• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Trump doesn't fact check - lies about Benghazi wikileak

Not able to change the thread title at work. Seems like Eichenwald jumped the gun on making a direct connection from Russia to Trump, because there was enough time after the Sputnik article being taken down for Trump's team to have gotten the information from a third party source, like twitter. There is no proof so far as to where Trump got it, but Eichenwald can't prove the conspiracy. What Eichenwald did prove was that once again Trump doesn't fact check his sources, like at all.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk
 
There are now a couple hundred people in Wilkes Barre PA who are absolutely sure that Hillary was complicit in the Benghazi embassy deaths, and thousands of people online who those people convinced, like a virus of stupidity.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
There are now a couple hundred people in Wilkes Barre PA who are absolutely sure that Hillary was complicit in the Benghazi embassy deaths, and thousands of people online who those people convinced, like a virus of stupidity.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

people should be less concerned with AI

universal suffrage will be the death of us all
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
There are now a couple hundred people in Wilkes Barre PA who were already absolutely sure that Hillary was complicit in the Benghazi embassy deaths, and thousands of people online who were already convinced, like a virus of stupidity.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

FIFY
 
BobStackFan4Life said:
[h=1]In the Democratic Echo Chamber, Inconvenient Truths Are Recast as Putin Plots[/h]https://theintercept.com/2016/10/11...nconvenient-truths-are-recast-as-putin-plots/
Click to expand...

Ouch.

Literally none of that happened. Or at least there is zero evidence that it did. These are smart, rational people falling for a scam. Why? It’s in part because Twitter fosters this group-think and lack of critical thought — you just click a button and, with little effort, you’ve spread whatever you want people to believe — but it’s also because they’re so convinced of the righteousness of their cause (electing Clinton/defeating Trump) that they have cast all limits and constraints to the side, believing that any narrative or accusation or smear, no matter how false or conspiratorial, is justified in pursuit of it.

But while Donald Trump’s candidacy poses grave dangers, so does group-think righteousness, particularly when it engulfs those with the greatest influence. The problem is that none of this is going to vanish after the election. This election-year machine that has been constructed based on elite unity in support of Clinton — casually dismissing inconvenient facts as fraudulent to make them disappear, branding critics and adversaries as tools or agents of an Enemy Power bent on destroying America — is a powerful one. As is seen here, it is capable of implanting any narrative, no matter how false; demonizing any critic, no matter how baseless; and riling up people to believe they’re under attack.

For a long time, liberals heralded themselves as part of the “reality-based community” and derided conservatives as faith-based victims of “epistemic closure.” The dynamics seen here are anything but byproducts of reason.
 
so wikileaks just happens to want to undo Hillary Clinton but doesn't care about investigating Trump?

hm
 
EatLeadCommie said:
Ouch.

Literally none of that happened. Or at least there is zero evidence that it did. These are smart, rational people falling for a scam. Why? It’s in part because Twitter fosters this group-think and lack of critical thought — you just click a button and, with little effort, you’ve spread whatever you want people to believe — but it’s also because they’re so convinced of the righteousness of their cause (electing Clinton/defeating Trump) that they have cast all limits and constraints to the side, believing that any narrative or accusation or smear, no matter how false or conspiratorial, is justified in pursuit of it.

But while Donald Trump’s candidacy poses grave dangers, so does group-think righteousness, particularly when it engulfs those with the greatest influence. The problem is that none of this is going to vanish after the election. This election-year machine that has been constructed based on elite unity in support of Clinton — casually dismissing inconvenient facts as fraudulent to make them disappear, branding critics and adversaries as tools or agents of an Enemy Power bent on destroying America — is a powerful one. As is seen here, it is capable of implanting any narrative, no matter how false; demonizing any critic, no matter how baseless; and riling up people to believe they’re under attack.

For a long time, liberals heralded themselves as part of the “reality-based community” and derided conservatives as faith-based victims of “epistemic closure.” The dynamics seen here are anything but byproducts of reason.
Click to expand...
This is how you react to an author that miscalculated a timeline of a few hours. This coming from the party that believes Hillary has the FBI Director in her pocket, and who's vice presidential candidate just "won" a debate by denying truthful quotes for 90 minutes. After we consider all that, can we mention that Trump did in fact misquote the wikileak data as fact.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk
 
Agree that Eichenwald played the typically right wing conspiracy card here. But Greenwald is way too quick to excuse Sputnik and Trump, blaming rushed low level staffers at Sputnik and the Trump campaign. Right. Like Trump didn't know exactly what he was doing, and that he was mis-attributing, when he gleefully read the email and attributed it to Blumenthal.
 
myDeaconmyhand said:
This is how you react to an author that miscalculated a timeline of a few hours. This coming from the party that believes Hillary has the FBI Director in her pocket, and who's vice presidential candidate just "won" a debate by denying truthful quotes for 90 minutes. After we consider all that, can we mention that Trump did in fact misquote the wikileak data as fact.

Sent from my SM-N930T using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

It appears he did get his quotes mixed up. What does not appear to be the case, and what the article delved into quite clearly, is that there is some case to be made for a conspiracy involving Assange, Pooty Pute, and Trump. Dude is taking a page out of the RJ handbook and forcing 2 and 2 to equal 5 because it's what he wants to believe. Newsweek dude totally fucked up the same way Trump did.
 
Trump reads Russian planted wiki leak at PA rally

I mean it's still funny -- it's like when North Korea or whatever unknowingly plagiarized completely an onion article as proof of their superiority. . And the onion rolled with it.
 
EatLeadCommie said:
It appears he did get his quotes mixed up. What does not appear to be the case, and what the article delved into quite clearly, is that there is some case to be made for a conspiracy involving Assange, Pooty Pute, and Trump. Dude is taking a page out of the RJ handbook and forcing 2 and 2 to equal 5 because it's what he wants to believe. Newsweek dude totally fucked up the same way Trump did.
Click to expand...
If the timeline had been as short as Eichenwald thought, than there wouldn't have been any legitimate way for Trump to have received that "wikileak" so quickly and have had it ready to announce to a crowd. Instead, the time line was longer than Eichenwald thought, the article was up long enough on Sputnik for it to get picked up on twitter and get a thousand(?) retweets:

"...Of course, this might be seen as just an opportunity to laugh at the incompetence of the Russian hackers and government press—once they realized their error, Sputnik took the article down. But then things got even more bizarre.

This false story was reported only by the Russian-controlled agency (a reference appeared in a Turkish publication, but it was nothing but a link to the Sputnik article). So how did Donald Trump end up advancing the same falsehood put out by Putin’s mouthpiece?...

How did this happen? Who in the Trump campaign was feeding him falsehoods straight from the Kremlin? (The Trump campaign did not respond to a request for comment.)"

Yes, Eichenwald jumped to a paranoid conclusion, but it's clear why he did. That's not an excuse, but we're not all trolling the internet by the minute for foreign mentions of Benghazi.
 
Last edited:
My playbook is THREE top Trump aides have direct contact with Putin and his staff. They have made MILLIONS of dollars helping Putin and have obviously had Trump's tin, idiotic ear. They have eaten at Putin's home, made overtures to his staff and appeared on his propaganda network. These all indisputable facts.

Trump has said what a great leader Putin and has been kissing his ass for over a year. He doesn't even know Putin has invaded and occupied Ukraine's province of Crimea. Trump has called for Putin to hack our government.

The Senate and House Intelligence Committees and the CIA all agree the Russians have been hacking the DNC, WH employees, state voter registration.

There are articles like this showing evidence http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/interne...ackers-attacking-u-s-political-system-n649966

NBC's Richard Engel has reported about meetings in Siberia with a company that is hacking.

Only, blind, brainwashed RW extremists even question that Russia is hacking us to impact the election to help Trump. Why would the Russians do this? Because they know Trump's an idiot whom they can control.

The only things that 2+2 and equal 5 are the synapses in the brains of ELC and other RWers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top