In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!
NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
I think when McCarthy said swear to god he was probably stating a genuine belief. It's not clear that it was all a big jolly-gee joke. And Ryan did seem to be making sure that comment wouldn't get out. Evan McMullin was present and he agreed with the gist of the WaPo story.
I'm beginning to understand why they still ran the story. Man present didn't get the joke, nothing is clear in transcript anymore, roll the tape. It's like WaPo is intent on only keeping its most committed followers.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
adds to the dumpster fire. paul ryan denied it (fake news, as dangles would say), until WaPo told him they had the audio recording.
I guess I don't like the idea of wapo trying to add to a dumpster fire rather than just giving us good shit. The comey memos were good shit. They didn't need to muddy their own water with stuff that people can argue is totally misleading. It gives Danglars full confidence to just plug his ears to the stuff that has been proved true. But because of this crap, people like Danglars don't even believe other stuff that has since been validated and totally true.
Paul Ryan's spokeperson's response:
when he first asked the offices of Ryan and McCarthy for comment, they denied that any such conversation had ever taken place. He then told them he had a transcript of the conversation, and they claimed it was fake. Only after they were told that Entous actually had a recording did they move to the position that it had all been a big joke.
Yeah, I definitely believe them 100% about their "big joke." I would love to hear the audio, though, as that's the one way to clear this up for certain.
So by denying the authenticity of the transcript, the WaPo was therefore justified in pretending it was anything other than a joke. This Russia stuff is just getting out of hand. Trump makes fool of himself, media asks America to hold their beers.
The transcript is of a recording the post has. They have Ryan and McCarthy on tape. The people involved denied it until the post dropped the bomb that they had the tape. Then they admitted it was true.
If it was all a joke, why not just admit it and provide context? Why deny it and then say the transcript is fake?
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
They must have forgotten how reputations are ruined. It doesn't matter how many good articles are mixed in with false ones, what matters is you mixed a little shit into the brownie mix and now people won't eat them up.
There is a physical recorded of the Republican leadership joking about Trump receiving Russian money in 2016 right before the end of the primary. Now there are 3 separate investigations into that fact. And the story was leaked by a Republican who clearly did not think it was funny.
At the same time, Fox News and conservative outlets are pushing a debunked story about Rich Seth, claiming a PI found evidence the DNC connected. The PI has gone on the record saying he heard about it first on Fox news. They are using their own reporting as a source.
The family of Seth Rich, the Democratic National Committee staffer who was fatally shot last July, is demanding retractions from Fox News and WTTG-TV on Wednesday for their inaccurate reports on the unsolved murder, a spokesman for the family told CNN Wednesday.
"The family is officially asking for a retraction and an apology from Fox News and from the Fox 5 DC affiliate for inaccurate reporting and damaging the legacy of their son," spokesman Brad Bauman said.
This week, both Fox News and WTTG-TV published and aired reports, sourced to private investigator Rod Wheeler, that said evidence showed Rich had been in contact with Wikileaks before his death. Wheeler later told CNN he had no such evidence and that he had, in fact, only heard of some information attributed to him from a Fox News reporter with whom he spoke.
Even Rich Seth's own family are asking them to stop, and they won't because Fox won't shut it's inaccurate reporting.
The government of Canada had to contact FOX news to make them stop reporting that the shooting at a mosque in Quebec was done by a muslim terrorist. It took a damn government to make them stop reporting false news. Good luck for that happening in the US for this story.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
I think when McCarthy said swear to god he was probably stating a genuine belief. It's not clear that it was all a big jolly-gee joke. And Ryan did seem to be making sure that comment wouldn't get out. Evan McMullin was present and he agreed with the gist of the WaPo story.
I'm beginning to understand why they still ran the story. Man present didn't get the joke, nothing is clear in transcript anymore, roll the tape. It's like WaPo is intent on only keeping its most committed followers.
Danglars knows for sure that "swear to god" is stated as part of a joke.
Can someone tell me what the legal consequences are for this? I've never heard of someone successfully ignoring away a regular subpoena, but maybe there are special rules for Congressional subpoenas?
