• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Washington Post Admits Russian Propaganda Story May Be Fake

Jack Hays said:
To which the appropriate response is: So what? (And yes, I read your post.)
Newspapers don't stand behind other people's claims.
The central thesis of the original WaPo story is untouched by any of this.


Click to expand...

So what? Really?

The only legitimacy the PropOrNot report has at all, if any, is that it was published in the Washington Post. And now the WaPo says that they will not stand behind that report. Ergo, the report has no legitimacy at all.
 
LowDown said:
So what? Really?

The only legitimacy the PropOrNot report has at all, if any, is that it was published in the Washington Post. And now the WaPo says that they will not stand behind that report. Ergo, the report has no legitimacy at all.
Click to expand...

Yes. So what? WaPo did not say they don't stand behind the report. They said they can't vouch for individual assessments therein. Quite a difference. And the main WaPo point is untouched.
 
Jack Hays said:
Yes. So what? WaPo did not say they don't stand behind the report. They said they can't vouch for individual assessments therein. Quite a difference. And the main WaPo point is untouched.
Click to expand...

So you're down for this Russian hacking thing. That's really sad.

And no, I see no difference between refusing to stand behind the PropOrNot report and saying they can't vouch for its individual assessments. For what is a report if not the sum of its assessments?
 
Last edited:
LowDown said:
So you're down for this Russian hacking thing. That's really sad.

And no, I see no difference between refusing to stand behind the PropOrNot report and saying they can't vouch for its individual assessments. For what is a report if not the sum of its assessments?
Click to expand...

PropOrNot is one of many sources in the story. Cyber warfare has been under way a long time.
 
Jack Hays said:
PropOrNot is one of many sources in the story. Cyber warfare has been under way a long time.
Click to expand...

Oh kaaaay, Jack.... <Backs out of the room slowly...> ;)
 
LowDown said:
So you refuse to acknowledge that the WaPo backing away from the PropOrNot report is material regarding that report's validity.

The PropOrNot report is an outrageous and absurd smear of the left's political opponents on it's face. It's up to you guys to prove its validity. The WaPo is saying that they won't do that.
Click to expand...

You seem to have forgotten what your very own thread is about. It is not about the validity of the PON report. Since you cant remember what your own thread is about, here is a reminder:

Thread: Washington Post Admits Russian Propaganda Story May Be Fake
Click to expand...

Your thread is about what WaPo admitted, which unfortunately for the fake-news loving right wingnuts, is nothing
 
LowDown said:
Oh kaaaay, Jack.... <Backs out of the room slowly...> ;)
Click to expand...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d6b300-be2a-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html

The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to officials briefed on the matter.
Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials. Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances.
“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” said a senior U.S. official briefed on an intelligence presentation made to U.S. senators. “That’s the consensus view.”. . .
 
sangha said:
You seem to have forgotten what your very own thread is about. It is not about the validity of the PON report. Since you cant remember what your own thread is about, here is a reminder:



Your thread is about what WaPo admitted, which unfortunately for the fake-news loving right wingnuts, is nothing
Click to expand...

Again, you refuse to acknowledge that WaPo's refusal to stand behind the PropOrNot report is material to that report's validity. The only validity that the report has comes from its publication in the WaPo and the implied endorsement thereby, and now the PropOrNot report has no validity at all.

WaPo seems to be out to prove that it is a completely worthless rag that no one should take seriously,
 
Jack Hays said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d6b300-be2a-11e6-94ac-3d324840106c_story.html

The CIA has concluded in a secret assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election to help Donald Trump win the presidency, rather than just to undermine confidence in the U.S. electoral system, according to officials briefed on the matter.
Intelligence agencies have identified individuals with connections to the Russian government who provided WikiLeaks with thousands of hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee and others, including Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, according to U.S. officials. Those officials described the individuals as actors known to the intelligence community and part of a wider Russian operation to boost Trump and hurt Clinton’s chances.
“It is the assessment of the intelligence community that Russia’s goal here was to favor one candidate over the other, to help Trump get elected,” said a senior U.S. official briefed on an intelligence presentation made to U.S. senators. “That’s the consensus view.”. . .
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but this is just yet another attempt to de-legitimize Trump's election. I don't believe them, I don't believe it, and I don't believe that you have bought into this nonsense.

And, oh, look, it's published in the same rag that said that the Drudge Report is under Russian control! Поцелуй мои куриные губы!
 
LowDown said:
Again, you refuse to acknowledge that WaPo's refusal to stand behind the PropOrNot report is material to that report's validity. The only validity that the report has comes from its publication in the WaPo and the implied endorsement thereby, and now the PropOrNot report has no validity at all.

