|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Dec 13, 2017 3:51:25 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Hero on Dec 13, 2017 10:12:40 GMT
I answered with good old common sense. Indeed, you did. You probably shouldn't waste your time discussing CNN with Herd. He says he NEVER watches it. And, he apparently cannot detect a skunk unless it crawls up his leg and bites him on the ass. Laughing
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 13, 2017 12:43:40 GMT
BTW - do you think that you are capable of convincing tigercpa that the Russians did in fact meddle in our election? Of course they did. Countries all over "meddle" in other countries elections. It depends on how you define "meddle"... The problem I have is how the media uses the word "meddle", the connotation of which is wide open and far-ranging. Like "influenced" or "participated"....have seen the media use these as well. They are non-specific, which is exactly why the media uses these words. They are hoping that the reader will see those words and think that "my vote was compromised by Russia, Trump is illegitimate" We must DO something."
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Dec 13, 2017 14:38:27 GMT
BTW - do you think that you are capable of convincing tigercpa that the Russians did in fact meddle in our election? Of course they did. Countries all over "meddle" in other countries elections. It depends on how you define "meddle"... The problem I have is how the media uses the word "meddle", the connotation of which is wide open and far-ranging. Like "influenced" or "participated"....have seen the media use these as well. They are non-specific, which is exactly why the media uses these words. They are hoping that the reader will see those words and think that "my vote was compromised by Russia, Trump is illegitimate" We must DO something." Exactly. Trump tweets "Russian Hoax story", and guys like Herd assume he's denying ANY Russian propagandizing. Not so. The "Hoax Story", when I hear Trump talk about it, is the accusation that Trump's campaign was coordinating with the Russians. THAT is what Democrats are claiming. THAT is what is supposed to be the focus of the Mueller investigation. And, it's a damnable lie. Russia Times runs a channel on my TV. I watch it sometimes. They run interesting stories that often have a different perspective, and in my experience, they often seem to be MORE accurate than CNN. How are they "meddling in our elections" any more than the FAKE US media? I am able to "consider the source" when I read something from them. If it's "big news", I seek a confirmation from someplace else... same as I do with CNN or NBC. The dollars the Russians supposedly spent on Facebook are miniscule. And, anyway... what kind of fool blindly believes any story that pops up on a Facebook ad? Last year, Facebook starting AUTO adding "leftist slanted" news stories on to any conservative story... that any of my friends posted. I thought the stories they added were extremely biased, to the point of being "fake"... but, they did it routinely. When someone posted a liberal story, I never saw a message from Facebook saying, "Other people think this", with the conservative viewpoint attached. It was all completely one-sided. THAT, is meddling. And, it was overt. And, there was 1000X more of that than any Russian piddling on Facebook.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Dec 13, 2017 19:49:10 GMT
BTW - do you think that you are capable of convincing tigercpa that the Russians did in fact meddle in our election? Of course they did. Countries all over "meddle" in other countries elections. It depends on how you define "meddle"... The problem I have is how the media uses the word "meddle", the connotation of which is wide open and far-ranging. Like "influenced" or "participated"....have seen the media use these as well. They are non-specific, which is exactly why the media uses these words. They are hoping that the reader will see those words and think that "my vote was compromised by Russia, Trump is illegitimate" We must DO something." How do you know what they are hoping? You don’t, of course. As usual. The Russian government directed interference with the U.S. election was generally viewed as wide-ranging and pervasive, except for a very gullible and naive Donald Trump who believed Vladimir when he said that Russia would never do such an evil deed.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Dec 13, 2017 19:50:43 GMT
So, Hero, do you watch CNN? (if you are able to stand in your own two feet)
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Dec 13, 2017 20:28:30 GMT
The Russian government directed interference with the U.S. election was generally viewed as wide-ranging and pervasive, except for a very gullible and naive Donald Trump who believed Vladimir when he said that Russia would never do such an evil deed. LOL Now YOU'RE the expert on what Donald Trump believes... your inconsistency is hilarious.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Dec 13, 2017 23:53:36 GMT
LOL Now YOU'RE the expert on what Donald Trump believes... your inconsistency is hilarious. I don’t make stuff up out of thin air and pretend that I can read people’s minds, like you, Hero and tigercpa so often do. In this case, I am on solid ground in saying that “Trump believes” - because he said so! “I asked him again,” Trump said after what he described as several brief, informal chats with Putin in Danang, Vietnam, where they were attending a regional conference. “You can only ask so many times . . . He said he absolutely did not meddle in our election. He did not do what they are saying he did. I really believe that when he tells me that...” Of course, if you had bothered to read the articles to which I provided links for you, you would have known that, and could have avoided making a fool of yourself (again). www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-insists-putin-means-it-in-denying-election-meddling-critics-say-thats-unconscionable/2017/11/11/af0b7c9e-c71a-11e7-afe9-4f60b5a6c4a0_story.html?utm_term=.1441641bb1f5
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 14, 2017 0:44:00 GMT
Of course they did. Countries all over "meddle" in other countries elections. It depends on how you define "meddle"... The problem I have is how the media uses the word "meddle", the connotation of which is wide open and far-ranging. Like "influenced" or "participated"....have seen the media use these as well. They are non-specific, which is exactly why the media uses these words. They are hoping that the reader will see those words and think that "my vote was compromised by Russia, Trump is illegitimate" We must DO something." How do you know what they are hoping? You don’t, of course. As usual. The Russian government directed interference with the U.S. election was generally viewed as wide-ranging and pervasive, except for a very gullible and naive Donald Trump who believed Vladimir when he said that Russia would never do such an evil deed. I do know...I know from observation how the media operates and what their objectives are- they try to tell you how to think, rather than just presenting the news. How do I know Bo Jackson is fast? I've seen him run.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 14, 2017 0:45:15 GMT
A source in the government says he has tapes of the Bill Clinton / Loretta Lynch meeting on the tarmac. Bill offered Loretta a bribe to look the other way.
