Who lies more --- the Left or the Right?

[Jimmy Higgins]

But WikiLeaks is not an American political entity, so they don't align with either the left or the right on this topic. However, some of the information they revealed is relevant to the discussion.

The discussion was about who lies more, the right or the left.. because THE LAPTOP! A thing that had wild accusations made regarding the content on it. Even the story about how it came about was incredibly fishy. That the laptop exists was a bit surprising. That the laptop didn't include any of the remarkably illegal content accused isn't. That someone OP'd a thread about who lies more the left or the right (cough... the left! the left!) because of the laptop... well it really isn't surprising, but it would have been decades ago.

It is well established that Republicans and Democrats bend the truth, mildly fib, and make with some haymakers. That isn't in dispute. What I would consider in dispute is how in the heck this is even remotely important relative to Trump and the incriminating and/or costly lies he has told. Anyone remember Fox News and Dominion? Giuliani and the poll workers? Several political folks that are going to trial for the fraudulent state paperwork regarding being electors that they weren't? The state of Arizona and the bamboo? All of the convicted and January 6th?

It isn't remotely a contest. It shouldn't even be a conversation! Yes, Dems and Repubs lie. Trump is neither. Trump isn't a liberal, isn't a conservative. He is a habitual liar who speaks the truth on so rare occasions that him saying the sun rises in the east leads to a Snopes fact check.

 

[Gospel]

Jeepers, I believe I made that point earlier. When I provided an example, you rushed to defend Bush, calling it (Bush lying about the mission being accomplished) arrogance. Now, you're throwing the same point back at me as if I hadn't considered it before. I think I need a drink.

 

[Bomb#20]

Speaking of discrepancy with public presentation, anybody remember "Straight Talk Express" man?

I’m proud of the job she’s doing. And I believe that she will play a major role in the politics in America. Americans like her whether the New York Times and others happen to like that or not.​

Yeah, that was McCain's sincere opinion of Palin, sure it was.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Russia's direct involvement with Trump is unknown, though complicated with the fact that they did have that secret meeting at Trump Tower with people linked to the Kremlin.

The same guy who said "Russia, if you’re listening — I hope you are able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let’s see if that happens."?

We're not sure about THAT guy's (EDIT) involvement?

We almost know without a doubt that Putin and Wikileaks were working together or at least allied. ...

^^^^ That ^^^^

What puzzles me, though, is why so many Americans seem to blame Assange and Pootie for undermining trust in the electoral process by airing the DNC's dirty laundry, instead of blaming the DNC for undermining trust in the electoral process by having that dirty laundry in the first place.

Because they didn’t also air the RNC’s dirty laundry.

 

[Shadowy Man]

Russia's direct involvement with Trump is unknown, though complicated with the fact that they did have that secret meeting at Trump Tower with people linked to the Kremlin.

The same guy who said "Russia, if you’re listening — I hope you are able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let’s see if that happens."?

We're not sure about THAT guy's (EDIT) involvement?

We almost know without a doubt that Putin and Wikileaks were working together or at least allied. ...

^^^^ That ^^^^

What puzzles me, though, is why so many Americans seem to blame Assange and Pootie for undermining trust in the electoral process by airing the DNC's dirty laundry, instead of blaming the DNC for undermining trust in the electoral process by having that dirty laundry in the first place.

Because they didn’t also air the RNC’s dirty laundry.

Given Trump's recent visit to the Capitol, it's unclear that the RNC isn't simply wearing its dirty laundry for all to see.

 

[Patooka]

If random anti-Trump channels on YouTube are considered "The Left", let me give an example of "The Left" lying.

Go to YouTube and search for "Trսmp РООРЅ НІМЅЕLF Lіvе оn ЅТАGЕ, СRОWD RЕАСТЅ ІΝ НОRRОR." You'll get several hits pointing to videos with that title, but apparently NONE of them mention any POOP, whether on stage or not, nor are any crowds reacting in HORROR.

Do these lies get an exemption, on the grounds that the Liar is just hoping for a few pennies' worth of extra click-bait? I'd love to see these Liars pay a price, but am afraid that some "on The Left" are happy to see the lying click-bait even when they realize it is a lie.

Funny that you mention that...

Watch: Did Joe Biden poop himself at today's D-Day ceremony? Critics claim yes...