WaPo seems to be out to prove that it is a completely worthless rag that no one should take seriously,
Click to expand...

You cant seem to remember what your thread is about, even after you have been reminded
Thread: Washington Post Admits Russian Propaganda Story May Be Fake
Click to expand...
 
LowDown said:
I'm sorry, but this is just yet another attempt to de-legitimize Trump's election. I don't believe them, I don't believe it, and I don't believe that you have bought into this nonsense.
Click to expand...

It's not nonsense. It's the emergence into public view of skirmishing that has been under way for years. I'm indifferent to the political fallout, but I know the intelligence work is sound.
 
Jack Hays said:
It's not nonsense. It's the emergence into public view of skirmishing that has been under way for years. I'm indifferent to the political fallout, but I know the intelligence work is sound.
Click to expand...

You KNOW this??? WTF? Are you working for the NSA or something?
 
sangha said:
That is hilarious!!

Youre posting a fake news article from a fake news website and you think it proves WaPo has been discredited :lamo
Click to expand...

That is hilarious!!

You posted that without reading what was in there and then following the embedded link to the original story in the WaPo, with the sited editors note :lamo
 
Jack Hays said:
It's in my profile.
Click to expand...

I see. Well, it's the same bunch that said that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq back in 2003, n'es pas? I'm more inclined to believe that that this is yet another of those political hiccups that grips the CIA from time to time. It could not be more obvious that this is just an effort to de-legitimize Trump's victory, and shame on them for that.
 
LowDown said:
I see. Well, it's the same bunch that said that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq back in 2003, n'es pas? I'm more inclined to believe that that this is yet another of those political hiccups that grips the CIA from time to time. It could not be more obvious that this is just an effort to de-legitimize Trump's victory, and shame on them for that.
Click to expand...

In some of my teaching I cite the Iraq WMD fiasco as the worst failure to occur during my career. Thankfully such failures were and are extremely rare. As I noted in another post, they get 100 or so things "right" every day. They have this right -- a center mass hit in fact.
 
Jack Hays said:
In some of my teaching I cite the Iraq WMD fiasco as the worst failure to occur during my career. Thankfully such failures were and are extremely rare. As I noted in another post, they get 100 or so things "right" every day. They have this right -- a center mass hit in fact.
Click to expand...

It may be true.
 
We were supposed to get outraged because Clinton was as careless as the last 5 SoS's with confidential information, and now we're supposed to forget about potential Russian interference with our election.
 
LowDown said:
I see. Well, it's the same bunch that said that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq back in 2003, n'es pas? I'm more inclined to believe that that this is yet another of those political hiccups that grips the CIA from time to time. It could not be more obvious that this is just an effort to de-legitimize Trump's victory, and shame on them for that.
Click to expand...

Oh, that's another gem.

During Bush's tenure, we were supposed to ignore the fact that there weren't any WMDs in Iraq and still support the war because Bush just did what the CIA told him. Now we're supposed to use the fact that there weren't WMDs in Iraq to excuse ourselves for ignoring potential Russian interference in our election.




You guys will say ANYTHING.
 
Mr Person said:
We were supposed to get outraged because Clinton was as careless as the last 5 SoS's with confidential information, and now we're supposed to forget about potential Russian interference with our election.
Click to expand...

Mindblowing.
 
Mr Person said:
We were supposed to get outraged because Clinton was as careless as the last 5 SoS's with confidential information, and now we're supposed to forget about potential Russian interference with our election.
Click to expand...

We are supposed to believe that the possibility that Hillary Clinton is running a pedophilia ring out of the basement of a pizzeria is something that should be investigated because fake news sites have posted articles about this

And we are supposed to believe that the possibility that Russia is interfering with our elections is something that should be ignored because the CIA suspects that it is true
 
Hey Russia, if you're listening, you just go ahead and hack -- you'll be rewarded..." - Trump, in one of his last press conferences in July.

The *only* thing the Trump changed in GOP party plank?
CzU2JYJXcAAD3CH.jpg






My campaign advisor Paul Manafort on the Russian payroll? Phhht.

The Russian officials who said explicitly they've been talking with the Trump campaign the whole time? Pay no attention.

Just because my son said this? “Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets.” So what?

Big deal if I admire murderous strongmen "In terms of leadership, he’s Putin gets an A."

Hey everybody, look at your new pro-Putin Secretary of State: Russian government BFF awarded Russia's highest honor to an American citizen: the Order of Friendship decoration...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom