Yes, I should start a thread on A.I. (Artificial Intelligence). You can post about whatever conspiracy you want.
Conspiracy - Are Some Theories Accurate?
- Thread starter patrick jane
- Start date
jaybird
New member
sweet i will be waiting, i never trusted that ET!
Were you saying you don't want to discuss the A.I. and Bitcoin and Sophia etc.?
jaybird
New member
i will discuss it.
we talk about it here? or you making another thread?
i thought this thread was just you posting links, i wasnt sure.
Arthur Brain
Well-known member
Wow, you have a line?
:shocked:
According to 'not to be senator' Roy 'Hillbilly' Moore, it was possibly a judgment from God...
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/14/politics/kfile-roy-moore-9-11/index.html
Good for Alabama for not voting this crank into office.
(Although he seems to have started his own conspiracy theory about voter fraud that was summarily dismissed...what is it with far right zealots and conspiracies etc?)
:think:
:idunno:
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Will anyone deny that there exists a conspiracy at this time to overthrow the President who won the election?
Common sense dictates that because the FBI refuses to release the documents pertaining to the Trump dossier they have something to hide. Like the fact that they used that dossier to obtain warrants to spy on people in the Trump election campaign.
Was not that the "insurance" of which one high ranking person in the Justice Department spoke about in case Trump somehow got elected?
All you liberals wake up and smell the coffee. If Trump would not have been elected the deep state, together with Hillary and the mainstream press, would have gained enough control so that there would never again be fair elections in the USA!
Thank the LORD for Trump! He saved the Republic from dishonest Hillary and her minions!
Common sense dictates that because the FBI refuses to release the documents pertaining to the Trump dossier they have something to hide. Like the fact that they used that dossier to obtain warrants to spy on people in the Trump election campaign.
Was not that the "insurance" of which one high ranking person in the Justice Department spoke about in case Trump somehow got elected?
All you liberals wake up and smell the coffee. If Trump would not have been elected the deep state, together with Hillary and the mainstream press, would have gained enough control so that there would never again be fair elections in the USA!
Thank the LORD for Trump! He saved the Republic from dishonest Hillary and her minions!
Like thanking a vegetarian for bacon.
And you know, I thought you'd never write anything crazier than some of your Cowboy posts...
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
You are so blinded by your liberal bias that you cannot think straight!
The greatest danger to our Republic is from within. And if you cannot see all the instances of Civil Rights abuses during the Obama administration then those you want to overthrow the election of Trump are counting on people like you to insure that they can get away with it.
Nah. I'm no more a liberal than I'm a conservative, except on certain issues. I actively campaigned for people to NOT vote for either. And by either I mean Trump or Hillary.
The greatest danger to our Republic is the belief that makes us suspicious of neighbor and hateful of what should be often enough viewed as an honorable and thoughtful opposition. What's a danger to the Republic is contempt for its institutions and the men or women who promote it as a means to power.
You'd have to present a case by case. I wasn't in his corner the second time around for reasons that didn't rise to criminal prosecution, but I don't believe anyone should be above the law. I also don't believe the willingness to assert a thing is proof of the thing.
There are always people who want the current rascal out. True during Obama's presidency, true during Bush, Clinton, and I imagine Reagan (remember Iran/Contra?). Some make better cases than others, but it's usually an effort to fit facts into a desire.
No one should count on someone like me to get away with criminal activity. I'm an officer of the court sworn to preserve the institutions of government. And I'm politically unaligned. If that is anyone's recipe for pulling something untoward over they have passed by optimism into the throes of a potent delusion.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
What about the IRS scandal?
How about the Obama administration spying on a FOX reporter?
How about those same people spying on reporters from the AP?
How about the Obama administration using phony documents in order to get a warrant to spy on members of the Trump election team?
A Gallup poll released shows 49% of Americans believe that "the federal government poses an immediate threat to individuals' rights and freedoms."
Perhaps you were not aware of those things? Or perhaps the only place where you get your news is from the Fake News Networks?
Just curious, but do you ever watch the FOX News?
Are you talking about where certain IRS agents were abusing their authority to single out known conservatives? I know about it. I've never read any report that connected it to an urging by then President Obama. Do you have a cite to authority that did?
That's not an accurate reflection of what happened, unless you get your "news" from a questionable outlet. I'll note that despite Trump making claims to that effect that Fox ran with no legal action or outcome implicating then President Obama in any illegal or unethical activity was ever actually arrived at. Thats because the President knows better, but he's counting on his followers not to.
The FBI was monitoring the AP? Don't know about that one. Links?
That's you going back to a claim already addressed under the Trump business. Produce something, anything that shows the President was involved in that and that what was going on was anything but a legal surveillance.
So fewer than half of the people have bought into decades of concerted effort on the part of Fox and hard right wing elements (and a few left) to undermine confidence in the institutions of government? I'm surprised and pleased to see that large a resistance to the effort. Thanks for that.
I'm aware of a lot of smoke and no demonstrable fire, and of the desire in many right wingers to promote it. Nothing new in it or news, for that matter.
Again, the whole MSM stuff is just the stuff of ignorance sold repeatedly and loudly by a small, interested group. Anyone who reads widely enough should understand that, but then, that may be part of the point of sale.
