National Lampoon's European Vacation staring Donald Trump
- Thread starter Rubashov
- Start date
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
I haven’t been hearing this.
What I have heard is that around election time Russia got involved with the election and that trumps team may have had something to did with Russia’s involvement.
Haven’t really heard anything about trump currently working for Russia but I figure you see and hear what you want to see and hear often.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
Red
Well-Known Member
I rely primarily on print media for news, the NATO summit being no exception. I don't find that they are staying silent on this "stuff" at all. For broadcast media, I watch mostly MSNBC, and have not found them to be silent on those things you've brought up here either. Now, you mention the things you believe Trump is doing to Russia that Putin cannot possibly be happy about. But let's take a closer look.
One, kicking out diplomats. The last time was following the poisoning of Russians, on British soil, by Russian agents. How exactly did Trump respond?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...1e850a-3f1b-11e8-974f-aacd97698cef_story.html
"President Trump seemed distracted in March as his aides briefed him at his Mar-a-Lago resort on the administration’s plan to expel 60 Russian diplomats and suspected spies.
The United States, they explained, would be ousting roughly the same number of Russians as its European allies — part of a coordinated move to punish Moscow for the poisoning of a former Russian spy and his daughter on British soil.
“We’ll match their numbers,” Trump instructed, according to a senior administration official. “We’re not taking the lead. We’re matching.”
The next day, when the expulsions were announced publicly, Trump erupted, officials said. To his shock and dismay, France and Germany were each expelling only four Russian officials — far fewer than the 60 his administration had decided on.
The president, who seemed to believe that other individual countries would largely equal the United States, was furious that his administration was being portrayed in the media as taking by far the toughest stance on Russia......
......The incident reflects a tension at the core of the Trump administration’s increasingly hard-nosed stance on Russia: The president instinctually opposes many of the punitive measures pushed by his Cabinet that have crippled his ability to forge a close relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin."
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two. Increasing NATO defense spending. This has been an issue, not just with Trump, but with previous presidents as well. At the summit, in order to make it even more difficult for NATO members to meet his demands, Trump insisted they increase their defense spending to 2% of the GDP now, and further, increase it to 4% over the longer run. But, two things need to be pointed out regarding his closing comments that NATO members agreed to increase their spending. First, Macron of France essentially pointed out that this was bs on Trump's part. The truth was that members simply reaffirmed their commitment to 2% of their GDP by 2024, an agreement already in place before the summit.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/12/politics/trump-nato-spending-claims-reaction-intl/index.html
And the second thing to be pointed out is how much Trump does not even understand about how NATO works:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...falsely-claims-nato-countries-owe-united-sta/
Really, we should be incredulous that our President is so dense in that respect, and apparently refuses to learn the facts before opening his mouth.
----------------------------------------
Three. Putin cannot like Trump attacking Germany over the Russian pipeline. It's true that the Russian economy benefits from that arrangement, and would not be happy if it somehow ended. But, Putin's strategic policy is to see NATO weakened. It has to be music to his ears to see Trump attacking Germany in the first place. Anything that works to weaken NATO is in Putin's first and foremost interest.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/11/politics/trump-nato-diplomats-reaction/index.html
https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-a-nato-summit-in-donald-trumps-parallel-universe/a-44639992
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/07/trump-goes-full-no-puppet-youre-the-puppet-on-angela-merkel
"Since taking office more than 18 months ago, Donald Trump has treated Russian President Vladimir Putin with the sort of respect and deference of which U.S. allies can only dream. In that time, he’s leaked information about a classified Israeli intelligence operation to two Russian envoys; hesitated to blame the Kremlin for the poisoning of an ex-Russian spy; exploded with rage when he found out the U.S. had expelled more Russian diplomats than European countries had following the incident; congratulated Putin on his election victory, against the express directive of senior aides; assured Russian officials that plans for sanctions announcedby U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley in response to the Kremlin’s support of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, whose actions have been likened by Trump to those of an “animal,” were never gonna happen; refused to condemn documented Russian meddling in the 2016 presidential election; and asked for Russia to be let back into the G7 after it was kicked out for invading another European country. All of which is to say, his claims during a breakfast meeting in Brussels on Wednesday came as something of a shock.....
......By pointing a diminutive orange finger at Germany, Trump is trying to spread the blame, deflecting attention from his own administration’s all-too-cozy ties to Putin, whom he’ll visit later this week. It’s the same move he pulled in October 2016, when he so eloquently told Hillary Clinton, “No puppet, no puppet. You’re the puppet.” For their part, the Europeans were not impressed; Merkel, who grew up in a Germany that was literally partially controlled by Russia, remarked that the country had been “free of Russian control since the fall of the Berlin Wall”.
--------------------------------------------
So, in conclusion, I find that the mainstream media, and I take it you mean outlets like MSNBC, CNN, the New York Times, the Washington Post, etc. by "mainstream" in this instance, does not stay silent on any of the things you mention. But they do not interpret those things the same way you do. Fox News, on the other hand, likely does agree with your take. It's your right to get your news from Fox, if in fact you do, and it's not my place at all to criticise you for that, if that is the case. We hear what we want to hear. That goes for me as well. This comment is simply to point out the sources I turn to have not been silent at all.
Last edited:
When the comment starts by lessening or excusing one side I feel it’s called for.
He didn’t just say “that’s sick and wrong”. No he started with a qualifier lessening the Rs damage to the country.
But we all have our own biases. Mine are against both the professional Rs and Ds as general groups. So that certainly colors my view of it.
Last edited:
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
Fair enough I guess. I didn't take it that way and find it better for all of society to stand above the fray regarding comments like that by ignoring them or condemning them. Ignoring is often best.
Take the Puerto Rican flag shirt incident for example. For the most part, the media left agendas out of it instead of trying to link this guy as a representative of a typical Republican as they are wont to. It was a refreshing change. I do feel bad for the officer though, being condemned before facts came out (which they now won't). He was there responding to a different situation and may have had two things on his plate to watch over at the same time. Now he has resigned from a productive role.
BTW, the fam is out of town so if you want to grab a bite or hit a bucket of balls let me know.
Its really hard to take anyone serious when they say how bad the "media" is. It pretty much ends a conversation for me and makes me think less of someone, despite trying to hear them out.
We live in an era where media is at its best. We have more options and better access to good news than we ever have had in the history of humanity.
On top of that the idea that main stream media is some liberal agenda is just a nice things to say and a great propaganda slogan. Evidence clearly points that most main stream media outlets are fairly non partisan. Media as a whole is pretty even. You have some very extreme media outlets that are biased like Fox News, Breitbart, Infowars, or Forward Progressives. But those are not places people should be getting their info from and if they are they are not getting good news. There are plenty of great news organizations.
I also think people really struggle to understand the difference between opinion pieces and news pieces.
Yes a lot of people who work in the media probably dislike Trump. But the fact is most people in the US dislike trump so it makes sense that many in the media are just like everyone else.
We live in an era where media is at its best. We have more options and better access to good news than we ever have had in the history of humanity.
On top of that the idea that main stream media is some liberal agenda is just a nice things to say and a great propaganda slogan. Evidence clearly points that most main stream media outlets are fairly non partisan. Media as a whole is pretty even. You have some very extreme media outlets that are biased like Fox News, Breitbart, Infowars, or Forward Progressives. But those are not places people should be getting their info from and if they are they are not getting good news. There are plenty of great news organizations.
I also think people really struggle to understand the difference between opinion pieces and news pieces.
Yes a lot of people who work in the media probably dislike Trump. But the fact is most people in the US dislike trump so it makes sense that many in the media are just like everyone else.
Objective news is outta style, bro. Sure a lot is presented as "objective", and sure we have some sites some interested partisans have funded which present themselves as fact-checkers or what not.
We seem to have a general problem in every quarter of wanting to believe it's objective when it's what we want to hear....
I have a hard time going back through history to find journalism in any nation that really is objective.....at any point in time.....
maybe we fail even in reporting common auto accidents and other mundane stuff. A lot of bias in saying someone was texting or looking at the scenery of plucking their eyebrows when they kill the kids in the other car they crash into.....
might be a problem with congressional hearings or even FBI investigations.......
Last edited:
Complete objectivity is like total darkness and absolute zero. More of a concept than a real possibility.
That doesn't mean relatively objective information can't be found.
And this notion that the ONLY reason people don't like Trump is because agenda based liberal news media tells us not to is an insult to whomever peddles that nonsense.
Look at the many conservative and/or Republican posters here who don't like Trump. They haven't been bathing in liberal news media with their eyes and ears closed to the truth as told by the right-wing. They look at Trump and find him distasteful, dishonest and unqualified.
You know, many many liberals didn't like Hillary. Despite presumably getting most of their news from this very well organized liberal media propaganda machine. Had Hillary been just a little more liked amongst the liberal base she'd be President right now. Enthusiasm for her was pretty low.
That doesn't mean relatively objective information can't be found.
And this notion that the ONLY reason people don't like Trump is because agenda based liberal news media tells us not to is an insult to whomever peddles that nonsense.
Look at the many conservative and/or Republican posters here who don't like Trump. They haven't been bathing in liberal news media with their eyes and ears closed to the truth as told by the right-wing. They look at Trump and find him distasteful, dishonest and unqualified.
You know, many many liberals didn't like Hillary. Despite presumably getting most of their news from this very well organized liberal media propaganda machine. Had Hillary been just a little more liked amongst the liberal base she'd be President right now. Enthusiasm for her was pretty low.
Its hard to take someone serious on this subject that thinks Hannity is an honest good source of info, or that thinks something they heard through some relative is more reliable than multiple news outlets reporting on it.
Objective is in style, more so than it ever has been. The era we live in now provides so much more access to reliable and factual information than ever.
But I do believe that you have a hard time finding any objective news, but that doesnt mean it doesnt exist.
Media is doing much better at their jobs and are given a lot more freedom than ever before in any time in human history.
RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
Mueller said Russians got involved by using a phishing scheme (not hacking) and that there was no collusion. And that the interference had no impact on the election.
There have been people on this forum talking about Trump working with the Russians for a while now.
All of our "news" is owned by interested folks, one way or another. The fact is "ownership" that does not accept truth as it is, but pays for "truth" they want to foist on our community.
I found it so oppressive when there were only three or so major TV sources and Walter Cronkite was telling us "And that's the way it is". Back when, there were some occasions when I saw for myself what happened and what the facts were, but saw the "news" in an entirely different take.
It's quite a bold assertion you make here about things being good, about the media being better these days, about Hannity being evil or whatever. I didn't like Hannity when he was putting Ron Paul down for McCain or Romney. I don't like Levin when he's calling Putin a ruthless KGB thug or doing his Free Trade schtick, or the LaRouchies when they're callin' Xi the world's beacon of progress. I realize that my relatives from Brazil, my friends from Iran or whoever are not paid schills for anybody but maybe not the sharpest knives in the drawer, either. I don't think you are really being very self-aware of your own distortions of current affairs.... buy hey, you be you and be happy. You shouldn't be too sure I am anybody's little true believer and you can be sure as hell I don't believe CNN is objective since Hillary lost. Those were the complicit dupes who did their level best to fix the debates and get Hillary elected, and they're sore losers to boot.
RandyForRubio
Well-Known Member
Oh man. I got my names mixed up...it’s time to get some sleep.
Rosenstein. It was Rosenstein. I think.
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
Information is only as good as the purveyor's ability to understand and explain, and the receiver's ability to understand. It seems like both parties fail more often than not.
Being objective can also lead to spreading false information when a journalist thinks they are being objective, and are truly trying, but just don't know enough to realize they don't know what the hell they're talking about.
The objective discovery process is all about trying to find out where you might be wrong. Our news organizations are in a production business. They don't have enough time to wait for an investigative journalist to complete that process. And they sure as hell don't have time to cater to the tiny audience who will take everything with a grain of salt and study out things that interest them on their own. The $ comes from content aimed at a target audience.
So, I disagree that we are in some golden age of journalism. Good journalism is an oxymoron in a society that isn't wired for it, IMO.
I'm also a believer that good information in the wrong hands is a dangerous weapon that will always get misused, whether intentionally or innocently. As such, increased "access to reliable and factual information" isnt a selling point for me. One article with good content can spur ten more that abuse the content, and the cascade effect overwhelms the good content.
When was the media better?
Also plenty of media members are allowed to do what you describe. Maybe you should look for people in the media doing that. There is lots of money in doing good pieces that take time over rushing and putting out crap. The scope of media is very wide now.
If you are getting crappy news that is your fault for settling for it.
Very few news organizations filter down objectives to their employees. Most of them are given free reign and encouraged to produce news that leaves their biases behind. Most people are great at their jobs.
If you are not getting that level of news and media then that is on you.
Most ownership doesnt influence the daily news at corporations.
I dont think Hannity is evil. He just doesnt report news or facts. He gives his opinions and also frequently lies to prove his point. Its pretty easy to fact check people.
fishonjazz
Well-Known Member
Contributor
2018 Award Winner
2019 Award Winner
2020-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
**** hannity.
He is the worst. Just spews hate non stop
He is the worst. Just spews hate non stop
idestroyedthetoilet
Well-Known Member
You prove my point while simultaneously avoiding the greater picture that is our human experience. It doesn't do us any good to try sweeping all those 800 lb gorillas under a rug. Should people seek out better info? Of course. Do we by-and-large? Of course not.
Also, it's not constructive to continuously bellitle others with your arrogant line that you can find good journalism but nobody else can or does. It is also steeped in hubris. That's your invisible crutch and assumes way too much.
If everyone put in the critical thinking effort that you have shown to do over the years then this conversation would rarely come up.