Dood lied.
To the People.
He’s supposed to represent the very essence of justice and truth…um…disconnect.
I’m concerned about this administration’s parlay with the truth.
Truth works in America.
Let’s seek it, find it, expose it, deal with it, and move on, for this lack of truth is corroding the very strands of America that make it worth defending; do that at the peril of our great experiment: I will not let that happen on my watch. snikt
Yup.
I just learned a word today. Did everyone else know what “recuse” meant?
The other word I did know.
I’ve never verified this because I was told by a professor of political science whom I trusted, but apparently Reagan did not give any press conferences in his last three years as pres, because leading up to that was a series of “misstatements” that his staff had to correct. Ergo it was pretty obvious even while he was in office.
That makes a lot of sense. The sycophantic talk about Putin by Trump and Russia by all the others is abnormal and a sure sign of “indebtedness”. (And thanks for giving meaning to my late-night surfing.)
Two questions: 1) do you think Russia intervened in the actual voting, e.g. by hacking voting machines? I suspect so but don’t have much evidence other than polls suspiciously mismatched to results. 2) could someone in the NSA, CIA or FBI obtain and release Trump’s tax returns?
Couldn’t this problem be solved by taking pics of the documents with a phone or other not-so-hi-rez camera?
I doubt the Russians hacked the voting machines. The various agencies that reported on their involvement specifically denied this aspect, and anyway, it would be very difficult to do in any meaningful way in a national election. This is because of the wide variety of systems used by each state, most of which do not connect to the internet. The Russians would have to gain physical access to machines in multiple locations. Also, it’s completely unnecessary. Better to sway the election by running fake news campaigns through state-owned sites like RT News, and feed disinformation to other conspiracy minded conservative outlets. This is enough to create confusion and doubt in the minds of voters and sway the election by a couple points.
While electronic voting machines are dreadfully insecure and a cause of concern, it is more worrisome for state and local elections where it’s easier to mask signs of interference. (Because you can’t draw correlations from other states’ systems.)
Yeah, I agree. I think the best argument against the machines being hacked is that the voting results were fairly consistent - demographically similar states had similar voting results. It would take a lot of hacking to pull that off.
FWIW, that’s also the strongest argument against the idea that people lied to the pollsters - the redder the state the more trump overperformed the poll predictions and the bluer the state the worse he underperformed the poll predictions.
Someone at the IRS could. They’ve obviously got copies. But it would be career suicide and probably subject them to criminal charges (not to mention republican power players just screwing up their life in general out of revenge) I wonder if it would be legal to set up a GoFundMe account for such a hypothetical whistleblower in order to reduce their personal risk.
There is a possible alternative: New York state might be able to do it.
Do you have a link for that? I’m interested in reading about it.
Its discussed in the link in the 2nd bullet item:
He’s not the only one to put forward that analysis either.
Looks like that is incorrect. Here are [photos from press conferences]((https://reaganlibrary.archives.gov/archives/photographs/press.html) he did up through 1988. They still might have cut back so he only did them on good days.
Probably not? It’s a pretty specific term that isn’t generally used in every day language.
I think he means that if you replace “recuse” with… some other word… it reads a little more interesting
All my years watching LA Law paid off!
Yeah, and finding a list of his press conferences isn’t tough:
There are two kinds of traps that could be set into a document. One is trackback, where there might be a link, web bug, license request, certificate validation, or a macro similar to malware embedded in it that would ping back to a server, uniquely identifying both the document and the reader. This is the best kind of tracking because it happens earlier in the process, and is in common use by advertisers and web sites.
The other is a watermark. A good watermark will not only appear on each copy, but will also survive reformatting, or even just a small bit quoted from the source. A copy of the document is generated uniquely for each path that might leak, and then modified.
Each paragraph might have some of the word orders swapped.
Each paragraph might have the order of some words swapped.
Each paragraph might have the words replaced with specific synonyms.
Each paragraph could have certain words replaced with unique synonyms.
Each paragraph may have specific words replaced with non-repeating synonyms.
Each block of words may have certain facts replaced with alternative facts.
That way, even if all they get is a partial quote, there’s plenty enough to identify the source.
“It’s so simple, even a Trump staffer could do it!”
I guess?
No such thing in the US (as “high treason” is generally “treason directly against the Crown,” which the U.S. doesn’t have), and this doesn’t qualify for normal treason except under an incredibly loose definition of the term “Enemies”:
From Article 3, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution:
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.
The rest of your post I agree with, but calling anything Trump has done “treason” (and especially calling it “high treason”) is (legally, at least) gross hyperbole of the Ann Coulter variety.
I remember him. It was obvious, but he still held press conferences. It’s true that people knew, but it’s also true there were steadier hands all around him than we have today. Reagan definitely had less of a schedule his last couple years, but he was still there and the people had the impression there were competent lieutenants to delegate things to. His VP who was already pretty hands on went to win the next election, after all, largely on how he had managed not to blow us up or cause a political crisis over the couple years of Ronnies decline.
