President Donald J. Trump

[Dr. MD MD]

Bucket 3 "Deconstruction of the administration state...

Amen

Absofuckinglutely! Did you hear how the whole crowd cheered that one. 

[Dr. MD MD]

Not being a shill for any side I remain open to VALID criticism of the right. Here's some but it's actually it's a little of both. You know, the system.  :


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zuW_K2TVI-0

[Meister_000]

FLASH 2-23-2017: new Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinds Obama-era guidance directing the Justice Dept to reduce use of Private Prisons.

"Private prison companies invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in Trump’s presidential campaign. Today they got their reward."

[img: Sessions memo 2-23-2017]

[albrecht]

FLASH 2-23-2017: new Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinds Obama-era guidance directing the Justice Dept to reduce use of Private Prisons.

"Private prison companies invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in Trump’s presidential campaign. Today they got their reward."

[img: Sessions memo 2-23-2017]

One of the three issues that I disagree with Trump (or his advisors) on. I don't like private prisons, I don't like the Feds (IRS, FBI, DOJ, etc) or State police ability to seize/confiscate assets before a conviction (except in rare, limited circumstances,) and he is too soft on immigration. But even with his faults he is certainly better than the other choice at the end- Billary.

[TigerLily]

FLASH 2-23-2017: new Attorney General Jeff Sessions rescinds Obama-era guidance directing the Justice Dept to reduce use of Private Prisons.

"Private prison companies invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in Trump’s presidential campaign. Today they got their reward."

[img: Sessions memo 2-23-2017]

*sigh*  So how's the drain the swamp thing going?

[Dr. MD MD]

One of the three issues that I disagree with Trump (or his advisors) on. I don't like private prisons, I don't like the Feds (IRS, FBI, DOJ, etc) or State police ability to seize/confiscate assets before a conviction (except in rare, limited circumstances,) and he is too soft on immigration. But even with his faults he is certainly better than the other choice at the end- Billary.

I agree with you on both points. Filling prisons with people is no way to run an economy.  :

Still better than Hillary though. 

[Dr. MD MD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ggxqxO7ySu4

[Meister_000]

They should really put Bannon out there more often. He's a very well spoken man who makes a lot of sense.

Bannon "makes a lot of sense", attracts you, *if* you have an IQ in the ranges:
- 80 to 89 range is classified as dullness
- 70 to 79 deemed borderline deficiency
- under 70 is marked as feeble-minded

[Dr. MD MD]

Bannon "makes a lot of sense", attracts you, *if* you have an IQ in the ranges:
- 80 to 89 range is classified as dullness
- 70 to 79 deemed borderline deficiency
- under 70 is marked as feeble-minded

Then I'm doing great compared to you because every one of your posts proves yours is much, much lower. 

[Dr. MD MD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tCzjefmAsrw

[Meister_000]

*sigh*  So how's the drain the swamp thing going?

Cesspoolatiously well! 

But it's the Police Statedness and "Making African Americans, Muslims, Mexicans, Protesters and Dissenters, Journalists and Scientists "Free" Again" that makes ya shudder!

[TigerLily]

Cesspoolatiously well! 

But it's the Police Statedness and "Making African Americans, Muslims, Mexicans, Protesters and Dissenters, Journalists and Scientists "Free" Again" that makes ya shudder!

Yep. Living the nightmare

[Dr. MD MD]

Yep. Living the nightmare

It's still funny. 

[Meister_000]

It's still funny. 

Not funny. It's *sick*, that you halfwit brutes take pleasure in *Terrorizing* and Disrupting the greater U.S. population (and I do mean "greater" in all senses of the word) as-well-as all-other Inhabitants of Earth whether on Land, Sea, or Air!  Sick, Perverse, Vengeful, Adolescent -- not Funny.

[Dr. MD MD]

Not funny. It's *sick*, that you halfwit brutes take pleasure in *Terrorizing* and Disrupting the greater U.S. population (and I do mean "greater" in all senses of the word) as-well-as all-other Inhabitants of Earth whether on Land, Sea, or Air!  Sick, Perverse, Vengeful, Adolescent -- not Funny.

Your gross over-exaggerations; that you think engaging in a grown-up conversation is being terrorized and that you further think your feelings represent the great majority of Americans. It's fucking hilarious! Never stop being certifiably insane! 

