Donald Trump

[Pottsey]

Was just checking, as I can clearly remember people saying it was a right wing conspiracy, now it’s changed to it was legally predicated

We’re going to find out soon that Flynn was the target of surveillance and probably without a legal basis, and everyone around him were unmasked

Think we’re also going to find out that it went far beyond Trump and team that were spied on, other political “enemies” like Nunes, Cruz and journos like Hannity, Soloman were targeted too

That is something you and MMJ do a lot which is mix people up and turn it into a false statement. As far as I remember the people saying it was legally predicted are not the same people saying it was a right wing conspiracy. You do that a lot you take two different people and claim "now its changed" when nothing has changed.

Also what are your thoughts now the US has entered the top 10 deaths per capita and moving up the chart? Plus with the reopening already, we will see a spike pushing it up further. What about the US failed testing? Or the fact the US is going to break past triple the expected deaths due to badly handing the situation? What about the Trumps terrible response compared to other counties? Just how bad does it have to get before you admit you are wrong and Trump has handled the situation badly?

 

[Orionaut]

last time I looked the the US had moved into the top 10 deaths per capita and was slowing working its way up.

One of the problems with the US and statistics is that it is not like other countries. (It is just the same with crime analysis too. saying that the USA's homicide rate is "X" is like saying that the EU's homicide rate is "Y" ignoring the quite big differences between individual member countries)

Within the EU different countries are reported as different countries.

And yet the USA is reported as a monolithic block, despite the fact that it is spread over a vast continent and consists of multiple states, which in many ways actually have more individual autonomy than member countries in the EU, and has an overall population a good proportion of the EU's

A better comparison would be on a state by state basis.

When you look at it that way the regional differences are quite marked.

EG I saw a claim the other day that the highest rates of Covid infection in the US are basically in democrat controlled "Sanctuary Cities" and it really doesn't figure anywhere like as much elsewhere. If this is indeed the case then it goes a long way towards explaining why Trump supporting states/cities have a very different attitude towards lockdowns and Covid strategy generally

 

[Pottsey]

One of the problems with the US and statistics is that it is not like other countries. (It is just the same with crime analysis too. saying that the USA's homicide rate is "X" is like saying that the EU's homicide rate is "Y" ignoring the quite big differences between individual member countries)

Within the EU different countries are reported as different countries.

And yet the USA is reported as a monolithic block, despite the fact that it is spread over a vast continent and consists of multiple states, which in many ways actually have more individual autonomy than member countries in the EU, and has an overall population a good proportion of the EU's

A better comparison would be on a state by state basis.

When you look at it that way the regional differences are quite marked.

EG I saw a claim the other day that the highest rates of Covid infection in the US are basically in democrat controlled "Sanctuary Cities" and it really doesn't figure anywhere like as much elsewhere. If this is indeed the case then it goes a long way towards explaining why Trump supporting states/cities have a very different attitude towards lockdowns and Covid strategy generally

Its kind of the same everywhere even in the UK on a smaller scale we see the same type of pattern. For example London is not the same from a homicide rate or virus spread rate as other areas of the UK. We could compared London to New York or pick a low infected UK region and compare it to a low infected US state. We all expect the London/New York style areas to be hit harder while the more sparsely wide open regions are barely hit. There is never going to be a 100% perfect way to look at it. Saying that I do agree with your point that its good to also look at states by states as well as the US wide numbers.

The reason I used capita is tang0 was using that to show how well Trump was handling the Virus. So I wanted to know what tang0 thinks now that capita has changed and it now shows how badly Trump is handling the virus. After all if what Trump was saying at the start was true and if his plan worked the capita deaths wouldn't be anywhere near as bad as it is now. It shows how badly Trump failed and how wrong Tang0 was. Capita deaths are on the way to be over triple what Trumps now failed plan called for.

