President Donald J. Trump

in reality, all of this has been a total load of old bollocks
User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 25868
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby toomanyhatz » 01 Oct 2017, 01:07

Jimbo wrote: "purveyor[s] of sloppy, biased reporting"


Pretty much describes Parry perfectly.
The Great Defector wrote:I still stand by if other people are doing as opposition or its just an everyday day thing, doesn't mean you have to or should do. Work away like, I'm just get your problem.


1959 1963 1965 1981 1988 2017?

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 13598
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 01 Oct 2017, 01:14

toomanyhatz wrote:
Jimbo wrote: "purveyor[s] of sloppy, biased reporting"


Pretty much describes Parry perfectly.


One example if you please.
I love you.

User avatar
toomanyhatz
Power-mad king of the WCC
Posts: 25868
Joined: 07 Apr 2005, 00:01
Location: Just east of where Charlie Parker went to do some relaxin'

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby toomanyhatz » 01 Oct 2017, 01:31

I've given you tons of examples in the past, but since he promotes the narrative you want to believe, you choose to believe him despite it.

In this article, let's start with how many times he says any ads were 'insignificant.' Basing that on percentage of Facebook's total revenue, which is thoroughly irrelevant.

Or how about "another way to have framed this story is that powerful politicians who could severely harm Facebook’s business model were getting in the face of Facebook executives and essentially demanding that they come up with something to support the Democratic Party’s theory of “Russian meddling.” - a) I don't think Facebook's business model is in any danger, and b) "essentially demanding" is some pretty harsh words since nobody at Facebook seems to be saying that at all.

Maybe 'sloppy' is the wrong word - he certainly did research - but it's his usual slant of telling us what to conclude based on the (lack of!) facts.
The Great Defector wrote:I still stand by if other people are doing as opposition or its just an everyday day thing, doesn't mean you have to or should do. Work away like, I'm just get your problem.


1959 1963 1965 1981 1988 2017?

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 13598
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 01 Oct 2017, 01:47

toomanyhatz wrote:I've given you tons of examples in the past, but since he promotes the narrative you want to believe, you choose to believe him despite it.

In this article, let's start with how many times he says any ads were 'insignificant.' Basing that on percentage of Facebook's total revenue, which is thoroughly irrelevant.

Or how about "another way to have framed this story is that powerful politicians who could severely harm Facebook’s business model were getting in the face of Facebook executives and essentially demanding that they come up with something to support the Democratic Party’s theory of “Russian meddling.” - a) I don't think Facebook's business model is in any danger, and b) "essentially demanding" is some pretty harsh words since nobody at Facebook seems to be saying that at all.

Maybe 'sloppy' is the wrong word - he certainly did research - but it's his usual slant of telling us what to conclude based on the (lack of!) facts.


Thanks T! I see your point. However, as an investigative journalist I, as a news consumer, appreciate Parry's doggedness and his asking/posing tough and sometimes only tangentially relevant questions which these papers of note seem to fail to ask themselves. There is a petition going around proposing that Parry be made the editor of the NYT. Then we'd see some afflicted comfortables.
I love you.

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 22306
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 01 Oct 2017, 05:46

Thankfully that petition has zero chance of success.

I got through most of that shitty Parry article. Generally I'll give an article my full attention, but he had meandered so far from the subject at the point I stopped that it seemed like a whole other article.

But as for the part that pertained to the Post article - it's a pretty fact-free ride. He cites no other sources, so all he's really supposedly doing is attempting to poke holes in the Post article. He accuses them of a few sins of omission, but then commits several of his own. For instance, he ignores the fact that the post quotes an account of the Obama/Zuckerberg conversations as saying that Obama only inquired about fake news, not other Russian meddling. Parry ignores that and just makes accusations to the contrary with no basis.

He also leaves out the fact that Facebook contacted the FBI about suspicious Russian activity in June of 2016. Apparently Parry didn't find that to be a significant data point. :roll:

Finally - I'd love to have a dollar for every time Parry attributes motivations to someone he's talking about (almost always without a single source attribution to back it up). It's beyond laughable that he's lecturing anyone else on their journalistic acumen.

The fact that he actually sidetracks the whole piece to talk about the "failing Democratic brand" and then bizarrely litigates things like the Clapper memo, supposed "false claims" about RT, and media portrayal of the invasion of Ukraine ought to make anyone with an IQ over 12 suspicious.

Jimbo...I'll challenge you to show me where Parry sources this section of that article:

"The Democratic leaders wanted this finding as an explanation for Hillary Clinton’s stunning defeat, rather than going through the painful process of examining why the party has steadily lost ground in white working-class areas across the country."

Note that he doesn't say, "they give the appearance of wanting...". Nope. He reports his opinion as if it were fact. And he does so in an article in which he condescendingly states that the WAPO writers are guilty of violating the reporting standard of "show, don't tell" by not giving an example of extreme political speech.

Anyhow - let me know when you've found his source for that quote.
Marginal BCB contributor since 2006

Image

User avatar
Snarfyguy
Dominated by the Obscure
Posts: 51939
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:04
Location: New York

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Snarfyguy » 01 Oct 2017, 07:07

I think we're talking about apples and oranges here.

We understand politics through the filter of the news media and Jimbo wants to talk about how that's all fucked up, with these biased news sources.

I'm trying to talk about the viability of the presidency, which is another matter, that's necessarily yoked to Jimbo's but which is still a distinct thing. The rest is media studies, which is great, but again I make a distinction in topic.
Jimbo wrote:In some ways, personality-wise, Trump and I are similar.

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 13598
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 01 Oct 2017, 09:29

Davey the Fat Boy wrote:Thankfully that petition has zero chance of success.

I got through most of that shitty Parry article. Generally I'll give an article my full attention, but he had meandered so far from the subject at the point I stopped that it seemed like a whole other article.

But as for the part that pertained to the Post article - it's a pretty fact-free ride. He cites no other sources, so all he's really supposedly doing is attempting to poke holes in the Post article. He accuses them of a few sins of omission, but then commits several of his own. For instance, he ignores the fact that the post quotes an account of the Obama/Zuckerberg conversations as saying that Obama only inquired about fake news, not other Russian meddling. Parry ignores that and just makes accusations to the contrary with no basis.

He also leaves out the fact that Facebook contacted the FBI about suspicious Russian activity in June of 2016. Apparently Parry didn't find that to be a significant data point. :roll:

Finally - I'd love to have a dollar for every time Parry attributes motivations to someone he's talking about (almost always without a single source attribution to back it up). It's beyond laughable that he's lecturing anyone else on their journalistic acumen.

The fact that he actually sidetracks the whole piece to talk about the "failing Democratic brand" and then bizarrely litigates things like the Clapper memo, supposed "false claims" about RT, and media portrayal of the invasion of Ukraine ought to make anyone with an IQ over 12 suspicious.

Jimbo...I'll challenge you to show me where Parry sources this section of that article:

"The Democratic leaders wanted this finding as an explanation for Hillary Clinton’s stunning defeat, rather than going through the painful process of examining why the party has steadily lost ground in white working-class areas across the country."

Note that he doesn't say, "they give the appearance of wanting...". Nope. He reports his opinion as if it were fact. And he does so in an article in which he condescendingly states that the WAPO writers are guilty of violating the reporting standard of "show, don't tell" by not giving an example of extreme political speech.

Anyhow - let me know when you've found his source for that quote.



"The Democratic leaders wanted this finding as an explanation for Hillary Clinton’s stunning defeat, rather than going through the painful process of examining why the party has steadily lost ground in white working-class areas across the country."


Aside from making sense considering her loss and the Dem's continuing bumbling cluelessness in the wake her loss, as well as losses all over the country, maybe Parry did indulge in some editorializing of his own. I'd bet if I could ask him personally for documentation he come across with something but I'm too dumb to find it on my own, though I just spent the last half hour looking. So you got me, Davey.


Whereas with this:

The fact that he actually sidetracks the whole piece to talk about the "failing Democratic brand" and then bizarrely litigates things like the Clapper memo, supposed "false claims" about RT, and media portrayal of the invasion of Ukraine ought to make anyone with an IQ over 12 suspicious.

Jimbo...I'll challenge you to show me where Parry sources this section of that article:


Parry has been the Ukraine true story exposer since Victoria Nuland was caught on the "Yats is the guy…" recording demonstrating blatant US meddling in another country's politics. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26079957 (I hope you can see the hypocrisy there.)

As for RT, I'd like to challenge you to show me where, aside from being critical of many US policies, where has RT put out any "fake news" items. I find RT to be the lefty-ish news station I'd hope MSNBC should have been. That it was RT which took on the task of hosting the third party presidential candidates' debate is laudatory. If that is interference in US politics give me more interference!

And Clapper is a liar.
Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) asked Clapper, “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?” Clapper replied, “No sir … not wittingly.”
I love you.

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 22306
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 01 Oct 2017, 17:11

The substance of those arguments isn't the issue. It's the fact that he tossed them in to an article that was supposedly about the WAPO piece.

He throws in the kitchen sink to distract from the fact that he has no evidence to support his central argument. He's simply suggesting that one could impose all of the same inferences he's outlining. Then he goes back and reinforces the larger narrative he wants you to accept about the Democratic Party, the Russians, etc. It's not a news story, and it isn't even presented as opinion.

Look again - the piece is almost completely evidence-free. It exists just to run guys like you over their talking points, lest you should hear about the Facebook story and begin to waver. But he won't stop at just attempting to poke a few holes in that story...he needs to keep you in line by running you through his litany of Russia-related arguments to reinforce your overall thinking.

That's propaganda. Go back and look at the piece line by line and start questioning where that line is coming from (regardless of whether you agree with it or not). Hold him to a journalistic standard. If you do that, you'll realize quickly that this guy is a false idol.
Marginal BCB contributor since 2006

Image

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 13598
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 01 Oct 2017, 23:08

I love you.

User avatar
Davey the Fat Boy
Posts: 22306
Joined: 05 Jan 2006, 02:55
Location: Applebees

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Davey the Fat Boy » 01 Oct 2017, 23:50

Ugh. Now that idiot?
Marginal BCB contributor since 2006

Image

User avatar
Sneelock
Posts: 9776
Joined: 19 Nov 2011, 23:56
Location: Lincoln Head City

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Sneelock » 02 Oct 2017, 02:47

Not the Onion.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrat ... ne-victims

President Trump on Sunday dedicated a golf trophy to the victims of recent powerful storms that tore through Texas, Florida and Puerto Rico, all the while defending the government's response to the disasters.
"You can bet your last money it’s ALL gonna be a stone-gas, honey!"

User avatar
Jimbo
Posts: 13598
Joined: 26 Dec 2009, 21:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Jimbo » 02 Oct 2017, 03:40

Sneelock wrote:Not the Onion.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrat ... ne-victims

President Trump on Sunday dedicated a golf trophy to the victims of recent powerful storms that tore through Texas, Florida and Puerto Rico, all the while defending the government's response to the disasters.



The funniest part is the girl on the video reading his words verbatim, and it isn't like a comedian who imitates his voice but a dry sober reading of his stupid words. Hilarious.
I love you.

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 37299
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: 22,300 miles above the Earth

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Count Machuki » 02 Oct 2017, 05:09

I keep coming here to see if anybody else is as fucking flabbergasted at the Puerto Rico response as I.
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 37299
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: 22,300 miles above the Earth

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Count Machuki » 02 Oct 2017, 05:09

Sneelock wrote:Not the Onion.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrat ... ne-victims

President Trump on Sunday dedicated a golf trophy to the victims of recent powerful storms that tore through Texas, Florida and Puerto Rico, all the while defending the government's response to the disasters.


:x :x :x
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 37299
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: 22,300 miles above the Earth

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Count Machuki » 02 Oct 2017, 05:10

I actually said, what, Friday night to my wife I says, "if Trump's on the golf course tomorrow I will lose my shit"

Haven't seen my shit since Saturday morning.
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

Six String
Posts: 19929
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:22

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Six String » 02 Oct 2017, 05:12

Sneelock wrote:Not the Onion.

http://thehill.com/homenews/administrat ... ne-victims

President Trump on Sunday dedicated a golf trophy to the victims of recent powerful storms that tore through Texas, Florida and Puerto Rico, all the while defending the government's response to the disasters.


Talk about a guy that just doesn't get it.

User avatar
COLIN LAND
hounds people off the board
Posts: 13620
Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 23:21
Location: pursued by the enraged queen

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby COLIN LAND » 02 Oct 2017, 06:14

Count Machuki wrote:I actually said, what, Friday night to my wife I says, "if Trump's on the golf course tomorrow I will lose my shit"

Haven't seen my shit since Saturday morning.


:)

I don't know what to say about Trump these days, it seems such a waste of time because my reaction to pretty much everything he does or says is the same every time: he's an ungracious arrogant piece of shit and I'm (still) shocked to see him holding such a high position and making such a mess of everything. But everyone here thinks the same, right?
Bride Of Sea Of Tunes wrote:
The Modernist wrote:
Your essay needs to be in before 5.00 tomorrow Dougie.


:D :D :D

One of the finest replies in BCB's history.

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 37299
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: 22,300 miles above the Earth

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Count Machuki » 02 Oct 2017, 14:40

I know just what you mean.
Really, this could be permanent status update/response to this thread:
[H]e's an ungracious arrogant piece of shit and I'm (still) shocked to see him holding such a high position and making such a mess of everything.
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D

User avatar
Still Baron
Diamond Geezer
Posts: 41897
Joined: 18 Jul 2003, 05:38
Location: Impregnable Citadel of Technicality

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Still Baron » 02 Oct 2017, 15:07

Count Machuki wrote:I keep coming here to see if anybody else is as fucking flabbergasted at the Puerto Rico response as I.


I'm not flabbergasted in the slightest. Entirely predictable. And outrageous, of course.
take5_d_shorterer wrote:If John Bonham simply didn't listen to enough Tommy Johnson or Blind Willie Mctell, that's his doing.

User avatar
Count Machuki
BCB Cup Champion 2013
Posts: 37299
Joined: 11 Jun 2005, 15:28
Location: 22,300 miles above the Earth

Re: President Donald J. Trump

Postby Count Machuki » 02 Oct 2017, 16:01

Still Baron wrote:
Count Machuki wrote:I keep coming here to see if anybody else is as fucking flabbergasted at the Puerto Rico response as I.


I'm not flabbergasted in the slightest. Entirely predictable. And outrageous, of course.


Yeah, word choice, I guess. I could have said "distraught"
:(
Let U be the set of all united sets, K be the set of the kids and D be the set of things divided.
Then it follows that ∀ k ∈ K: K ∈ U ⇒ k ∉ D