View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
real-human
![](images/avatars/contrib/18368271185d23fd22c0575.gif)
Joined: 02 Jul 2011 Posts: 14892 Location: on earth
|
Posted: Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
techno900 wrote: | I heard on national news this morning that the CIA, FBI, etc. have not had access to the hacked DNC computers (because the DNC wouldn't let them), but still are firm with their assessment that the Russians did the hacking. That, plus the source of the leaks - Wikileaks has said no state government, including Russia was their source of the DNC emails.
You just have to wonder......................................... |
BYW idiot, they did not need to have their hands on the DNC servers. The FBI went to the low level operator and told the dems they were being hacked you moron. You are so stupid and clueless, the FBI was watching the hacking going on. daaa they could see the the traffic going to russian sites.
The low level guy at the DNC did not know if it really was an FBI agent on the phone daaaa. Again someone calling and saying he was. The FBI should have sent a few agents to the DNC to discuss with some higher level people in person. The FBI could not send an email because it would give away to the Russians that that they knew they were being hacked and how.
you certainly are tech NO... _________________ when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
real-human
![](images/avatars/contrib/18368271185d23fd22c0575.gif)
Joined: 02 Jul 2011 Posts: 14892 Location: on earth
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
real-human
![](images/avatars/contrib/18368271185d23fd22c0575.gif)
Joined: 02 Jul 2011 Posts: 14892 Location: on earth
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
real-human
![](images/avatars/contrib/18368271185d23fd22c0575.gif)
Joined: 02 Jul 2011 Posts: 14892 Location: on earth
|
Posted: Wed Feb 22, 2017 12:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/2/21/1636413/-Tucker-Carlson-Of-FAKE-Fox-News-Debates-An-Actor-He-Hired-To-Portray-Anti-Trump-Organizer
Tucker Carlson Of FAKE Fox News Debates An Actor He Hired To Portray Anti-Trump Organizer
Quote: | Monday night's episode of Fox News' Tucker Carlson Tonight scheduled a discussion about the "Not My Presidents" Day demonstrations being held across the country. These events were an extension of the virtually non-stop demonstrations taking place since the election. They are attended by tens of thousands of Americans protesting Donald Trump's extremist right-wing agenda.
There was just one problem. Carlson tried to book an organizer of the demonstrations, but all of them refused to go on his show. That's a wise decision considering his reputation for ambushing and insulting his guests. So how did Carlson respond after being rejected by the protests' organizers? He booked an actor to portray an organizer and proceeded to debate him. Talk about fake news. The Daily Beast reported this comical perversion of journalism:
"Fox News' Tucker Carlson had a hard time booking Olga Lexell, the creator and co-organizer of the nationwide Not My President's Day protests on Monday. So, after repeated refusals, Carlson’s show instead booked Shane Saunders, a Los Angeles-based actor and casting agent, who Lexell said 'was not affiliated in any way with our rallies and was not an organizer.'" [...]
"For a man who knows nothing about the protests to go on TV unprepared, misrepresent our message, take credit for our weeks of hard work, and make us look bad - and for Tucker Carlson's team to go along with it - is just disappointing."
That's putting it mildly. The whole segment was a farce, beginning with the false graphic describing Saunders as the "protest organizer." Carlson began the segment by heralding the "virtuous" celebrations of Presidents Day. However, he immediately segued to the protests, implying that they were not virtuous, and asserting that they have no point. Saunders made an attempt to brush back Carlson's premise with a listing of the achievements made by protesting. He concluded by noting that the protests were "getting to Trump" and that they have him "frazzled." |
_________________ when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
real-human
![](images/avatars/contrib/18368271185d23fd22c0575.gif)
Joined: 02 Jul 2011 Posts: 14892 Location: on earth
|
Posted: Sun Feb 26, 2017 12:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.dailykos.com/stories/2017/2/24/1637207/-CNN-Blitzer-used-video-evidence-to-call-out-Rep-Marsha-Blackburn-s-lie
CNN Blitzer used video evidence to call out Rep Marsha Blackburn’s lie
Quote: | CNN’s Wolf Blitzer went toe to toe with Representative Marsha Blackburn (R-TN) as she lied about the people at her town hall being out of her districts. Blitzer even brought out video evidence shown in this excerpted video. She also had the gall to claim that there were many cars with out of state license plates.
Following are pieces of the interchange.
Wolf Blitzer: We did get this tweet from Trip Gabriel, he’s a reporter for The New York Times. He was there at the event and he tweeted this. He said, “everyone I spoke to in this town hall identified themselves as TN 7th, Tennessee- seven voter, town restricted RSVPs to locals and checked IDs.” Is that true that RSVPs were only going to people from your district and they checked their IDs before they were allowed inside?
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN): You know, Wolf, there were some people who stood up to speak and ask a question and they identified themselves as living outside of the district. So, I don’t know who the reporter talked to. I do know that the first people that RSVP’d, about the first hundred people that RSVP’d, they had not put up the information on the city’s little website announcement that you needed to be a Fairview resident. But, you know, the point is this. There were people that were there, whether or not they were in my district, they came to express their opinions. Most of them were angry. I stood there and took their questions and gave them the best answers that I possibly could. Others that came that couldn’t get in and wanted to visit with me, we had invited them to call the office or to sign a list, and then come on by. And then after the event was over, I went outside to the alternative town hall, and the gentleman that had — was organizing that, I actually spoke to those that were outside. And, there again, invited them into the process. All opinions matter. As we look at some very serious issues that are necessary for getting this nation back on track, things like reforming —
Marsha Blackburn once again caught in another lie
Wolf Blitzer: Alright, hold on a second. Hold on one second, congresswoman, because there is some video that is now out there on social media. I’m going to play it for you and then we’ll continue this. Watch this.
...
Almost everyone apparently in that video raised their hand if they live in your district, Tennessee congressional district seven. And, so, let me get back to the original question. How do you know only a third of the people that were inside, actually were from your district?
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN): We do know that people were overheard in the line saying, “oh, you know, say that you live in Williamson County.” But there again, Wolf, my goodness, you know, they were people that came. They came in. I took their questions. I gave them answers. They are concerned. All voices ought to be heard as we —
Wolf Blitzer: Did they check IDs when people came in to see if their addresses were in your district?
Rep. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN): They did and they also — they also looked at the parking lot. There were a lot of out of state tags. They did check IDs when people came in the door. The information we were given was that about a third of the people that showed up were from the district and the rest were not. But there again, you know, you can make a big issue of exactly what number was in the district or outside of the district. There were people that were angry and they had their concerns. I gave them the opportunity to express their concerns. And then even went outside and addressed the alternative town hall.
Wolf Blitzer: But if people had IDs showing they lived in your district, that’s pretty straightforward.
Supposed journalists had done their job like this in 2010, Obamacare would have been better. Had they done this type of journalism in 2016, there would be no Trump.
Remember how the Tea Party turned the tide against us back in 2010, by showing up at town halls and annoying Democratic members of Congress? Well, now it's time to return the favor.
|
_________________ when good people stay silent the right wing are the only ones heard. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17748 Location: Berkeley, California
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
real-human
![](images/avatars/contrib/18368271185d23fd22c0575.gif)
Joined: 02 Jul 2011 Posts: 14892 Location: on earth
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17748 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2017 12:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
For those who think Napolitano is a reliable source, I found this little tidbit that is from 2005. People who are ethically challenged--like those who would cheat their subcontractors on hotel and casino projects--seldom change.
Quote: | Judge Andrew Napolitano
Napolitano is a legal analyst for Fox News, and calling him a judge is somewhat misleading. He left the bench a decade ago after a long career in New Jersey. But Napolitano qualifies not only as an Ethics Dunce; he is a rare Super Dunce, thanks to his recent inexcusable comments on John Gibson's Fox show, "The Big Story." The real Big Story is that this former judge, current practicing lawyer and supposed legal analyst has an understanding of legal ethics on par with that of your average 4th grader.