Here we go again,

www.louderwithcrowder.com

 

[ideologyhunter]

Here's how much you can rely on a Republican to tell it to you straight.
Ted Cruz:
"Trump alleges that my dad was involved in assassinating JFK. Now, let's be clear. This is nuts...this is just kooky."
"Donald Trump, you're a sniveling coward."
"I'm gonna tell you what I really think of Donald Trump. The man is a pathological liar. He doesn't know the difference between truth and lies. He lies (with) practically every word that comes out of his mouth, and in a pattern I think is straight out of a psychology textbook, his response is to accuse everybody else of lying."
"The man is utterly amoral."
I couldn't have said it better, Ted. But who's lying now?
Marco Rubio:
"He's a con artist. He runs on this idea he is fighting for the little guy, but he has spent his entire career sticking it to the little guy."
Lindsey Graham:
"The more you know about Donald Trump, the less likely you are to vote for him,"
"You know how you make America great again? You tell Donald Trump to go to hell."
"He's a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot. He doesn't represent my party."
You left out the fact that he's a sadistic, misogynist, authoritarian dunce, Lindsey. But he is hard to describe in one sentence.
J.D. Vance:
"My God, what an idiot."
"I go back and forth between thinking Trump might be a cynical asshole like Nixon...or that he might be America's Hitler."
I go back and forth between thinking you might be a cynical asshole, JD, or that you might definitively be one. Thanks for giving my state a low-IQ image.

Summarizing, for time/space limitations: Mc Turtle on Trump being 'morally and practically' responsible for January 6; Paul Ryan describing Trump's comments on a "Mexican" (actually Indiana-born) judge as "textbook racism"; Tucker Carlson on Trump as "a demonic force, a destroyer". I didn't know whether to include Rex Tillerson's appraisal of Trump as a "fucking moron", because I don't know if Tillerson currently has warm, appreciative things to say about Orangey.

;

 

[Gospel]

Speaking of discrepancy with public presentation, anybody remember "Straight Talk Express" man?

I’m proud of the job she’s doing. And I believe that she will play a major role in the politics in America. Americans like her whether the New York Times and others happen to like that or not.​

Yeah, that was McCain's sincere opinion of Palin, sure it was.

I liked McCain. I think his problem was running against the wrong democrat.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Speaking of discrepancy with public presentation, anybody remember "Straight Talk Express" man?

I’m proud of the job she’s doing. And I believe that she will play a major role in the politics in America. Americans like her whether the New York Times and others happen to like that or not.​

Yeah, that was McCain's sincere opinion of Palin, sure it was.

I liked McCain. I think his problem was running against the wrong democrat.

Keating Five?

Also, McCain didn't lose simply because of Obama. He lost mainly because the GOP was kind of trashed by 2008. McCain probably would have won in 2000.... had he not had had a mixed raced child.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

But where the lying comes in is that the Republican's think we are always at the right side of the curve (which we aren't) and the Democrats assume we are always at the left side of the parabola (which we may not be). Then there is confusion about who or what is really wealthy. The Democrats would say anyone making 6 figures is wealthy but the Republicans would say you have to be a billionaire to be wealthy.

If we are on the left side of the curve government revenue will have a positive relationship to the tax rate. If we are on the right it will have a negative relationship. In practice we see a positive relationship.

 

[Patooka]

It's pretty interesting Lumpenproletariat hasn't returned since starting this thread...

 

[Gospel]

Probably because it didn't turn out to benefit the political party he expected? I could be wrong.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What puzzles me, though, is why so many Americans seem to blame Assange and Pootie for undermining trust in the electoral process by airing the DNC's dirty laundry, instead of blaming the DNC for undermining trust in the electoral process by having that dirty laundry in the first place.

Whistleblowers make everyone feel uncomfortable. You never know who'll get blown next.

Assange pretended to be a whistleblower.

Exposing wrongdoing is one thing, but he went a lot farther than that.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Yeah, he was just the publisher through WikiLeaks, which did a great job exposing how the DNC operated behind the scenes. I consider the discrepancy between how the DNC operates privately and how they present themselves publicly to be deceptive. In other words, they lie.

Yes, the DNC wouldn't pass a purity test. Wikileaks is selective with what they post. Wikileaks did a good job posting stolen documents by the Russians in order to help Trump with his pussy grabbing claims. They weren't on any remotely noble mission of trying to clean up politics in America (or the West).

I think they started out with noble intentions but were subverted by Moscow.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Yeah, he was just the publisher through WikiLeaks, which did a great job exposing how the DNC operated behind the scenes. I consider the discrepancy between how the DNC operates privately and how they present themselves publicly to be deceptive. In other words, they lie.

Yes, the DNC wouldn't pass a purity test. Wikileaks is selective with what they post. Wikileaks did a good job posting stolen documents by the Russians in order to help Trump with his pussy grabbing claims. They weren't on any remotely noble mission of trying to clean up politics in America (or the West).

I think they started out with noble intentions but were subverted by Moscow.

Even back in the days of W, they seemed to have less of a noble agenda.

 

[JohnG]

I really like the voter fraud lie—you know, the one that's trying to destabilize their own country by undermining trust in the electoral process. That one Those two definitely should have won the Pulitzer Prize for Fiction.

Good example. FIFY. The Dems and Reps were in on that lie up to their necks. The endless claims that Russia had hacked the 2016 election, complete with co-opting uncritical friendly media, were a playbook for Trump's lies after 2020.

I thought the Russian hacks were confirmed by U.S. intelligence agencies.

Claims of hacking the 2020 election were by Trump et al. The 2016 wasn't hacked by Russia, but they certainly were trying to influence it with actual fake news and the like on social media. Russia's direct involvement with Trump is unknown, though complicated with the fact that they did have that secret meeting at Trump Tower with people linked to the Kremlin.

^^^^ That ^^^^

Good example. FIFY. The Dems and Reps were in on that lie up to their necks. The endless claims that Russia had hacked the 2016 election, complete with co-opting uncritical friendly media, were a playbook for Trump's lies after 2020.

Senate Intel Releases Election Security Findings in First Volume of Bipartisan Russia Report

^^^^ That ^^^^

Key Findings and Recommendations:

The Russian government directed extensive activity against U.S. election infrastructure. The Committee found the activity directed at the state and local level began in at least 2014 and carried into at least 2017. The Committee has seen no evidence that any votes were changed or that any voting machines were manipulated.

^^^^ That ^^^^

And yet in spite of that, a large fraction of the U.S. population, including intelligent and educated people, believed that Russian hackers had remotely accessed voting machines and altered the vote count. Why is not a mystery. An awful lot of news reports from that period in respected media outlets gave that impression by artful word choice. "Tampering" should have won the 2017 word-of-the-year award.

I’m not so sure that it wasn’t more than fringe voices (I heard zero) saying that the polls were hacked. I heard it discussed that it should be investigated in light of the Mueller investigation - but the mainstream and left leaning (pod save America) voices were going with the claim that they were not hacked.

The DNC server was hacked, one spinoff of that was Q-anon. The satanic panic crowd moved on to this lunacy. People were so desperate to find incriminating stuff that they convinced themselves that Cheese pizza is code for child pornography.

 

[Bomb#20]

Speaking of discrepancy with public presentation, anybody remember "Straight Talk Express" man?
...

I liked McCain. I think his problem was running against the wrong democrat.

I liked him in 2000, when I still bought his "maverick" persona. He was the guy willing to stand up to the religious right. Then he lost to Bush, figured out appealing to America doesn't matter if you aren't the candidate and you don't get to be the candidate if you don't win the primary, and then spent the next eight years sucking up to the religious right. Oh well...

 

[ideologyhunter]

I'll never vote Repub for any office in any election -- they've gone over to the dark side -- but McCain does look pretty good on a number of counts:
-lending his name, energy, and political capital to the movement to put limits on campaign donations -- another great lost cause
-shutting down that hateful hag at his town hall who wanted to rant about Obama being Muslim -- I'm sure she's happy with DJT.
-defying Trump on the vote to scuttle the ACA
-letting it be known that he didn't want Trump at his funeral
I guess that balances his creation of Palin as a national phenom, especially since she's now a has-been. (He must've been smart enough to realize how completely unfit she would have been to step into the role of President, once he got to know her.)

 

[Bomb#20]

We almost know without a doubt that Putin and Wikileaks were working together or at least allied. ...

^^^^ That ^^^^

What puzzles me, though, is why so many Americans seem to blame Assange and Pootie for undermining trust in the electoral process by airing the DNC's dirty laundry, instead of blaming the DNC for undermining trust in the electoral process by having that dirty laundry in the first place.

Because they didn’t also air the RNC’s dirty laundry.

See, this is exactly what I'm on about. They didn't also air the RNC's dirty laundry. Well, so what?

Assange isn't asking America to put him in charge of anything. And it's not as though when Slate catches Trump doing something crooked we go all "Why didn't you investigate Biden too?" We rely on journalists to expose corrupt politicians to sunlight, and journalists have their own biases, and if we demanded viewpoint neutrality from investigative reporters the way we demand it from judges then the 2% of journalists who are unbiased would have time to uncover 2% of the corruption that's currently getting exposed. Is that really what we want?

I'm not questioning the leak, I'm questioing the strategic timing of said leaks to cover Trump when bad stuff was coming out on him.

Even back when Assange was embarrassing the W Admin, I was skeptical of their actual motives in releasing particular documents.

... Wikileaks is selective with what they post. Wikileaks did a good job posting stolen documents by the Russians in order to help Trump with his pussy grabbing claims. They weren't on any remotely noble mission of trying to clean up politics in America (or the West).

Assange pretended to be a whistleblower.

Exposing wrongdoing is one thing, but he went a lot farther than that.

I think they started out with noble intentions but were subverted by Moscow.

Even back in the days of W, they seemed to have less of a noble agenda.

Why do all you guys care whether Wikileaks has a noble agenda? Seriously, dudes, what is up with that?

 

[ZiprHead]

nd yet in spite of that, a large fraction of the U.S. population, including intelligent and educated people, believed that Russian hackers had remotely accessed voting machines and altered the vote count. Why is not a mystery.

It is a mystery because it never happened.