[mikuthing01]

Not funny. It's *sick*, that you halfwit brutes take pleasure in *Terrorizing* and Disrupting the greater U.S. population (and I do mean "greater" in all senses of the word) as-well-as all-other Inhabitants of Earth whether on Land, Sea, or Air!  Sick, Perverse, Vengeful, Adolescent -- not Funny.

[Kidnostad3]

So enlighten me. Where do you get your news?

I get my news from all the usual places.  The question you should be asking is how do I evaluate the validity of what is being reported. 

The networks are owned by corporations who have a vested interest in controlling the narrative and fostering globalism.  If one fails to see the pro right bias in the reporting of FN and the consistently pro left slant in the tone, tenor and arguments of news and commentary on virtually all other networks, one has given himself over completely to his cognitive biases.  If nothing else, the fact that all the commentators on those leftist news outlets told us that Hilliary was a sure bet right up until election night and that they were visibly crestfallen when she lost says it all.  Moreover, they continue their war against Trump with a vengeance.  The print media is similarly biased with Carlos Slim owning the NYT and Jeff Besos owning the WP.

The political class is solely interested in maintaining the status quo and getting elected/reelected with the help of monied interests.  In other words, politicians are tools of special interests whether it's the Koch Brothers or Soros or any other major financial or commercial entities.  They pay homage to unions and social group advocates ( i.e. NAACP, various Latino groups, the LGBT community, etc.) but the big corporations are their main benefactors and call the shots.

What you, the MSM and pols fighting Trump fail to realize is that it isn't about republicans versus democrats nor is it necessarily about left versus right.  It's about Americans against big government and corporate globalism and for economic nationalism and national integrity and sovereignty.  The steady nit picking and gotchas will not advance the cause of those opposing Trump.  It will just make them look increasingly petty and obstructionist.

How I judge the veracity of reporting is how it comports with what I know to be the facts, the accuracy of reporting when viewed with the benefit of hindsight and what my senses tell me about the person delivering the news or opinion in terms of their level of emotion and body language and how they couch their arguments.  In other words, what my experience with people has taught me over the years.  Most intelligent people do not want to be told what their opinion should be.  Others want to be told.

[Dr. MD MD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jabbcxMyRiE

[albrecht]

I get my news from all the usual places.  The question you should be asking is how do I evaluate the validity of what is being reported. 

The networks are owned by corporations who have a vested interest in controlling the narrative and fostering globalism.  If one fails to see the pro right bias in the reporting of FN and the consistently pro left slant in the tone, tenor and arguments of news and commentary on virtually all other networks, one has given himself over completely to his cognitive biases.  If nothing else, the fact that all the commentators on those leftist news outlets told us that Hilliary was a sure bet right up until she lost and that they were visibly crestfallen when she lost speaks volumes.  Moreover they continue their war against Trump with a vengeance.  The print media is similarly biased with Carlos Slim owning the NYT and Jeff Besos owning the WP.

The political class is solely interested in maintaining the status quo and getting elected/reelected with the help of monied interests.  In other words, politicians are tools of special interests whether it's the Koch Brothers or Soros or any other major financial or commercial entities.  They pay homage to unions and social group advocates. ( i.e. NAACP, various Latino groups, the LGBT community, etc.) but the big corporations are their main benefactors and call the shots.

What you, the MSM and pols fighting Trump fail to realize is that it isn't about republicans versus democrats nor is it necessarily about left versus right.  It's about Americans against big government and corporate globalism and for economic nationalism and national integrity and sovereignty.  The steady nit picking and gotchas will not advance the cause of those opposing Trump.  It will just make them look increasingly petty and obstructionist.

How I judge the veracity of reporting is how it comports with what I know to be the facts, the accuracy of reporting when viewed with the benefit of hindsight and what my senses tell me about the person delivering the news or opinion in terms of their level of emotion and body language and how they couch their arguments.  In other words,  what my experience with people has taught me over the years.

Good comments. The other issue in the 'fake news' stuff is editorial policy and direction/motivation. It doesn't mean it is, necessary, 'fake' but certain papers/sources report certain events but don't report others (or report in a redacted/censored manner.) A quick example to use partisan news organizations as an example. Two stories involving illegals happen around the same time (actually these were separated by years but just for sake of my point.)

Breitbart might report on the 10+ group of undocumented illegal aliens (unclear if all of the suspects were illegal but some had "detainers" put on) here in Austin who gang-raped an 13 year old girl and filmed it on their phones.

CNN might report on the illegal undocumented granted legal status via DREAMER who graduated valedictorian (I think it was that, in any regard it was very high) from a local HS and wants to join the Navy.

Both stories are true, not 'fake news,' but the editor, producer, or reporters decide "let's run with this story" or "not cover that story" because it will attract our readers or because it fits my politics, or whatever. And even choice of words change between papers in attempts to manipulate the story (undocumented "feels" a lot better, than "illegal." Undocumented seems like I forgot my wallet leaving the house this morning. Illegal feels like purposely breaking the law.) Or news organizations, especially national ones, will ignore certain details, lest they offend, or for political purposes. So they substitute words like "youth" or mention a "immigration detainer," usually buried in the article, instead of teenage black person or illegal alien.

[Kidnostad3]

Good comments. The other issue in the 'fake news' stuff is editorial policy and direction/motivation. It doesn't mean it is, necessary, 'fake' but certain papers/sources report certain events but don't report others (or report in a redacted/censored manner.) A quick example to use partisan news organizations as an example. Two stories involving illegals happen around the same time (actually these were separated by years but just for sake of my point.)

Breitbart might report on the 10+ group of undocumented illegal aliens (unclear if all of the suspects were illegal but some had "detainers" put on) here in Austin who gang-raped an 13 year old girl and filmed it on their phones.

CNN might report on the illegal undocumented granted legal status via DREAMER who graduated valedictorian (I think it was that, in any regard it was very high) from a local HS and wants to join the Navy.

Both stories are true, not 'fake news,' but the editor, producer, or reporters decide "let's run with this story" or "not cover that story" because it will attract our readers or because it fits my politics, or whatever. And even choice of words change between papers in attempts to manipulate the story (undocumented "feels" a lot better, than "illegal." Undocumented seems like I forgot my wallet leaving the house this morning. Illegal feels like purposely breaking the law.) Or news organizations, especially national ones, will ignore certain details, lest they offend, or for political purposes. So they substitute words like "youth" or mention a "immigration detainer," usually buried in the article, instead of teenage black person or illegal alien.

Concur.

[albrecht]

Warning: witches are casting spells against Trump (and anybody who voted for or supports him.) 
https://extranewsfeed.com/a-spell-to-bind-donald-trump-and-all-those-who-abet-him-february-24th-mass-ritual-51f3d94f62f4#.imos5l8xw
ps: will Heather counter this with her magic as a Trump supporter, per Art's instructions?

[Dr. MD MD]

Good comments. The other issue in the 'fake news' stuff is editorial policy and direction/motivation. It doesn't mean it is, necessary, 'fake' but certain papers/sources report certain events but don't report others (or report in a redacted/censored manner.) A quick example to use partisan news organizations as an example. Two stories involving illegals happen around the same time (actually these were separated by years but just for sake of my point.)

Breitbart might report on the 10+ group of undocumented illegal aliens (unclear if all of the suspects were illegal but some had "detainers" put on) here in Austin who gang-raped an 13 year old girl and filmed it on their phones.

CNN might report on the illegal undocumented granted legal status via DREAMER who graduated valedictorian (I think it was that, in any regard it was very high) from a local HS and wants to join the Navy.

Both stories are true, not 'fake news,' but the editor, producer, or reporters decide "let's run with this story" or "not cover that story" because it will attract our readers or because it fits my politics, or whatever. And even choice of words change between papers in attempts to manipulate the story (undocumented "feels" a lot better, than "illegal." Undocumented seems like I forgot my wallet leaving the house this morning. Illegal feels like purposely breaking the law.) Or news organizations, especially national ones, will ignore certain details, lest they offend, or for political purposes. So they substitute words like "youth" or mention a "immigration detainer," usually buried in the article, instead of teenage black person or illegal alien.

Sure, I think what you're talking about is often referred to as tone or slant. It's just another way of framing facts in a certain way to support the conclusions you want to draw out in the reader's/viewer's mind. It's this kind of political crap that really muddies the water but I suppose it will always be there to some degree. It's up to us to weigh the evidence and draw our own conclusions now.

[Dr. MD MD]

Warning: witches are casting spells against Trump (and anybody who voted for or supports him.) 
https://extranewsfeed.com/a-spell-to-bind-donald-trump-and-all-those-who-abet-him-february-24th-mass-ritual-51f3d94f62f4#.imos5l8xw
ps: will Heather counter this with her magic as a Trump supporter, per Art's instructions?

She better or Art may receive another visit from the stalker. 

[GravitySucks]

Good comments. The other issue in the 'fake news' stuff is editorial policy and direction/motivation. It doesn't mean it is, necessary, 'fake' but certain papers/sources report certain events but don't report others (or report in a redacted/censored manner.) A quick example to use partisan news organizations as an example. Two stories involving illegals happen around the same time (actually these were separated by years but just for sake of my point.)

Breitbart might report on the 10+ group of undocumented illegal aliens (unclear if all of the suspects were illegal but some had "detainers" put on) here in Austin who gang-raped an 13 year old girl and filmed it on their phones.

CNN might report on the illegal undocumented granted legal status via DREAMER who graduated valedictorian (I think it was that, in any regard it was very high) from a local HS and wants to join the Navy.

Both stories are true, not 'fake news,' but the editor, producer, or reporters decide "let's run with this story" or "not cover that story" because it will attract our readers or because it fits my politics, or whatever. And even choice of words change between papers in attempts to manipulate the story (undocumented "feels" a lot better, than "illegal." Undocumented seems like I forgot my wallet leaving the house this morning. Illegal feels like purposely breaking the law.) Or news organizations, especially national ones, will ignore certain details, lest they offend, or for political purposes. So they substitute words like "youth" or mention a "immigration detainer," usually buried in the article, instead of teenage black person or illegal alien.

I have seen one of these that was more recent with more sources, but can't find it right now.

I think AP has gone further left. They have a tendency to post anything they get in a press release form the DNC or Media Matters.

And the last one I had seen had CNN much more to the left.

[Meister_000]

Do not see this.

[Kidnostad3]

Warning: witches are casting spells against Trump (and anybody who voted for or supports him.) 
https://extranewsfeed.com/a-spell-to-bind-donald-trump-and-all-those-who-abet-him-february-24th-mass-ritual-51f3d94f62f4#.imos5l8xw
ps: will Heather counter this with her magic as a Trump supporter, per Art's instructions?

You mean a witch like in Macbeth:  "Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn, and caldron bubble. Fillet of a fenny snake, In the caldron boil and bake; Eye of newt, and toe of frog, Wool of bat, and ...".   Now you're talking.   I was wondering when they would roll out the big guns. 

[albrecht]

Do not see this.

Who wasn't aware of the Exxon deal that failed due to sanctions or the pipeline stuff? I hope we come to some type of rapprochement with Russia and some of the sanctions gets lifted and Exxon, and others, get to exploit the Russian Arctic and other areas (and do so in a safer manner as only American and some European have the technology and "know how" to do so) and also so that Europe has cheaper and more reliable flow of gas and less effected by politics. Also mean less energy reliance on crazy, corrupt Muslim countries and we can stop our support/wars designed to try to stabilize (or, if you are really a conspiracy theorist, destabilize) the region. A win for everyone: shareholders, citizens, consumers, environmentalists, troops, etc!

[Kidnostad3]

Do not see this.

Rest assured that I won't.  You've become legeandary for your nonsensical ravings and bull shit articles.

[Dr. MD MD]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MKGATYxbqq4

[albrecht]

You mean a witch like in Macbeth:  "Double, double toil and trouble; Fire burn, and caldron bubble. Fillet of a fenny snake, In the caldron boil and bake; Eye of newt, and toe of frog, Wool of bat, and ...".   Now you're talking.   I was wondering when they would roll out the big guns.

Ha, yeah. The last time they tried the more "new-agey" type of witchcraft and it wasn't that successful. Remember when they "cleansed" the White House from Bush's mojo before Obama, and his witch voodoo doctor mother-in-law, moved in? They need to get back to the basics what with eyes of newt, etc.