 

[Trusty]

Oh you are getting boring now. Who cares about the NIH? Who even mentioned it other than you again and again? You keep banging on about it like it makes you right. You replied to a post, you were wrong because you didn't watch the video or read the article and now you are desperate to save face. Just let it go and move on as you look more foolish the longer you drag this out. No one said there wasn't other research, however this research is going on exactly where the virus is jumping from bats to other animals. It was ended because Fox News ran a CT piece and of course Trump jumped on it. What is going on at the Wuhan lab? Come on lets hear your CT that you have based on what exactly? This company was from the US but they are working against thew US are they, with the Chinese. You are the one outraged, probably at yourself in this case for being a fool and yes you are tiresome.

Literally, wtf are you talking about?

I watched the video, i posted an article showing NIH funding had increased, which is where Ecohealth get their funding, to show that money will be in the pot to fund projects like that, i thought you would be intelligent enough to make that leap.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1258982675559276549

Its not the first time deadly pathogens have leaked from labs in China, its happened many times before actually, if only you would do some reading rather than automatically assume you know everything...

 

[Murphy]

Was just checking, as I can clearly remember people saying it was a right wing conspiracy, now it’s changed to it was legally predicated

We’re going to find out soon that Flynn was the target of surveillance and probably without a legal basis, and everyone around him were unmasked

Think we’re also going to find out that it went far beyond Trump and team that were spied on, other political “enemies” like Nunes, Cruz and journos like Hannity, Soloman were targeted too

Why do i have the feeling you've either misrepresented or misinterpreted what people said? I'm not saying you've consistently done that and as such i don't trust what you say so should provide some evidence, but..yea who's ever said that the intelligence services carrying out due diligence on politicians "was a right wing conspiracy"?

I suspect the only place that claim exists is in your head because are you really suggesting that politicians and 'journalist' (and i use that term very loosely as Hannity and Soloman are about as far removed from journalists as you can get, they're not journalists, they're political commentators), are you saying the security services should not investigate such people in order to protect America and its people?

I'm not fully aware of what powers the FBI have but i would imagine they're pretty wide ranging when it comes to protecting America and its citizens and IIRC the legal basis was entirely correct, they applied for, and were granted, a warrant (is it a FISA order or something?).

 

[tang0]

Why do i have the feeling you've either misrepresented or misinterpreted what people said? I'm not saying you've consistently done that and as such i don't trust what you say so should provide some evidence, but..yea who's ever said that the intelligence services carrying out due diligence on politicians "was a right wing conspiracy"?

I suspect the only place that claim exists is in your head because are you really suggesting that politicians and 'journalist' (and i use that term very loosely as Hannity and Soloman are about as far removed from journalists as you can get, they're not journalists, they're political commentators), are you saying the security services should not investigate such people in order to protect America and its people?

I'm not fully aware of what powers the FBI have but i would imagine they're pretty wide ranging when it comes to protecting America and its citizens and IIRC the legal basis was entirely correct, they applied for, and were granted, a warrant (is it a FISA order or something?).

https://imgur.com/a/ZHiYv1k

Just a few posts

The surveillance was illegal (NSA queries), the FISA applications were fraudulent (knowingly used fake intelligence), the counter intelligence was a fraud (crossfire hurricane), the unmasking’s were illegal

 

[Pottsey]

https://imgur.com/a/ZHiYv1k

Just a few posts

The surveillance was illegal (NSA queries), the FISA applications were fraudulent (knowingly used fake intelligence), the counter intelligence was a fraud (crossfire hurricane), the unmasking’s were illegal

Unless I missed something most of those comments are correct. The wiretap being talked about in those comments wasn’t directed at Trump. It was directed at someone else that was being wired tapped and then Trump rang that person being caught in it.

Was there another wiretap aimed directly on Trump that I missed? Even if there was that isn't what those most of those comments are talking about is it? They are talking about the wiretap on that other person that Trump rang.

I see you are avoiding my questions on the virus? Is this wiretap obsolete news just so you can avoid looking at how badly Trump is handling the Virus?

 

[Murphy]

https://imgur.com/a/ZHiYv1k

Just a few posts

The surveillance was illegal (NSA queries), the FISA applications were fraudulent (knowingly used fake intelligence), the counter intelligence was a fraud (crossfire hurricane), the unmasking’s were illegal

BTW you can links to posts directly by using the #6766 (or whatever number is shown in the top right of the post).

Yea, i suspected as much, you've misrepresented or misinterpreted what people said as not a single one of those posts say that the intelligence services carrying out due diligence on politicians "was a right wing conspiracy", the closest they come are talking about right-wing CT theories, Trump ranting about his phones being tapped, that Obama ordered it, and that it was illegal but, and here's the important part, they don't link those disparate things together, you've done that all by yourself.

Are there some wacky right-wing CT theories out there? Sure, but that doesn't mean all right-wing theories are CT theories or all CT theories are right-wing or even that they relate to the security services carrying out their duty.

Did Trump rant about his phones being tapped? Sure he did, he leaves a trail of tweets in his wake but, and again this is the important part, just because Trump didn't like it doesn't mean it wasn't legal or unjustified (and based on what Pottsey just said above it seems Trump wasn't even the target).https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/members/pottsey.50511/

Did Obama order it? No, not AFAIA as there's rules and laws in place that largely separate the power of the law from that of politics, politicians pass laws and judges enforce them, and although I'm not as familiar with the separation of power between the security services and politicians in America i suspect it's similar to how it's separated in the UK, not only to protect the security services but also to protect the politicians.

Was it illegal? Not AFAIA because the FBI took their case (reasons) to a judge and the judge considered they had good reasons so issued them a warrant that made it legal.

 

[Werewolf]

IIRC and this has been explained in great detail to Tango repeatedly the phones that were tapped belonged to several people other than Trump.
Including Flynn (IIRC the FBI were investigating him back in 2016 and he was being monitored from them), several of Trump's Russian pals* who due to their positions and history would/should have been no surprise.

But Tango cannot understand the difference between your phone being monitored because you're being tapped, and your call being monitored because you are on the line to someone whose phone is being tapped, it's a small but hugely important thing, as this is the whole point of wiretaps, you tap the suspect and try to pick up information between both their known and previously unknown contacts, with rules in place to stop monitoring of individual calls if they are no pertinent to the warrant.
Of course this requires some comprehension and understanding of what is going on that seems far beyond Trump and his supporters.

It's like claiming you're under surveillance because you keep being seen going into a property that the police are monitoring because they suspect it's a brothel full of trafficked sex slaves.


*Something to do with the FBI being tasked with both law enforcement in general at a national level, and counter espionage specifically means that they tend to monitor known agents of the Russian government, and known dodgy international individuals fairly often (the same way every country monitors known agents of foreign governments).

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

Literally, wtf are you talking about?

I watched the video, i posted an article showing NIH funding had increased, which is where Ecohealth get their funding, to show that money will be in the pot to fund projects like that, i thought you would be intelligent enough to make that leap.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1258982675559276549

Its not the first time deadly pathogens have leaked from labs in China, its happened many times before actually, if only you would do some reading rather than automatically assume you know everything...

Where did I or anyone say the NIH budget was cut? Not once was that budget mentioned. You can't use an argument that a company didn't have its grant cut or it doesn't matter that it did because the department that was in charge of paying out that grant had its budget increased. If the 60 minutes story said the NIH budget was cut you'd be correct but it didn't and you are wrong.

Oh so because a leak could happen it happened. Right I see, so Fox News running an inaccurate story and Trump making a statement based on that story that suits his politics without any evidence is grounds to cut funding to an American company doing vital work on the ground? Australian Gov says everything points to animal transfer. Of course for there to even be a leak that lab had to have this virus in its possession, which there is no evidence of either. So its a guess. If or when they have evidence then would be the time to take action, not for political gain, that is shortsighted and self defeating.

 

[Murphy]

I guess Trump is having a bad day today what with Fauci contradicting him and the supreme court hearing the case on his tax returns, it's double jeopardy.

 

[doodah]

Pah lets be honest - the SC are dithering and contemplating until its time to vote down party lines. I would be genuinely shocked if it doesn't go Trump's way.

I just pray Bader-Ginsburg stays in good health as the GOP vultures are already circling around her seat despite previously screaming bloody murder you can't nominate and appoint a SCOTUS justice in an election year.

 

[Murphy]

Do they always do that? Not having followed American SC rulings IDK how common that is.