Sure. Mostly prior to cord cutting. Now I largely read at any number of sites I have bundled. Smith surprises me by running a ship that is almost the only thing on that network not dedicated to carrying water for the Republican Party. I enjoy perusing a number of readable sites for news. Everything from Fox to the BBC, The Wall Street Journal to NPR. I've always liked casting a wide net to see how different vantages (because individually you can find trends and bias anywhere) approach the same subject and how they filter the subjects they approach.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
Do you think that the Washington Post is a questionable outlet?
Here is what we find in that news source:
"There are various reasons you might not care about the Obama administration’s spying on journalist James Rosen and labeling him a “co-conspirator and/or aider and abettor” in an espionage case.
Liberals may not be particularly bothered because the targeted journalist works for Fox News. Conservatives may not be concerned because of their antipathy toward the news media generally. And the general public certainly doesn’t have much patience for journalists’ whining.
But here’s why you should care — and why this case, along with the administration’s broad snooping into Associated Press phone records, is more serious than the other supposed Obama administration scandals regarding Benghazi and the Internal Revenue Service. The Rosen affair is as flagrant an assault on civil liberties as anything done by George W. Bush’s administration, and it uses technology to silence critics in a way Richard Nixon could only have dreamed of."
Even The Washington Post recognizes that the Rosen affair is a flagrant assault on civil liberties. But according to you they were only monitoring Rosen!
We also read the following:
"The Justice Department used security badge access records to track the reporter’s comings and goings from the State Department, according to a newly obtained court affidavit. They traced the timing of his calls with a State Department security adviser suspected of sharing the classified report. They obtained a search warrant for the reporter’s personal emails."
Those dastardly deeds sends chills down my back. But even worse than that is all the people like you who defend those actions, saying that Rosen was only being monitored.
How abut the Huffington Post which ran this headline?:
"DOJ Calls Fox News Reporter James Rosen 'Co-Conspirator' In Leak Case; Journalists Outraged"
All I see from you is an ignorance about what really went on with the Department of Justice in regard to FOX reporter James Rosen. Do you really think that Obama's hand picked Attorney General, Eric Holder, was unaware of what was happening with Rosen? And do you really think that Holder would have even ordered the spying on Rosen without the consent of Obama?
Of course we shouldn't worry about anyone in any administration spying on journalists just trying to do their job because the real threat is being suspicious of our neighbors.
LOL!
Lon
Well-known member
Cowboy posts...
NFL or John Wayne?
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
When I was a kid I loved Staubach.
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
When he retired he retired with the highest quarterback rating in the history of the NFL. His leadership qualities were off the chart and they didn't call him Roger the Dodger for nothing.
He had it all in spades!
I was 8 in 77 and I bought cards at the store. I had a Tony Dorsett rookie card and I gave it to a guy from Texas (a huge Cowboys fan).
Jerry Shugart
Well-known member
I also had a Tony Dorsett rookie card and I also gave it to someone from Texas who was a huge Cowboy fan. Small world!
You need to distinguish between an op/ed and news.
What you published from it was opinion piece. He's also the same man who wrote, "In this holiday season, a familiar question arises: Is President Donald Trump trying to undermine democracy, or is he just irredeemably vain?"
That's what he does.
Rather, a man who wrote an op-ed piece to get reactions declared it, which is something else.
A sensation born of imagination? That seems about right.
I haven't agreed with the premise so I'm not defending what hasn't been established as either a) a violation of law, or b) some ethical breach to be set at then President Obama's feet.
And what's worse is people who confuse opinion with fact, hyperbole with analysis and sensationalism (so long as it's the other guy's ox) as a bold declaration of truth.
If your phone is being tapped or your emails examined, whereabouts confirmed, etc. you're under surveillance. Surveillance, monitored, so long as it's legal, under a writ and/or appropriate authority there's nothing wrong with it.
Sounds like some Journalists were outraged. I thought you believed most of them were propaganda enthusiasts. So now some unnamed among them are credible?
Do tell.
That's because you conclude first. But then ignorance of one particular, whenever it's established, isn't particularly shocking. I'm betting any number of things happen in a day, week, or month that get by most people who aren't dedicating inordinate amounts of time to keeping abreast of most of what's reported. Nothing inherently troubling in that given how easy it is to get up to speed.
Produce proof or what either of us think isn't really worth much. And your "spying" is just more evidence of a tendency to conclude without facts. Spying isn't what's done under writ and/or authority.
Which is only half of what I said. Supra on proof and "spying" but the rest is true enough. Paranoia born of partisan nonsense is dangerous. Disrespect of public institutions that has been part of the Republican agenda when out of power will and has come back to haunt them when in power. Seeds and whatnot.
Unless you're a 15 year old girl and this is your diary, stop that.
lain:
I'd think anyone who wasn't a stary eyed Cowboy fan and thought Staubach was a better qb than Montana was...less than empirical in approach and less than objective in analysis. Montana, who I never rooted for and whose team was never my team, was demonstrably the best at what he did. Four SBs with over 100 rating, no ints. That sort of thing.
I doubt you literally did that. And if you did were you present or was this on tv? I've seen him on tape and heard stories about him, looked at the numbers that support both my observations and his greatness. I have a pretty good record at estimating ability through analysis, from team to individual (which is how I arrive at the team estimation, summed).
Exceptional qb, to be sure. But he's not the GOAT by any reasoned stretch. Nothing wrong with that. There's only one of those and a number of great athletes vying.