He was appearing on Gibson's show to discuss the oddity of former U.S. Attorney General Ramsey Clark being a member of Saddam Hussein's defense team in Baghdad. It is odd, but then so is Clark, the son of a U.S. Supreme Court Justice and a once respected legal mind so radicalized by the Viet Nam war that he has spent over 30 years defining the outer reaches of anti-American advocacy. Any enemy of the U.S. is a friend of Ramsey's, it seems, so his willingness to defend Saddam fits into the over-all arc of his strange career. But there is certainly nothing wrong or ignoble about giving a legal defense to a mass murderer; it's a dirty job, but someone has to do it. That's why it's called a "fair trial." The fact that Clark probably wants to do it, likes doing it, and actively sought out the chance to do it says something about his state of mind, but nothing unseemly about his legal ethics.
But John Gibson is not a lawyer, nor is he well-versed in ethics, as anyone who followed his commentary on the prisoner abuse at Abu Ghraib knows (Gibson's reaction being fairly summarized as, "Good!"), so he asked Napolitano a really, really dumb question about Clark's latest assignment: "Might Clark be disbarred for this?" Napolitano's answer should have been a nicer way of saying this: "John, you Bozo, how do you host a public affairs show with such a pathetic grasp of our legal system? Lawyers don't get disbarred for defending bad people, they get disbarred (well, reprimanded and sanctioned) for refusing to defend bad people as vigorously as the law will allow. It's called the 6th Amendment of that U.S. Constitution you're always blathering about, John…have you ever read it? The Bill of Rights? Hello? In the U.S, the accused has the right to counsel. How could a lawyer be disbarred for providing an Iraqi defendant in an Iraqi trial the same right that he would be guaranteed in America?"
But Napolitano didn't say that. Incredibly, this judge, lawyer and supposed expert said, "Well, the American Bar Association has always been loose about disciplining lawyers who represent evil clients." "Loose?" That implies that there is some basis for discipline that the ABA isn't enforcing, which is 100% baloney-plated hooey. (Actually, the American Bar Association doesn't discipline lawyers at all; it just produces model standards to give state bar associations guidance. That part of the judge's statement is wrong, but it is so overshadowed by the rest of his sentence that it's not worth dwelling on.) The ABA rules encourage lawyers to do what Clark is doing, because that is a lawyer's duty: to make the 6th Amendment right to counsel work. Clarence Darrow represented two rich teenaged crypto-fascists who killed a little boy to show how smart they were, and he saved them from hanging. That makes him a legal hero, not a candidate for disbarment. Attorney Anthony Amsterdam worked his whole legal career to save the dregs of the earth from receiving execution for horrendous crimes; he too was a model attorney. Our democracy is supposed to work for everyone, good or bad, angelic or evil. Upholding that principle, as Ramsey Clark is, cannot be a basis for condemnation. It is a badge of honor.
Lawyers and judges, of all people, are supposed to understand this to the core of their being. The fact that Andrew Napolitano does not is shocking, and an Ethics Dunce is the least of what he deserves for further confusing the American public about what constitutes the ethical practice of law. It is he, not Ramsey Clark, who is a disgrace to the legal profession. But another amendment, the first, persuades bar associations to be "loose" about punishing lawyers for saying outrageous things. And for Fox News commentators, it is standard practice. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17748 Location: Berkeley, California
|
Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2017 10:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Surprise, there is more. On the same day that it is announced that Trump has ok'd the Keystone pipeline, that probably won't be built and definitely won't be built with American steel, the facts about the Belle Fourche pipeline emerge. Turns out the spill, in December, was 530,000 gallons. Much larger than reported, and still not cleaned up. The cause--poor siting put the route through an area where a landslide caused a rupture.
This is what Trump and the GOP are all in on--eliminate regulations and make America safe for polluters. |
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
mac
Joined: 07 Mar 1999 Posts: 17748 Location: Berkeley, California
|
|
Back to top |
|
![](templates/subSilver/images/spacer.gif) |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
|