ‘Oh, freedom of speech, freedom of speech.’ These are foolish people." -- Trump

Trump calls for internet to be cut off for terrorists
The Law That Could Allow Trump To Shut Down The US Internet

etc...

Are you trying to claim Trump is more coherent than Obama? Trump loses his train of thought mid-sentence all the time when giving speeches.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/op...

https://www.theguardian.com/tv...

I love this example of a Trump speech:

“Look, having nuclear — my uncle was a great professor and scientist and engineer, Dr. John Trump at MIT; good genes, very good genes, OK, very smart, the Wharton School of Finance, very good, very smart — you know, if you’re a conservative Republican, if I were a liberal, if, like, OK, if I ran as a liberal Democrat, they would say I’m one of the smartest people anywhere in the world — it’s true! — but when you’re a conservative Republican they try — oh, do they do a number — that’s why I always start off: Went to Wharton, was a good student, went there, went there, did this, built a fortune — you know I have to give my like credentials all the time, because we’re a little disadvantaged — but you look at the nuclear deal, the thing that really bothers me — it would have been so easy, and it’s not as important as these lives are — nuclear is powerful; my uncle explained that to me many, many years ago, the power and that was 35 years ago; he would explain the power of what’s going to happen and he was right, who would have thought? — but when you look at what’s going on with the four prisoners — now it used to be three, now it’s four — but when it was three and even now, I would have said it’s all in the messenger; fellas, and it is fellas because, you know, they don’t, they haven’t figured that the women are smarter right now than the men, so, you know, it’s gonna take them about another 150 years — but the Persians are great negotiators, the Iranians are great negotiators, so, and they, they just killed, they just killed us.”

https://www.snopes.com/donald-...
https://www.theguardian.com/tv...

Here are some more examples:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and...

yup, Trump had nothing to do with Russia ever.. except maybe..

2008 Trump "Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets. We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia" http://time.com/4433880/donald...

2013 Trump appears in a music video by the son of Aras Agalarov https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

2014-2015 - Starting in 2014, Trump oddly Tweeted Nine Times to Deleted Russian Twitter Accounts About Running for President. https://www.pastemagazine.com/...
11/23/2014 - "@russiannavyblog: @dr_rita39 I follow Mr. Trump in a crusade to get him to restore Western Civilization with a Trump/Palin '16 ticket!" https://twitter.com/realDonald...
12/20/2014 - "@VladimirRussia7: "@realDonaldTrump :Be sure to set exceptional goals for your 2015 resolutions. Push yourself, you can do it. Think Big!"" https://twitter.com/realDonald...
12/24/2014 - "@VladimirRussia7: @realDonaldTrump Merry Christmas,my favorite billionaire!" Thanks! https://twitter.com/realDonald...
12/27/2014 - @VladimirRussia7: @realDonaldTrump and \@mcuban and \@WarrenBuffett are my favorite billionaires and heroes." https://twitter.com/realDonald...
1/17/2015 -"@VladimirRussia7: @realDonaldTrump Oh,How I respect you- a billionaire,a family man,and a TV Star!" Thanks. https://twitter.com/realDonald...
1/30/2015 -"@VladimirRussia7 You are the best #billionare and the great teacher!I love your inspiring books!" Thanks and good luck.https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/561179324699910147
1/30/2015 - "@russiannavyblog: @realDonaldTrump An announcement Mr Trump will run for President and fix the Obama-ruined nation?" https://twitter.com/realDonald...
3/11/2015 - "@russiannavyblog: @Joe3957 If there is anything America desperately needs, it's a Trump run!" https://twitter.com/realDonald...
3/11/2015 - \@monkiekaty: @realDonaldTrump Yes! Yes! Yes! Trump for President https://twitter.com/realDonald...

I could really fill a volume here there is so much out there.

If America want's to represent Democratic values i.e. capitalism, rule by the people for the people, on a world stage, with the willingness to represent and defend those people who cannot. Then we must as a nation defend those things. We have a president who will not or cannot defend those things that have been so sacred to our institution. The rule of law over government, the desire to promote the will of the people over tyrannical leaders, the hope that all of us will have some say in our own lives, and the willingness to defend others. That is the America I fight for. Not Nazi's, not white power, not America first. https://www.snopes.com/dr-seus...

Not that any amount of examples would ever sway you.

One would do me. Just one. One link to their site with a story full of lies. Or an example where they made a mistake and doubled down on instead of correcting. Not that any amount of examples will ever be provided.

Piss dossier

Maybe you can give me a link to CNN's site where they say that DJT's water-sports tape is more than allegation?

Claiming Soros did not work with the Nazis

Despite politically-motivated rumors to the contrary, billionaire leftist George Soros was neither in the SS nor a Nazi collaborator in the Second World War.

Claiming wiretapping of Trump tower never happened

Obama never tappped DJT's phones. If you think he did, you're as deluded as him.

A major city suffers a blackout for more than 24 hours, and we find hospital delivery rooms overflowing 9 months later. Good luck implementing population control when the unemployable masses have little to do all day but eat, fuck, and sleep. That creative mental and physical outlet has already been proven. At least until the Fuckitron 3000 shows it can do that better than a human too.

Actually, this is relatively debunked and shouldn't be used to over-generalize the population.

Those brown people brought their anarchy ways with them and don't want to change Many don't respect the rule of law and the rights of others and are outright racist. Rotherham, hundreds of cars burned in France, especially on New Years Eve, the rape capital of the world, Finland. Most on welfare and do not want to work. They brought their shithole with them.

*facepalm*

First of all get your xenophobic talking points correct. I'm a Finn. The 'rape capital' -card is thrown about regarding Sweden, and is not even correct..

Oh man, epic burn! Imma bookmark this one for when I'm in need of a good laugh.

And I guess we'll be free of MellowBob's nattering for a while while he's being treated in the burn ward.

Those brown people brought their anarchy ways with them and don't want to change Many don't respect the rule of law and the rights of others and are outright racist. Rotherham, hundreds of cars burned in France, especially on New Years Eve, the rape capital of the world, Finland. Most on welfare and do not want to work. They brought their shithole with them.

*facepalm*

First of all get your xenophobic talking points correct. I'm a Finn. The 'rape capital' -card is thrown about regarding Sweden, and is not even correct..

Thirdly, since you managed to somehow miss it even I was not making a pro/anti-immigration argument, I was making an argument for slowing down or containing the warming of the climate as much as we can because failure to do so puts all societies in increased risk of breakdown and lowers the standard of living for everyone. I don't care what your stance on immigration is, it has nothing to do the fact that unless the climate related challenges are solved, the situation is going to get worse for everyone. If you want to reduce the amount of people on the move, you're going to want to make sure they don't run out of food, which is what will happen if the heating continues. The point is precisely that if we don't want even more people being both internally and internationally displaced, then we cannot ignore the role that climate plays in societal stability.

I took it up precisely because I find it so baffling that many of the people making the most noise about the current refugee situation (mostly using incorrect and/or copypasted memes like you just did) are often also ones that don't think climate presents any kind of risk, when climate is one of the main drivers of massive movements of people.

And, again, if you don't carry the phone at all times? Or pull the battery?

Not something you would do normally. And if you do, you'll be flagged by the system just for that. It will certainly retain your picture and the driver will remember you, etc.

BTW - the goal isn't total anonymity. It's FRAGMENTATION of data

No disagreement here. Yet the cellphone gives marketeers and police alike a single source...

The link for the credit cards was from 2007.

The first link was from 2007 and talked about BOFA piloting the program. The second link is from 2014 and talks about the credit-availability to illegals from a much wider array of financial institutions. "Illegal immigrant" and "no credit card" are (nearly) orthogonal — if anything, an immigrant can get a card from a bank in his home country... Other options exist too.

And, after all, both Lyft and Uber accept Paypal and debit cards. Having an established credit is not necessary...

I think, I'm done here. It is getting tedious — especially because I find myself hunting for evidence to cite, while you reply with unsubstantiated (or outright incorrect) statements...

Care to provide an example of an edit in a Project Veritas video that wildly changed the context of the statement?

Dishonest from start to finish.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://www.nationalreview.com/...

https://www.snopes.com/2016/10...

To be clear, they get the same subsidy as regular federal gov't employees towards plans purchased from the D.C. exchange. It's not free; the subsidy covers roughly 72% of premiums (less if the plan's premium is significantly more than the typical plan, up to 75% for cheaper plans). So they're still paying for at least 25% of the premium. This isn't all that different from the pre-ACA status quo, except their selection of plans is different (likely worse) than the selection of FEHB plans offered to other federal employees.

Threatening to sue and killing the cat of a rape victim to shut her up are two different things. One of them is Trump, the other one is Clinton.

Actually, coercive lawsuits are often quite a problem, as is manufacturing unverified, and even provablyfalse claims about another.

It's ok, you're just a partisan Stalwart, and can't help yourself. You jumped on the bandwagon, and will never get off.

LBJ was famously quoted at the time as saying under his breath about the Democrat entitlement programs; "I'll have those n1gg3rs voting Democrat for the next hundred years!"

Except there is only a single person who ever claimed to have heard this quote, and their reliability is questionable. There is a paired quote (also dubious) that he may have expressed nearly the opposite sentiment, worrying that he'd ruined the prospects for the Democratic party "I think we just delivered the South to the Republican party for a long time to come." Both things happened (and losing the South hurt a lot more than gaining the Black vote helped), but that doesn't mean either quote was true.

Slightly more blacks per capita are killed as compared to whites, but when you look at the racial breakdown of violent crimes they are disproportionately committed by blacks. When you scale for criminal activity, blacks are actually shot less than whites.

You can go to any county courthouse and get one for about 10 bucks. Even leftists admit that narrative is bullshit - https://www.snopes.com/2015/10...

Here's a snopes link on the subject. It links to local news articles related to the subject.

https://www.snopes.com/2015/10/01/alabama-drivers-license/

Assuming you still maintain the position that this did not occur, can provide links to back up that position?

I did read the links. O'Keefe does hidden camera investigations. The fact he did one into AntiFa isn't the only evidence against them. And the charges against O'Keefe are politically motivated bullshit - his sin was exposing the lies and bias of leftist media organisations and NGOs.

Nope. His sin was being a lying bullshit spewer, which lead to him becoming a criminal, your sin, of course, was to believe him. Repetitively.

Any prosecutor dumb enough to allow such a taint into a trial, well, no wonder incompetence is rampant.

But hey, keep relying on them, it's a big sign that you've got less than nothing.

Good thing Hilldog only got to sell Uranium to Russia and not the entire country.

I'm astonished how many redneck Trump voters who believe this even after it's been debunked, even by republicans. It must be fun living in a fairy tale universe where saying something three times makes it true.

https://www.snopes.com/hillary...
https://www.factcheck.org/2015...

Meanwhile, in the real world, I'd be far more worried about a president who lies so much. I''m not saying that Hillary Rodham Clinton is a honest person, but Donald John Trump has taken outright fabrication to a whole new level.

http://www.politifact.com/pers...