We'll see.
If true, people are going to jail for a long time.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Dec 14, 2017 0:56:48 GMT
How do you know what they are hoping? You don’t, of course. As usual. The Russian government directed interference with the U.S. election was generally viewed as wide-ranging and pervasive, except for a very gullible and naive Donald Trump who believed Vladimir when he said that Russia would never do such an evil deed. I do know...I know from observation how the media operates and what their objectives are- they try to tell you how to think, rather than just presenting the news. How do I know Bo Jackson is fast? I've seen him run. If you really, really believe that you are capable of reading someone’s mind, then I doubt if I can prove you wrong, unless the person publicly says something to the contrary. I’ll admit that I have never been able to read another person’s mind. My attempts to anticipate what another person is thinking have got my face slapped by more than one young lady.
|
|
|
Post by FLORIDA HERD FAN on Dec 14, 2017 0:57:58 GMT
A source in the government says he has tapes of the Bill Clinton / Loretta Lynch meeting on the tarmac. Bill offered Loretta a bribe to look the other way. We'll see. If true, people are going to jail for a long time. Would be a bombshell, if true. Do you have a credible source?
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 14, 2017 1:16:03 GMT
I do know...I know from observation how the media operates and what their objectives are- they try to tell you how to think, rather than just presenting the news. How do I know Bo Jackson is fast? I've seen him run. If you really, really believe that you are capable of reading someone’s mind, then I doubt if I can prove you wrong, unless the person publicly says something to the contrary. I’ll admit that I have never been able to read another person’s mind. My attempts to anticipate what another person is thinking have got my face slapped by more than one young lady. Not reading their mind, just observing their past actions and applying their own bias. Developing "prejudices or stereotypes" is basic human learning in action. It's the core of learning.
|
|
|
Post by tigercpa on Dec 14, 2017 1:16:59 GMT
A source in the government says he has tapes of the Bill Clinton / Loretta Lynch meeting on the tarmac. Bill offered Loretta a bribe to look the other way. We'll see. If true, people are going to jail for a long time. Would be a bombshell, if true. Do you have a credible source? I don't but others do. NSA earlier in the year blocked the release of the tape on "national security grounds". May or June I think it was...
|
|
|
Post by Bevo on Dec 14, 2017 2:27:08 GMT
I don’t make stuff up out of thin air and pretend that I can read people’s minds, like you, Hero and tigercpa so often do. In this case, I am on solid ground in saying that “Trump believes” - because he said so! “I asked him again,” Trump said after what he described as several brief, informal chats with Putin in Danang, Vietnam, where they were attending a regional conference. “You can only ask so many times . . . He said he absolutely did not meddle in our election. He did not do what they are saying he did. I really believe that when he tells me that...” Of course, if you had bothered to read the articles to which I provided links for you, you would have known that, and could have avoided making a fool of yourself (again). www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-insists-putin-means-it-in-denying-election-meddling-critics-say-thats-unconscionable/2017/11/11/af0b7c9e-c71a-11e7-afe9-4f60b5a6c4a0_story.html?utm_term=.1441641bb1f5Congrats, you've reached a new low. I think, you actually could work for CNN. Unfortunately for you, I HEARD that statement, when Trump said it...and, I remember what Trump said. With malice and forethought, you truncated Trump's statement to change the meaning... What Trump said was: "“I really believe that when he tells me that, he means it...." Trump didn't say the HE believed Putin... he said he believes PUTIN Believes what Putin is saying. Really good liars convince themselves first. Thanks for reminding me why I cannot talk with you about anything political. You distort facts in a way that is dishonest, and is extremely annoying. Who needs THAT in their life? Not me.
|
|