***Official Political Discussion Thread***

leemelone said:
He outdoes himself once again
Click to expand...
I think this one still takes the cake so far. He didn't personally tweet it but he did double down on advocating for what the image depicts.
A NY Post reporter asked him about Rosenstein being behind bars in that image he promoted and Trump responded "He should've never appointed a special counsel."
8d56625a47c2400cf7c207df9eb20dc2.png


In my opinion that's certainly up there as one of if not the most guilty sounding statements that have come out of his mouth.
He's essentially saying "Damn right I meant it, those traitors should be prosecuted for treason and Rosenstein should be behind bars for appointing a special counsel"

What kind of entirely innocent man claiming to have absolutely nothing to do with a particular matter of investiation proceeds to publicly advocate for jailing the DOJ official who appointed the investigator? While at the same time advocating for treason prosecutions against that investigator too.
 
Last edited:
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ublicans-are-staging-mini-coups-across-the-us

Republicans are staging mini-coups across the US


"If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy."

-David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush

Say what you want about AOC, but she gets it. Ain't no compromising with the GOP; they will stab you behind your back. We need more like her in Congress.
 
gry60 said:
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ublicans-are-staging-mini-coups-across-the-us

Republicans are staging mini-coups across the US


"If conservatives become convinced that they cannot win democratically, they will not abandon conservatism. They will reject democracy."

-David Frum, former speechwriter for George W. Bush

Say what you want about AOC, but she gets it. Ain't no compromising with the GOP; they will stab you behind your back. We need more like her in Congress.
Click to expand...

while people are focusing on pelosi (because the republicans view her as a threat and decided to make her a target like they did anything obama or hillary).. they need to work on getting this dude up out the paint:

H06_Chuck_Schumer.jpg
 
I recommend reading the article below.

Malloch is also the one who was asked by Roger Stone to visit Assange and retrieve the pending emails.
Stone emailed "Get to Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London and get the pending WikiLeaks emails" to Jerome Corsi, who is also a target in Mueller's investigion. Corsi then forwarded that email on July 25th 2016 to Ted Malloch for him to act on it. Corsi refused a Mueller plea deal and looks to be facing at least one perjury and obstruction of justice charge. He confirms that email communication with Ted Malloch but claims nothing became of it.

6 days after Corsi forwarded that email, Roger Stone emailed Corsi again and said Malloch should go see Assange.
On the 2nd of August, Corsi replied to Stone's email "Word is friend in embassy plans 2 more dumps … Impact planned to be very damaging.”
Corsi deleted all his pre-October 16th emails but Mueller's team recovered them.
Corsi insists that he doesn't recall Malloch ever responding and doesn't know if Malloch went to see Assange. Corsi claims his information he relayed back to Stone on the 2nd of August was just information he simply figured out by himself.



Excerpt:
Draft legal documents and visitor logs from Ecuador’s embassy in London, where Assange is based, show that RT staff met and interviewed Assange on the same day – 2 August 2016 – that Roger Stone, the self-described “dirty trickster” and longtime Trump associate who had previously bragged about having special access to WikiLeaks, was passed information about Assange’s plans.

Excerpt:
on the same day that Corsi sent his email, Assange told an RT reporter during an interview at the embassy that he would be releasing emails that contained information relating to the Clinton Foundation. Assange’s interview with the RT reporter Afshin Rattansi was not broadcast publicly until several days later, on 6 August. Rattansi did not return a request for comment.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...t-trump-russia-investigation?CMP=share_btn_tw
Trump aide's appearances on RT channel are focus for Russia inquiry
Ted Malloch, a Trump campaign adviser, has been questioned about his relationship with the Kremlin-controlled broadcaster

Robert Mueller is allegedly examining a Trump campaign adviser’s appearances on the Kremlin-controlled broadcaster RT, offering new hints about the investigation into possible collusion between Moscow and Donald Trump’s associates.

Mueller’s investigators have asked Ted Malloch, the London-based American academic who is also close to Nigel Farage, about his frequent appearances on RT, which US intelligence authorities have called Russia’s principal propaganda arm.
The special counsel’s alleged focus on RT is important because the Russian news channel also has a close relationship with the WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who in 2016 published tens of thousands of emails stolen from senior Democrats by Russian intelligence operatives.

Malloch disclosed that he was questioned about RT to his friend Jerome Corsi, a rightwing author who is himself a target of the investigation. “They thought maybe he was coordinating with Russia – and RT is Russia,” Corsi told the Guardian. Malloch denies any coordination.

