All Purpose News and Politics Thread Part IV: The Center Cannot Hold

[aja_christopher]

The flaws in your argument as I see it.

1. "various individuals to have an exaggerated sense of their impact": The Impact of Russia on the 2016 election was not well understood, and not made public until after Trump was elected. "Sense of impact" implies a non-factual view of the events of what happened in 2016. Problem with that assumption is that we have had The Mueller Investigation and subsequent Report that spells out exactly what happened, factually. Which may soon become available unredacted.

2. Various members of the US Intelligence Community, Including the FBI Director, and DNI Coates, have testified under oath to Congress that Russia is now and will continue to intervene in the upcoming election.

American intelligence already pointed out that the Russians hope to start a race war in America -- just like the white supremacists. Combine that with their infiltration into -- and financial support of -- the NRA, and it's not even close to "paranoid" to suggest what's already been reported by federal investigators.

Mets can easily research all of this information for himself but instead he chooses to "debate" as if other people don't know how to use the internet.

Apparently, to him it's okay to be "paranoid" about open borders that no prominent democrat ever proposed, but not about proven Russian interference in our election that threatens the very foundation of our democracy, even when his Republican party is protecting those who actively encourage it.

Or, rather, because his Republican party is protecting those who actively encourage said interference, he chooses to do the same.

-----
"Russian documents reveal desire to sow racial discord — and violence — in the U.S."

The revelations come as U.S. intelligence agencies have warned of probable Russian meddling in the 2020 election.

"Russians who were linked to interference in the 2016 U.S. election discussed ambitious plans to stoke unrest and even violence inside the U.S. as recently as 2018, according to documents reviewed by NBC News...

Regardless of whether or not these plans are an amateurish thought experiment, the fact that these people are talking about doing this should disturb Americans of all stripes,” Figliuzzi said. “The unfortunate reality is that we’re seeing an adversary that will consider virtually anything to get what it wants, and if it means violence or splitting America along racial lines or eroding our trust in institutions, they’ll do it.”

Some of the documents appear to have been sent by Dzheykhun “Jay” Aslanov, an employee of the Internet Research Agency, the St. Petersburg-based troll farm that played a key role in the 2016 Russian meddling campaign. Aslanov was one of 13 Russians indicted by Mueller in February 2018 for his role with the IRA."

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/r...e-u-s-n1008051

[worstblogever]

Mitch McConnell's campaign has followed up on showing a fake graveyard with Amy McGrath's tombstone in it by having some "fine young white Republican men" wearing MoscowMitch's gear pose while groping and/or choking a cardboard cutout of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and putting that on social media.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Mitch McConnell's campaign has followed up on showing a fake graveyard with Amy McGrath's tombstone in it by having some "fine young white Republican men" wearing MoscowMitch's gear pose while groping and/or choking a cardboard cutout of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and putting that on social media.

I'll bet a month's pay most, if not all of those shitstains are incels for whom that cutout is the closest they'll ever come to touching a woman. But seriously, I find that alarming, AOC's office had already been broken into not too long ago, what are the chances that disgusting photo might give some unbalanced Trump lover violent ideas?

[worstblogever]

I'll bet a month's pay most, if not all of those shitstains are incels for whom that cutout is the closest they'll ever come to touching a woman. But seriously, I find that alarming, AOC's office had already been broken into not too long ago, what are the chances that disgusting photo might give some unbalanced Trump lover violent ideas?

She has already been receiving both rape and death threats.

[Kirby101]

Mitch McConnell's campaign has followed up on showing a fake graveyard with Amy McGrath's tombstone in it by having some "fine young white Republican men" wearing MoscowMitch's gear pose while groping and/or choking a cardboard cutout of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and putting that on social media.

If you only told me about the pic, I would think these racist dicks look exactly like that.

[Mister Mets]

The flaws in your argument as I see it.

1. "various individuals to have an exaggerated sense of their impact": The Impact of Russia on the 2016 election was not well understood, and not made public until after Trump was elected. "Sense of impact" implies a non-factual view of the events of what happened in 2016. Problem with that assumption is that we have had The Mueller Investigation and subsequent Report that spells out exactly what happened, factually. Which may soon become available unredacted.

2. Various members of the US Intelligence Community, Including the FBI Director, and DNI Coates, have testified under oath to Congress that Russia is now and will continue to intervene in the upcoming election.

1. We'll see if the redactions offer anything substantial. That's currently unknown and hasn't really been hinted by Mueller and others familiar with the report. Russians had an impact, but the extent of it is often exaggerated by Trump critics in a way that plays into Putin's hands (making him seem more powerful and getting more division in this country). At the height of the election, Russia spent $1.2 million a month on troll farms in the context of an election where the major parties spent a total of $1.8 billion (I get that troll farms have the advantage of being able to go with more extreme material than the campaigns but it's still a very small part of election spending) and hacked the DNC emails. They may have been involved in disinformation against Trump with the Steele dossier. Russian intelligence also spread the Seth Rich conspiracy theory, though I suspect people inclined to believe that the Clinton campaign had a staffer killed were unlikely to vote for the Democrats.

2. This doesn't contradict anything I've said. We can believe it's a serious problem, but one that many exxaggerate.

[aja_christopher]

She has already been receiving both rape and death threats.

There's evidence that they might work for McConnell's campaign -- regardless, this is the face of the new Republican party.



“Just wanted to clarify: are you paying for young men to practice groping & choking members of Congress w/ your payroll or is this just the standard culture of #TeamMitch?” -- AOC

[aja_christopher]

1. We'll see if the redactions offer anything substantial.

2. This doesn't contradict anything I've said. We can believe it's a serious problem, but one that many exxaggerate.

"As part of his testimony on Wednesday, Mueller added that "indictments we returned against the Russians were substantial," and that he hoped his report and the criminal charges would serve as a warning to foreign governments not to interfere in U.S. elections and domestic politics."

1) There's already "substantial" evidence that the Russians have interfered with and will continue to attempt to interfere in our elections on an unprecedented scale -- we don't need any further evidence to prove it.

2) Unlike "open borders" or "antifa," it's not an exaggeration or paranoia to address something that all of our federal agencies have pointed out as being a "substantial" threat to our democracy.

Much like white supremacy, which you also seem to be far less "paranoid" about for some reason, despite all of the recent terrorist shootings.

------
"The Russians are absolutely intent on trying to interfere with our elections,” Wray said during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing.

Wray appeared at an oversight hearing a day before Robert Mueller, the former special counsel, was due to testify publicly before Congress about his two-year investigation of Russian interference to sway the 2016 presidential race toward President Donald Trump.

“Everything we’ve done against Russia has not deterred them enough?” asked Senator Lindsey Graham, the Republican committee chairman. “All the sanctions, all the talk, they’re still at it?”

“Yes. My view is until they stop they haven’t been deterred enough,” Wray responded.

Mueller’s investigation disclosed an elaborate campaign of hacking and propaganda during the 2016 presidential race and resulted in indictments that charged 25 Russian individuals and three Russian companies. The United States has imposed election-related sanctions on Russian oligarchs and military intelligence officials and there is a push for legislation threatening tougher sanctions in the U.S. Congress.

As Wray confirmed the Russia threat remains, Senate Democrats criticized Republican Majority Leader Mitch McConnell for not taking up election security legislation. McConnell has said enough money was set aside for security last year and there was no need for extra measures.

“We have been warned in closed sessions about the Russian plans to corrupt this next election and they’re very specific,” Senator Richard Durbin said at a news conference. “What are we doing about it? The answer is: Nothing. The reason: Mitch McConnell.”

The Russia investigation cast a shadow over Trump’s White House tenure and the president has repeatedly downplayed the Kremlin’s role in trying to help him win.

At last year’s summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki, he sided with Moscow over U.S. intelligence agencies."

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKCN1UI1XW

[Tami]

1. We'll see if the redactions offer anything substantial. That's currently unknown and hasn't really been hinted by Mueller and others familiar with the report. Russians had an impact, but the extent of it is often exaggerated by Trump critics in a way that plays into Putin's hands (making him seem more powerful and getting more division in this country). At the height of the election, Russia spent $1.2 million a month on troll farms in the context of an election where the major parties spent a total of $1.8 billion (I get that troll farms have the advantage of being able to go with more extreme material than the campaigns but it's still a very small part of election spending) and hacked the DNC emails. They may have been involved in disinformation against Trump with the Steele dossier. Russian intelligence also spread the Seth Rich conspiracy theory, though I suspect people inclined to believe that the Clinton campaign had a staffer killed were unlikely to vote for the Democrats.

2. This doesn't contradict anything I've said. We can believe it's a serious problem, but one that many exxaggerate.

Russia's Role in Election-Year Hacking

CSpan Video of Congressional Testimony.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and the heads of the FBI, CIA, and the National Security Agency testified at a hearing on their collective investigation and findings on Russian influence in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. The witnesses reiterated many of the points made in their unclassified report on Russia’s influence, including their conclusion that Russian President Vladimir Putin was directly involved. In his first congressional appearance since the election, FBI Director James Comey faced sharp questioning on whether his agency was investigating potential connections between either of the presidential campaigns and Russian officials, and he said he could not comment on whether such an investigation was ongoing.

[aja_christopher]

One more time for those who choose bias over facts and political party over democracy for every American citizen.

-----
"Mueller: Russian Interference 'Serious' Threat to Democracy"

"Former Special Council Robert Mueller told members of Congress Wednesday that Russian interference in elections is the most serious challenge to U.S. democracy that he has seen over the course of his career and that it deserves more attention, especially as the 2020 election looms and more disruption is likely.

Mueller testified for several hours Wednesday before both the House Judicial Committee and the House Intelligence Committee, where lawmakers from both parties pressed him for more details on his report that investigated interference in the 2016 election and whether President Donald Trump obstructed justice.

As he promised at a May 29 press conference, Mueller mostly stuck to repeating the findings and conclusions in the Special Council report. For most of the day, he stuck to "yes" or "no" responses and terse answers.

The one area where Mueller appeared willing to stray from the report was when he addressed what Russian's interference in the 2016 election means for the upcoming 2020 presidential election.

"Over the course of my career, I've seen a number of challenges to our democracy. The Russian government's effort to interfere in our election is among the most serious. As I said on May 29, this deserves the attention of every American," Mueller, who served as FBI director during the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, said during his opening statement to the Intelligence Committee.

Later in the hearing, he told committee members that the Russian interference in the 2016 election was not "isolated" and that he believes more disruption is likely in 2020.

https://www.bankinfosecurity.com/mue...ocracy-a-12827

[Mister Mets]

And you seem to be constantly downplaying the racism in your party and your party's blatant and open attacks on our democracy by dodging said "point" -- just because you don't bring up something doesn't mean it shouldn't be addressed directly. After all, half your game is trying to get people to argue on your terms ("open borders") because you know that you can't defend your party's actions -- other people have to "make these points" because you'd never address them otherwise, and you still don't do so adequately when given the opportunity because you know you can't defend the indefensible.

You still have yet to explain why you are comfortable supporting a political party that you know engages in racist and homophobic behavior -- instead you try to act as if it's "paranoia" to point out the Republicans have no problem allowing Russians interfering in our elections to the point where they will cover for a president who openly seeks to work with foreign powers to subvert our democracy, while simultaneously obstructing justice to make sure he isn't held accountable, making you complicit in said criminality.

When I say you ruin your credibility with these kinds of posts, I'm not exaggerating: many of us would like to have a rational dialogue with an honest Republican on these issues, but so long as you continue to try to deflect to everything else but addressing the problems within your own party -- whether it's racist rhetoric or policies, or attempting to downplay white supremacy and Russian interference in our elections by disregarding the contents of the Mueller report and every other American intelligence agency -- there's just no reason to take your "arguments" seriously, and definitely not "in good faith".

You can lie to yourself regarding your party, but all you do is insult the intelligence of others when you expect us to do the same.

You're not doing Republicans any favors with said behavior -- in fact, in refusing to address these problems and constantly trying to deflect from them, you and the rest of the party are just ensuring that many people will never vote for Republican candidates in the future.

------
"Will Hurd's Retirement is the Latest Sign of Doom for the Republicans"

The only Black Republican in the House is checking out—just weeks after he condemned Trump’s “racist and xenophobic” tweets about the Squad...

“It’s a pleasure to be with you all today because you all know something that many of my colleagues don’t,” Hurd told the gathering. “If you’re at least the age of 40 in most places across this country you have to whisper that you’re a Republican,” he said. “This is a party that is shrinking. The party is not growing in some of the largest parts of our country,” he continued.

“Why is that? I’ll tell you. It’s real simple,” said Hurd. “Don’t be an asshole. Don’t be a racist. Don’t be a misogynist, right? Don’t be a homophobe. These are real basic things that we all should learn when we were in kindergarten.”

-----
'Hurd didn’t directly mention Donald Trump in his tweets or statement announcing his abrupt retirement, but his decision comes just weeks after he joined House Democrats to condemn the president’s racist attacks on a group of nonwhite progressive congresswomen who have been critical of his administration, especially over its immigration policies.

"I think those tweets are racist and xenophobic,” Hurd told CNN of Trump’s attacks on the Squad, in which the president called on the lawmakers to “go back and help fix the totally broken and crime infested places from which they came.”

Hurd noted at the time that the tweets about Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Ayanna Pressley, Rashida Tlaib, and Ilhan Omar were “inaccurate” and drive minorities away from the G.O.P. “This makes it harder in order to take our ideas, and our platform, to communities that don’t necessarily identify with the Republican party,” he said.

But rather than widening the scope of their appeal, Republicans since then have dramatically narrowed it — lining up behind Trump and his destructive policies and racist, sexist rhetoric."

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019...cans-diversity

You're accusing me of deflection for not talking about racism and homophobia in a chain of posts on a different topic (Russian interference.) That seems to be deflection on your end, to avoid countering my points that the Russian threat is exaggerated by some and that this plays into Putin's hands.

If you're interested in my opinions on anything, you can ask non-loaded questions (IE- Mister Mets, what do you think of Will Hurd deciding not to seek another term?) and I'll do my best to answer (IE- Will Hurd opting not to seek another term is bad for Republicans; it appears he doesn't think it's worth a difficult reelection campaign in a swing district).

On the open borders argument, I am always careful to explain where I'm coming from (IE- that many Democrats are consistently unwilling to express any limiting principle on legal immigration or to express an opinion on anyone who should be deported aside from felons or those just processed at the border) and generally careful to refer to it as de facto open borders to avoid any confusion by people arguing about a nuance between two unpopular positions (IE- there can still be barriers for people with obvious criminal records). Granted, the Democratic Socialists of America did just endorse open borders without any caveats, so there is some support for it.

https://medium.com/@stevens.elijah/o...19-28208937504
https://www.cnn.com/2019/08/05/polit...019/index.html

In the recent debate, Booker disagreed with the idea that immigrants with particular skills should be prioritized over any others. Biden remained vague on whether he agreed with the more moderate portions of Obama's immigration policy, and while he believes people should get in line he hasn't been clear on how many people should be admitted per year.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/sto...dential-debate

That said, I still intend to vote for him in the general election.

American intelligence already pointed out that the Russians hope to start a race war in America -- just like the white supremacists. Combine that with their infiltration into -- and financial support of -- the NRA, and it's not even close to "paranoid" to suggest what's already been reported by federal investigators.

Mets can easily research all of this information for himself but instead he chooses to "debate" as if other people don't know how to use the internet.

Apparently, to him it's okay to be "paranoid" about open borders that no prominent democrat ever proposed, but not about proven Russian interference in our election that threatens the very foundation of our democracy, even when his Republican party is protecting those who actively encourage it.

Or, rather, because his Republican party is protecting those who actively encourage said interference, he chooses to do the same.

-----
"Russian documents reveal desire to sow racial discord — and violence — in the U.S."

The revelations come as U.S. intelligence agencies have warned of probable Russian meddling in the 2020 election.

"Russians who were linked to interference in the 2016 U.S. election discussed ambitious plans to stoke unrest and even violence inside the U.S. as recently as 2018, according to documents reviewed by NBC News...

Regardless of whether or not these plans are an amateurish thought experiment, the fact that these people are talking about doing this should disturb Americans of all stripes,” Figliuzzi said. “The unfortunate reality is that we’re seeing an adversary that will consider virtually anything to get what it wants, and if it means violence or splitting America along racial lines or eroding our trust in institutions, they’ll do it.”

Some of the documents appear to have been sent by Dzheykhun “Jay” Aslanov, an employee of the Internet Research Agency, the St. Petersburg-based troll farm that played a key role in the 2016 Russian meddling campaign. Aslanov was one of 13 Russians indicted by Mueller in February 2018 for his role with the IRA."

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/r...e-u-s-n1008051

Division and even violence still falls short of a race war, and it remains a stretch to think there was a master plan to back the NRA because access to guns will be helpful in a race war.

If the NRA had shut down in 2016, how much of a difference would there be in terms of guns on the streets? What policies is anyone suggesting that would make a substantial difference?

[aja_christopher]

If you're interested in my opinions on anything, you can ask non-loaded questions (IE- Mister Mets, what do you think of Will Hurd deciding not to seek another term?) and I'll do my best to answer (IE- Will Hurd opting not to seek another term is bad for Republicans; it appears he doesn't think it's worth a difficult reelection campaign in a swing district).

Your "open borders" question is "loaded" Mets -- you ask the question with an answer already in mind and you refuse to accept any other answer but the one you've already pre-determined, based on your assumptions about Democrats rather than their actual record.

With that in mind, don't ask from others what you don't give in return.

This is no longer about "asking you questions" because I think most people here are pretty clear where you stand on most issues -- this is about pointing out the hypocrisy of your being more concerned with potential hypothetical "open borders" than the very real racism, homophobia, Islamophobia, white supremacy, and right-wing domestic terrorism coming directly from your party and as advocated by your Republican president and Congress.

You're accusing me of deflection for not talking about racism and homophobia in a chain of posts on a different topic (Russian interference.) That seems to be deflection on your end, to avoid countering my points that the Russian threat is exaggerated by some and that this plays into Putin's hands.

I've already posted numerous articles directly addressing the substantial Russian interference that Mueller says is the most serious threat to democracy he's ever seen in his career -- and Mueller is a lifetime Republican so you can't try to argue that this is partisan politics.

He directly states that we should be paying more attention to these threats, not less.

Again -- you ruin your credibility when you make false arguments, and then try to double down on them in the face of factual evidence against them, which is one of the main reasons I don't bother asking you questions.

[kidfresh512]

Is anyone else finding in everyday discussions lately people getting so touchy now when you bring up domestic terrorism and white supremacy? I mean guys are getting super touchy having to talk about it as a threat. I'm constantly having to preface statements like no one is "attacking white people". We are talking about white supremacists! There is a huge difference. And until we aren't afraid to call it out and address the very real issue of domestic terrorism and how we are ignoring and not calling out white supremacy when we see it these attacks will continue to happen.

Add to that the fact that the top levels of government right now find common ground in rhetoric and policy with white supremacists and you get a quagmire of inaction and heads buried in the sand. On social media and in everyday discussions since the shooting I see people "blaming media" for stoking divisions? Why because they are reporting on the El paso shooters manifesto that is mired in white supremacist and trumpian hate and fear? Rather than talk about the obvious and deal with it its easy to blame "media" and ignore they have been supporting, chanting with, and following an administration who constantly feeds into the hate and fears of brown "invaders" coming to take what is "theirs". Pointing out facts is the media's literal job. But, people who I know arent "white supremacists" are just so averse to admitting and combating it lest they think they are being attacked just because they are republican and voted for trump.

[InformationGeek]

Just from Fox News today.

Brian Kilmeade on undocumented immigration: "If you use the term 'this is an invasion,' that's not anti-Hispanic. It's a fact."

Oh, Trump responded today with his usual humanity and unsion.

“Did George Bush ever condemn President Obama after Sandy Hook. President Obama had 32 mass shootings during his reign. Not many people said Obama is out of Control. Mass shootings were happening before the President even thought about running for Pres.” @kilmeade @foxandfriends

[aja_christopher]

"In his long-awaited testimony before Congress, former special counsel Robert Mueller says Russia's efforts to interfere in U.S. elections is "among the most serious" challenges to American democracy."