I don't think that ignoring a subpoena is ever a good idea (it's better to move to quash it), but the subpoena has to be lawful to be enforceable and to trigger contempt penalties for ignoring the subpoena. I haven't looked at the subpoena in detail and I don't know much about how the Congressional subpoenas work and what their authority is, but from what I've heard about what the subpoena asks for, it is likely overly broad in the type of way that federal courts severely frown upon. When I was a new lawyer, a federal magistrate chewed my ass out for using the type of language in a subpoena that has been used here.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
They must have forgotten how reputations are ruined. It doesn't matter how many good articles are mixed in with false ones, what matters is you mixed a little shit into the brownie mix and now people won't eat them up.
There is a physical recorded of the Republican leadership joking about Trump receiving Russian money in 2016 right before the end of the primary. Now there are 3 separate investigations into that fact. And the story was leaked by a Republican who clearly did not think it was funny.
At the same time, Fox News and conservative outlets are pushing a debunked story about Rich Seth, claiming a PI found evidence the DNC connected. The PI has gone on the record saying he heard about it first on Fox news. They are using their own reporting as a source.
The family of Seth Rich, the Democratic National Committee staffer who was fatally shot last July, is demanding retractions from Fox News and WTTG-TV on Wednesday for their inaccurate reports on the unsolved murder, a spokesman for the family told CNN Wednesday.
"The family is officially asking for a retraction and an apology from Fox News and from the Fox 5 DC affiliate for inaccurate reporting and damaging the legacy of their son," spokesman Brad Bauman said.
This week, both Fox News and WTTG-TV published and aired reports, sourced to private investigator Rod Wheeler, that said evidence showed Rich had been in contact with Wikileaks before his death. Wheeler later told CNN he had no such evidence and that he had, in fact, only heard of some information attributed to him from a Fox News reporter with whom he spoke.
Even Rich Seth's own family are asking them to stop, and they won't because Fox won't shut it's inaccurate reporting.
The government of Canada had to contact FOX news to make them stop reporting that the shooting at a mosque in Quebec was done by a muslim terrorist. It took a damn government to make them stop reporting false news. Good luck for that happening in the US for this story.
It was a good era when our government held the news to some standards and didn’t just let them do whatever they wanted without repercussions. 1949-1980 were ok times for news media.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
adds to the dumpster fire. paul ryan denied it (fake news, as dangles would say), until WaPo told him they had the audio recording.
I guess I don't like the idea of wapo trying to add to a dumpster fire rather than just giving us good shit. The comey memos were good shit. They didn't need to muddy their own water with stuff that people can argue is totally misleading. It gives Danglars full confidence to just plug his ears to the stuff that has been proved true. But because of this crap, people like Danglars don't even believe other stuff that has since been validated and totally true.
Paul Ryan's spokeperson's response:
when he first asked the offices of Ryan and McCarthy for comment, they denied that any such conversation had ever taken place. He then told them he had a transcript of the conversation, and they claimed it was fake. Only after they were told that Entous actually had a recording did they move to the position that it had all been a big joke.
Yeah, I definitely believe them 100% about their "big joke." I would love to hear the audio, though, as that's the one way to clear this up for certain.
So by denying the authenticity of the transcript, the WaPo was therefore justified in pretending it was anything other than a joke. This Russia stuff is just getting out of hand. Trump makes fool of himself, media asks America to hold their beers.
The transcript is of a recording the post has. They have Ryan and McCarthy on tape. The people involved denied it until the post dropped the bomb that they had the tape. Then they admitted it was true.
If it was all a joke, why not just admit it and provide context? Why deny it and then say the transcript is fake?
Why hear fake news and then accuse others of lying as if it excuses the fact that they misreported the story with the intent of deceiving the reader? I'm sorry but I can't take your argument seriously at all.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
Because like many others they don't understand the problem of noise or saturating with so much BS that people stop caring.
Personally I've cut down heavily on Trump-based stories. He's a disaster, I am aware. But at this point it's hard to care about specific incidents of stupidity. God knows we've all been saturated with too many of those.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
I think when McCarthy said swear to god he was probably stating a genuine belief. It's not clear that it was all a big jolly-gee joke. And Ryan did seem to be making sure that comment wouldn't get out. Evan McMullin was present and he agreed with the gist of the WaPo story.
I'm beginning to understand why they still ran the story. Man present didn't get the joke, nothing is clear in transcript anymore, roll the tape. It's like WaPo is intent on only keeping its most committed followers.
It possibly couldn't be that a media outlet ran a story because they had conclusive proof that an extremely important polititian lied? It's not Trump level which diminishes its impact though, but that's not a good thing.
Can someone tell me what the legal consequences are for this? I've never heard of someone successfully ignoring away a regular subpoena, but maybe there are special rules for Congressional subpoenas?
I don't think that ignoring a subpoena is ever a good idea (it's better to move to quash it), but the subpoena has to be lawful to be enforceable and to trigger contempt penalties for ignoring the subpoena. I haven't looked at the subpoena in detail and I don't know much about how the Congressional subpoenas work and what their authority is, but from what I've heard about what the subpoena asks for, it is likely overly broad in the type of way that federal courts severely frown upon. When I was a new lawyer, a federal magistrate chewed my ass out for using the type of language in a subpoena that has been used here.
Thanks for the explanation. So what language exactly qualifies as overly broad?
looks like trump press conference wont be about the leaks or comey or anything else. Its a joint press conference with another president,probably only answering questions about their meeting.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
I think when McCarthy said swear to god he was probably stating a genuine belief. It's not clear that it was all a big jolly-gee joke. And Ryan did seem to be making sure that comment wouldn't get out. Evan McMullin was present and he agreed with the gist of the WaPo story.
I'm beginning to understand why they still ran the story. Man present didn't get the joke, nothing is clear in transcript anymore, roll the tape. It's like WaPo is intent on only keeping its most committed followers.
It possibly couldn't be that a media outlet ran a story because they had conclusive proof that an extremely important polititian lied? It's not Trump level which diminishes its impact though, but that's not a good thing.
You mean a media outlet published fake news as a response to a lie. I don't know of any paper I'd consider reputable that retaliates for lies by publishing lies. But then the 2016 election has really messed up WaPo, among others.
Can someone tell me what the legal consequences are for this? I've never heard of someone successfully ignoring away a regular subpoena, but maybe there are special rules for Congressional subpoenas?
I don't think that ignoring a subpoena is ever a good idea (it's better to move to quash it), but the subpoena has to be lawful to be enforceable and to trigger contempt penalties for ignoring the subpoena. I haven't looked at the subpoena in detail and I don't know much about how the Congressional subpoenas work and what their authority is, but from what I've heard about what the subpoena asks for, it is likely overly broad in the type of way that federal courts severely frown upon. When I was a new lawyer, a federal magistrate chewed my ass out for using the type of language in a subpoena that has been used here.
Thanks for the explanation. So what language exactly qualifies as overly broad?
Anytime the subpoena starts asking for something akin to "anything related to X," there's a problem. The "related to" language is problematic.
Looking a little further, it seems like ignoring congressional subpoenas is routine given the clumsy enforcement mechanisms that are available.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
adds to the dumpster fire. paul ryan denied it (fake news, as dangles would say), until WaPo told him they had the audio recording.
I guess I don't like the idea of wapo trying to add to a dumpster fire rather than just giving us good shit. The comey memos were good shit. They didn't need to muddy their own water with stuff that people can argue is totally misleading. It gives Danglars full confidence to just plug his ears to the stuff that has been proved true. But because of this crap, people like Danglars don't even believe other stuff that has since been validated and totally true.
Paul Ryan's spokeperson's response:
when he first asked the offices of Ryan and McCarthy for comment, they denied that any such conversation had ever taken place. He then told them he had a transcript of the conversation, and they claimed it was fake. Only after they were told that Entous actually had a recording did they move to the position that it had all been a big joke.
Yeah, I definitely believe them 100% about their "big joke." I would love to hear the audio, though, as that's the one way to clear this up for certain.
So by denying the authenticity of the transcript, the WaPo was therefore justified in pretending it was anything other than a joke. This Russia stuff is just getting out of hand. Trump makes fool of himself, media asks America to hold their beers.