Draft legal documents and visitor logs from Ecuador’s embassy in London, where Assange is based, show that RT staff met and interviewed Assange on the same day – 2 August 2016 – that Roger Stone, the self-described “dirty trickster” and longtime Trump associate who had previously bragged about having special access to WikiLeaks, was passed information about Assange’s plans.

The timing may be coincidental and is not clear evidence that RT shared information with Stone or others. RT denied sharing any information about its interview and said it was “ludicrous, baseless” to make any claim that information was passed from RT staff to Malloch or Corsi.

According to a draft court filing drawn up by Mueller, Stone was in late July 2016 scrambling to obtain advance copies of additional emails that WikiLeaks intended to publish after its release of thousands from the Democratic party, which prompted the resignation of its chairwoman.

Stone emailed Corsi on 31 July 2016 to say Malloch, a mutual friend of theirs who was in London, “should see Assange”. Corsi has said that he forwarded Malloch a message from Stone explaining that Stone wanted to “get the pending WikiLeaks emails”.

On 2 August 2016, Corsi replied with what appeared to be intelligence about WikiLeaks’s plans to dump more emails. “Word is friend in [the] embassy plans 2 more dumps,” it said. Corsi estimated a schedule for the releases, and seemed to predict one would deal with Clinton’s philanthropic foundation. Corsi also proposed spreading speculation that Clinton was in poor health as a campaign tactic to help Trump.

Mueller is investigating how Corsi obtained the information about WikiLeaks’ plans. Corsi said he did not recall Malloch ever responding, and that he only pretended he had a secret source in order to appear well-connected. He may have been aware of a separate 25 July 2016 email from a Fox News reporter, which also privately suggested that the Clinton Foundation would be a topic of the Assange emails.

But on the same day that Corsi sent his email, Assange told an RT reporter during an interview at the embassy that he would be releasing emails that contained information relating to the Clinton Foundation. Assange’s interview with the RT reporter Afshin Rattansi was not broadcast publicly until several days later, on 6 August. Rattansi did not return a request for comment.

RT said in a statement the information conveyed in the 6 August interview “largely echoed” earlier interviews Assange had given, including to the independent news show Democracy Now. Assange was interviewed by Democracy Now on 25 July but did not mention future email releases or the Clinton Foundation.

Since Trump’s election victory in November 2016, Malloch has appeared at least five times on Rattansi’s talk show on RT.

Malloch, who has denied having any connection to WikiLeaks, declined to comment following multiple requests by the Guardian. WikiLeaks did not respond to requests for comment.

In an intelligence assessment published by US authorities following the election, Rattansi’s August 2016 interview of Assange was alleged to have been part of Russian propaganda efforts aimed at boosting Trump and denigrating Clinton.

The US intelligence report also noted a past relationship between RT and Assange, alleging that the Kremlin-backed channel had “actively collaborated with WikiLeaks” in an effort to denounce the US. RT has denied being controlled by the Kremlin and said its output is “designed merely to inform, not influence”.

Questions about whether the Trump campaign or other associates of the president helped to coordinate the timing of WikiLeaks’s release of emails before the November 2016 election lie at the heart of Mueller’s investigation. Emails were stolen from senior Democrats including Clinton’s campaign chairman by agents of the GRU and transferred to WikiLeaks, according to a US criminal indictment.

Assange has denied that he received the hacked emails from Russia.

Public statements and documents have so far revealed that Mueller’s team has focused on Stone, Corsi and Malloch as part of their quest to confirm who may have had knowledge about WikiLeaks’s plans.

Malloch was briefly detained by Mueller’s investigators at Logan airport in Boston in March this year. He was questioned and issued a grand jury subpoena, but his appearance at the grand jury in Washington DC was postponed.

It was unclear in March 2018 why Mueller was interested in Malloch.

The academic appeared to have played only a minor role in Trump’s campaign as an “unpaid adviser”, although he claimed in his January 2017 book Hired that he had known Trump for decades and contributed to Trump’s “philanthropic causes” in Florida and New York.

It became clearer last week why Mueller took an apparent interest in Malloch when the draft filing containing messages between Stone and Corsi was released to the media by Corsi.

Corsi told the Guardian he introduced Malloch to Stone over steaks at the Strip House in midtown Manhattan in late February or March 2016. Mueller’s investigators “wanted to know about the dinner”, he said. When asked if Assange was discussed during the meal, Corsi said he was not a “human tape recorder”.

Stone has given conflicting accounts of the meeting. In March he told Business Insider the three chatted about “Brexit and globalism” but did not discuss WikiLeaks, Assange or Russia. Yet last Sunday, Stone told Fox News that Malloch “mentioned that he knew Assange”, which was what prompted him to suggest Malloch go to Ecuador’s embassy in search of the emails.

Nearly two years after Stone’s attempt to get to Assange, the FBI descended on Malloch, separated him from his wife and began questioning him. Corsi was quickly alerted – apparently by Malloch or his wife – and, for reasons that are unclear, publicised the news in an “emergency” broadcast on the far-right conspiracy website Infowars.

At the time, Corsi said he had been told the FBI was questioning Malloch about Assange and his appearances on RT. He repeated that assertion in an interview with the Guardian this week: “Mueller’s people asked Ted about his appearances on RT.

At the time, Malloch said he “knew nothing” about WikiLeaks and has suggested he was being targeted because of his support for Trump. He also played down his longtime friendship with Corsi, who he said “edited a memoir I had written some years ago”.

Malloch was subpoenaed to appear before Mueller’s grand jury in Washington DC soon after being questioned by the FBI, but the appearance was postponed and it is unclear if it was ever rescheduled. Malloch said in May that he was “still actively participating in this conversation” with investigators. A spokesman for Mueller declined to comment.

Mueller’s alleged focus on RT is noteworthy, too, because employees of the Russian broadcaster made several visits to Assange at Ecuador’s embassy – on 4, 8, 10, 17 and 23 June 2016, according to visitor logs – a time of high activity for Assange and for the Russian operatives alleged to have stolen the Democratic emails.

US intelligence officials also noted in their 2017 assessment that allegations Clinton was suffering “poor physical and mental health” featured prominently in RT’s coverage. RT has rejected claims it paid unusual attention to the subject, pointing to widespread coverage by other outlets after Clinton fell ill at a September 11 memorial event.

But a Guardian review of RT’s output found it began raising the allegations at least a month earlier, soon after Corsi’s message to Stone predicting Clinton’s health would dominate the next WikiLeaks email release – and that it “would not hurt” to start suggesting she had suffered a stroke.

On 8 August, RT published a misleading article about a six-month-old photograph of Clinton slipping on a stair, which falsely stated she had “well-documented brain injuries”. The channel’s Spanish-language version cited unfounded allegations that Clinton had been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease.

That same day, Russian intelligence operatives posted the first of almost 500 tweets or retweets featuring the hashtag #HillarysHealth, according to a study of 3m postings by Russian troll accounts by the Clemson University researchers Darren Linvill and Patrick Warren.

From 30 August, RT itself began using the hashtag in tweets to promote its articles on Clinton’s condition.

RT also broadcast wild speculation about Clinton’s health on television. Michael Lebron, the broadcaster and conspiracy theorist who goes by the name “Lionel”, claimed on air that Clinton might be hiding a degenerative illness. He asked: “Where the hell has the mainstream media been regarding Hillary Clinton’s health?”

There is no evidence Malloch had a relationship with RT or Rattansi before the November 2016 election. RT told the Guardian that Malloch was introduced to the show Going Underground by Jan Halper Hayes and that Malloch first met Rattansi in February 2017.

RT said Malloch had not been paid for his appearances on Rattansi’s show since the election. In those interviews, Malloch dismissed the notion of collusion between Trump’s campaign and Russian operatives as a conspiracy theory.

Malloch also advocated for friendlier US-Russia relations and predicted Trump would move to soften US economic restrictions on Moscow. He asked Rattansi in a February 2017 appearance: “If those sanctions were removed, would not the world be a better place?”

Mueller has also been investigating whether another Stone contact, the comedian and radio host Randy Credico, could have been his source for information from WikiLeaks. Credico denies this.

There is no evidence that Malloch or Stone ever personally met Assange at the Ecuadorian embassy.
Click to expand...
 
jdfrenchbread23 said:
the pew research center does a pretty good job of quantifying a lot of the major factors that play into up ward mobility and there i will be drawing my data from
https://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2013/11/01/movingonuppdf.pdf

the problem with the way you approach this is that ignores some pretty important nuances.
70% of people born below the poverty line, never make it out of poverty. Regardless of race, meaning that 7 out of 10 people born poor will never make it out. Thats the lens you have to focus your assumptions through. When the when the large majority of circumstances end in a specific outcome, that means that a system is designed to favor that outcome. Thats basic Design of experiment/Scientific method. In order for this "value system" to hold weight youd have to make the claim that 70% poor people have the same value system. Literally and Statically thats not possible. But do you do know what poor communites do have in common? underfunded school systems, no real financial literacy avenues, paths to employment that leads to increasing wealth, affordable and investible property to be able to build asset wealth. And you know what happenes when none of that is available to the vast majority of people in those areas? crime becomes normalized, welfare becomes part of the monthly budget, and upward mobility becomes impossible. that 70% statistic means that even people who do have the "values" youre describing, if theyre born into poverty, chances that they'll make it out of poverty still arent in their favor. There are plenty of poor people that are doing the exact opposite of what the stereotype is and they'll never make it to the middle class.
Capture.PNG
Click to expand...

You are a blessing to this thread. I don't disagree with anything you wrote. Just because most don't make it out of poverty doesn't mean what I said was incorrect. It actually goes with it. Poor values are generational. I would agree that the system is designed to keep people working but we both know as a society we have grown and become more wealthy. I would never make the claim that everyone in either category has the same values, but people in both categories do share some similar values that affect the outcome of their financial status. All of the commonalities you mentioned: education, financial education, and level of employment could possibly be improved on an individual level with effort.

I think the main difference in what you and I believe is that I think the larger factor relies on the individual as where you would prefer to blame the system. No one is guaranteed to make it out of poverty. You have to work at it and just except failure if you don't make it. Bless your child with some wisdom and hope for the best for them.
 
gry60 said:
Equivalencies are not implications.

=> is not the same as <=>

Crime doesn't create poverty (white collar criminals should know). There is no cycle there.
Click to expand...

Wow. Look at the common sense on this one! Really drove that one home. Guess I'm wrong because not every crime leads to poverty.
 
bigrockford said:
You are a blessing to this thread. I don't disagree with anything you wrote. Just because most don't make it out of poverty doesn't mean what I said was incorrect. It actually goes with it. Poor values are generational. I would agree that the system is designed to keep people working but we both know as a society we have grown and become more wealthy. I would never make the claim that everyone in either category has the same values, but people in both categories do share some similar values that affect the outcome of their financial status. All of the commonalities you mentioned: education, financial education, and level of employment could possibly be improved on an individual level with effort.

I think the main difference in what you and I believe is that I think the larger factor relies on the individual as where you would prefer to blame the system. No one is guaranteed to make it out of poverty. You have to work at it and just except failure if you don't make it. Bless your child with some wisdom and hope for the best for them.
Click to expand...

The reason why I don’t even bring up values is because data shows that it isn’t a deciding factor in a persons ability to be upwardly mobile. I blame the system because the communities that have access to those things don’t have to examine their value systems to succeed they just have to use the resources their tax money affords them. Asking poor people to value education when they don’t have access to a valuable education isn’t fair. Looking down on people who commit crime to make a living when their are no opportunities to make a living wage isn’t fair. We’re placing the burden of overcoming a system designed not to be overcome squarely on the backs of the poor and then when 70% don’t make it (as designigned) they get blamed for adapting to survive? Meanwhile a middle class person can have the same stereotypical values as a poor and their socioeconomic viability isn’t affected at all. Telling people do better and denying them the tools to do so by stripping funding for schools, social programs, and jobs programs is exactly why I won’t vote conservatively EVER.
 
rexanglorum said:
In a narrow context, Douthat is not wrong. If we have to choose between two ruling classes where one is white supremacist, patriarchal and plutocratic and is also flashy and unscrupulous and the other is white supremacist, patriarchal and plutocratic but is more restrained in its aesthetic and at least feels like they have some obligation to their country, of course we’d choose the latter.

What we should aspire to is not having to choose which terrible clique will rule over us. The essence of leftist politics is that we don’t have a ruling class.
Click to expand...
Can you define what you specifically mean by ruling class? I know the term can be pretty fluid, just want to clarify if possible......

Additionally, regardless of the definition, I disagree that the goal of the leftists politics (at least in this country) is to eliminate the ruling class.
 
bigrockford said:
Wow. Look at the common sense on this one! Really drove that one home. Guess I'm wrong because not every crime leads to poverty.
Click to expand...
It's not common sense, it's logic.

Statement A implies statement B doesnt make the reverse true. You haven't proven that B leads to A, and until you do, you can't claim the existence of a cycle from A to B to A.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

shaboozy
What's your NT routine?
2
Replies
37
Views
4K
ogbobbyjohnson773
ogbobbyjohnson773
chezzer10
***MLB FEET, EQUIPMENT, AND UNIFORMS 2024***NEW THREAD
2 3
Replies
50
Views
5K
langfor5
langfor5
datznasty
Official Niketalk Custom Basketball Shorts Thread
Replies
5
Views
1K
MakeNTGreatAgain
MakeNTGreatAgain

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom