What should be the epithet for the new conspiracy kooks?

[RavenSky]

Why? Does an intelligence agency reporting on unsubstantiated rumors substantiate them?

James Comey says "Fuck yeah!".

^^^ that

 

[RavenSky]

We need a label for the deluded propagandists who try to pretend if Russia was not solely responsible for the election outcome, then Russia did not try to influence the election.

Maybe Trumpsuckers? Putinistas? Conservolibertarians?

Skeptics.

I thought you were a scientologist?

 

[Elixir]

Looky here - it's all FAKE NEWS. CNN? Fake news. MSNBC? SUPER Fake news. FOX? Semi-fake news.
The only non-fake news is that which ushereth forth from the mouth of the fat orange oracle.
Oh, wait... even HE says the Russians hacked the US election.

I guess Jason has appointed himself arbiter of fake news.

So, just to establish a principle here: you would be happy to see news agencies report on unsubstantiated opposition research and rumors in future elections?

You mean what CNN did? Yes, of course. That wasn't opposition research, it was just a REAL news agency (as opposed to Breitbart) reporting on intel activity. There is nothing fake about "XYZ Intel agency/agencies are investigating unsubstantiated allegations in a document/dossier that comes from a source they deem credible" if it's true, and it appears to be. Those are THE FACTS, dismal. Trump can scream "FAKE NEWS!" all he wants, but actual "fake news" would be his five+ year binge of lying about Obama's birth certificate being fake, which was not only unsubstantiated, but made up out of whole cloth.

 

[whichphilosophy]

So, just to establish a principle here: you would be happy to see news agencies report on unsubstantiated opposition research and rumors in future elections?

You mean what CNN did? Yes, of course. There is nothing fake about "XYZ Intel agency/agencies are investigating unsubstantiated allegations in a document/dossier that comes from a source they deem credible". Those are THE FACTS, dismal. Trump can scream "FAKE NEWS!" all he wants, but actual "fake news" would be his five+ year binge of lying about Obama's birth certificate being fake, which was not only unsubstantiated, but made up out of whole cloth.

Normally an investigation is done first if the credible source has evidence and not simply infer. Obama's birth certificate is just another example.
Scientists can quote a credible source for research but it would be quickly disregarded, scoffed at and other things until there is clear evidence to review.
Fortunately our legal system does not allow us to arrest someone because a credible source thinks he 'did it.'

 

[Elixir]

You mean what CNN did? Yes, of course. There is nothing fake about "XYZ Intel agency/agencies are investigating unsubstantiated allegations in a document/dossier that comes from a source they deem credible". Those are THE FACTS, dismal. Trump can scream "FAKE NEWS!" all he wants, but actual "fake news" would be his five+ year binge of lying about Obama's birth certificate being fake, which was not only unsubstantiated, but made up out of whole cloth.

Normally an investigation is done first if the credible source has evidence

I guess they have evidence then. You wouldn't know. If not evidence, what else makes them credible? Regardless, it is up to the intel folk to determine what is and is not credible. I'll wager that the uninformed opinion of superstitious foreigners is deemed less credible than the source of the dossier.

 

[bilby]

As usual you can't refute what he says so you launch a personal attack on him.

Pay attention to the world!

He can't. He lives in Mullum, surrounded by aging hippies who moved there in order to get away from the world.

When you are surrounded by out of touch conspiracy theorists and anti-vaxxers who deliberately shut themselves off from civilisation, it's hardly surprising that your worldview is hugely distorted.

My hypothesis is that his Russophillia is a hangover from the fact that the Russians were communists, and therefore the good guys in the eyes of the anti-capitalist settlers of the Northern Rivers. These are not deep thinkers, and they are very slow to change (a fact that's not helped by massive cannabis consumption).

Think how San Francisco would have turned out if the flower children had been few in number and rural in setting - Haight-Ashbury minus any trace of cosmopolitanism.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Normally an investigation is done first if the credible source has evidence

I guess they have evidence then. You wouldn't know. If not evidence, what else makes them credible? Regardless, it is up to the intel folk to determine what is and is not credible. I'll wager that the uninformed opinion of superstitious foreigners is deemed less credible than the source of the dossier.

Since WMD we have the phrase fruit from the poisonous tree. This means the Criminal Intelligence Agency must be more open.
I am open to evidence however that the CIA has been instrumental as one of the key agencies which effectively has prevented numerous terrorist attacks on the USA.

It has a shady past. A new thread will be required.

As for which news is credible. CNN is credible if it produces a credible person who can logically and ideally with evidence support their claims. It works better when no on from CNN comments. CNN's program MkUltra is now

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKUltra

Although the CIA insists that MKULTRA-type experiments have been abandoned, 14-year CIA veteran Victor Marchetti has stated in various interviews that the CIA routinely conducts disinformation campaigns and that CIA mind control research continued. In a 1977 interview, Marchetti specifically called the CIA claim that MKULTRA was abandoned a "cover story

This would be the subject of a whole thread. It recruited Nazi Scientists at the end of the war to conduct mind control experiments (while of course the Russians use its own scientists).
The recent events show that the CIA seems to have conducted a misinformation against both parties during the election. What I mean by misinformation giving inconclusive statements or conducting investigations. This notably started against Clinton (emailgate).



There are thousands of declassified documents (under the Freedom of Act of 1977).

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

We've got a whole thread about how Ann Coulter actually dared to use the number "14", which is apparently a very racist code-word. And I just ran across this.



I think the author of that has given me a possible label for what I'm looking for. The critics who will believe anything about Trump as long as it is bad, they're throwing Trumpertantrums.