The transcript is of a recording the post has. They have Ryan and McCarthy on tape. The people involved denied it until the post dropped the bomb that they had the tape. Then they admitted it was true.
If it was all a joke, why not just admit it and provide context? Why deny it and then say the transcript is fake?
Why hear fake news and then accuse others of lying as if it excuses the fact that they misreported the story with the intent of deceiving the reader? I'm sorry but I can't take your argument seriously at all.
You keep saying fake news like that makes your argument.
The Post has a recording, which is confirmed to be accurate by someone in the room at the time.
They call Ryan and McCarthy, who both deny it until the Post informs them that they have a recording.
They write that exact story.
There is nothing fake about this. They are not misleading their readers. They have a tape of a discussion that in the current context is news worthy. The entire political team for NPR talked about the story on their podcast and agreed that in the current climate, the recording is bad optics for Ryan and GOP leadership. And that was news worthy because there could be more. If you don’t like it, that is your problem.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
I think when McCarthy said swear to god he was probably stating a genuine belief. It's not clear that it was all a big jolly-gee joke. And Ryan did seem to be making sure that comment wouldn't get out. Evan McMullin was present and he agreed with the gist of the WaPo story.
I'm beginning to understand why they still ran the story. Man present didn't get the joke, nothing is clear in transcript anymore, roll the tape. It's like WaPo is intent on only keeping its most committed followers.
It possibly couldn't be that a media outlet ran a story because they had conclusive proof that an extremely important polititian lied? It's not Trump level which diminishes its impact though, but that's not a good thing.
You mean a media outlet published fake news as a response to a lie. I don't know of any paper I'd consider reputable that retaliates for lies by publishing lies. But then the 2016 election has really messed up WaPo, among others.
If we could avoid getting into another protracted discussion about what defines "fake news" that would be great.
But I do think the emphasis in the story should more have been on Ryan lying about discussing (even in jest) Trump Russia connections, which is a pretty serious news story imo, and less on sinister Republican meeting manipulation.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
I think when McCarthy said swear to god he was probably stating a genuine belief. It's not clear that it was all a big jolly-gee joke. And Ryan did seem to be making sure that comment wouldn't get out. Evan McMullin was present and he agreed with the gist of the WaPo story.
I'm beginning to understand why they still ran the story. Man present didn't get the joke, nothing is clear in transcript anymore, roll the tape. It's like WaPo is intent on only keeping its most committed followers.
It possibly couldn't be that a media outlet ran a story because they had conclusive proof that an extremely important polititian lied? It's not Trump level which diminishes its impact though, but that's not a good thing.
You mean a media outlet published fake news as a response to a lie. I don't know of any paper I'd consider reputable that retaliates for lies by publishing lies. But then the 2016 election has really messed up WaPo, among others.
How is it fake news?
Because as Trump once said, any negative news about him is fake news.
On May 18 2017 23:56 Mohdoo wrote: I really don't understand why wapo even ran this crap about someone joking about putin paying trump. They have some truly compelling stuff going on otherwise and it is weird that they could toss in that pile of shit along with it.
I think when McCarthy said swear to god he was probably stating a genuine belief. It's not clear that it was all a big jolly-gee joke. And Ryan did seem to be making sure that comment wouldn't get out. Evan McMullin was present and he agreed with the gist of the WaPo story.
I'm beginning to understand why they still ran the story. Man present didn't get the joke, nothing is clear in transcript anymore, roll the tape. It's like WaPo is intent on only keeping its most committed followers.
It possibly couldn't be that a media outlet ran a story because they had conclusive proof that an extremely important polititian lied? It's not Trump level which diminishes its impact though, but that's not a good thing.
You mean a media outlet published fake news as a response to a lie. I don't know of any paper I'd consider reputable that retaliates for lies by publishing lies. But then the 2016 election has really messed up WaPo, among others.
Fake news would be them making up a conversation, not transcribing a conversation from tape and having a witness verify it.
You may not like the article and maybe the conversation was a joke but there's nothing fake about it...
EPT