 

[chroniclard]

If they vote on party lines it just confirms the corruption Trump has dramatically multiplied in the US. It also just cements Don trying to set himself up as emperor outside the law.

 

[Colonel_Klinck]

There seems to be a thought the SC will say this isn't justiciable so avoiding the question. Problem with that is if Trump loses and they also lose the Senate it leaves them exposed to the incoming administration using that to get away with things the GOP doesn't want anyone but them to get away with. Personally I think it won't go Trump's way. The last time they ruled on something very similar it went 7-0, this would be a massive if they vote the other way.

 

[Werewolf]

Do they always do that? Not having followed American SC rulings IDK how common that is.

They don't always, but Trump and Mitch McConnel have been absolutely stuffing every judicial seat they can (including the Supreme Court) with people that are often by anyone's standards not fit for it, either because they're completely unqualified*, or because like Kavenagh they've got a huge number of outstanding questions about their behaviour and finances (IIRC his financial records suggest he was in debt and living well above high declared means).


*They've been appointing people to life time positions who've never argued in court, and in some cases were not eligible to decide on traffic fines in their home states because they'd got that little experience - think about that for a moment, not experienced enough to oversee traffic fines but being put in a lifetime position in high level courts..

 

[doodah]

Exactly - that's McConnell's legacy (packing the courts) and it will be a golden goose that will keep on giving for a generation.

Gorsuch was propelled into the SC by dark money and we all know about Kavanaugh. The court should be independently appointed but this is America after all.

 

[Mr Badger]

Last nights briefing and his attack upon that reporter was nothing more than a calculated attack.
Firstly attacked for looking Chinese in appearance and then as a woman because let’s face it Trump can’t handle a strong willed woman .
And as usual the TDF crew are here defending this xenophobic, racist piece of orange garbage. Loaded question my ass lol, everything to Trump is like a competition and no they are in no way leading the world in testing lol. That’s what’s the most hilarious thing about that briefing, those big posters saying they are number 1. No you are not, you rank just above Belarus in testing .

Everyone had best sit down because I am going to (sort of) defend Trump here!!!

Although I haven't done a forensic analysis of the exchange (and I've only seen that clip and not anything that took place before) it looked to me as though Trump didn't like her question and so did his default look over there/blame someone else routine, intending to move on quickly to the next reporter. I wouldn't be at all surprised if at that point he had no concept that his telling her to "Ask China" could be construed as personal and relating to her appearance. Then of course things escalated as she stood her ground and Trump seemed to become even more erratic in his exchange with the next female reporter that tried to ask a question before he promptly ran away.

He acted like a spoilt child, but I also agree there was no need for that reporter to bring racism into it. Is he not allowed to mention China at all to her because she’s part Chinese?

Maybe it genuinely felt racist to her, or maybe it was simply just too big a gaff for her to let it pass. We know that Trump hates it when people challenge or stand up to him and he appears to be so insensitive and lacking in empathy that I can believe he didn't initially grasp what he done. A normal person would have apologised for any misunderstanding and clarified their point, but not Trump who seems to have no ability to think on his feet. I can imagine a handler around the corner realising that Trump was losing his grip on proceedings and frantically telling him over an earpiece to walk away before the situation span completely out of control.

 

[Jono8]

I can't see how the Supreme Court can side with Trump.

To do so would basically just makes the President a king and **** all over their constitution.

In once case (the NY AG one) they are arguing that only congress can investigate the president/hold the president to account, yet in the other (the congress one) they are stating that congress cannot investigate him either. Their arguments are bizarre to say the least.

 

[Mr Badger]

I can't see how the Supreme Court can side with Trump.

To do so would basically just makes the President a king and **** all over their constitution.

In once case (the NY AG one) they are arguing that only congress can investigate the president/hold the president to account, yet in the other (the congress one) they are stating that congress cannot investigate him either. Their arguments are bizarre to say the least.

Only if you are looking for logical consistency. Free yourself from that petty constraint and the door will be open for you to embrace the massive hypocrisy of US politics in general and the Republican party in particular. If only you knew the power of the dark side...