A Thread for Trump's Self-Inflicted Wound of the Day

[time4fun]

Let's be honest- this just needs its own thread. The man has never met a self-destructive strategy he didn't like.

Today:

Trump decided to (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/05/us/politics/trump-travel-ban.html?_r=0) tweet about the Travel Ban:


“The Justice Dept. should have stayed with the original Travel Ban, not the watered down, politically correct version they submitted to S.C.,” Mr. Trump wrote.

etc.

So first, Trump signed off on pulling the original EO while it was before the Courts and then wrote and signed the new version himself. So it's unclear why he's blaming the Justice Department for his executive actions.

Second, let's review the arguments that the Administration have been using to defend the second EO in Court:

1) It's not a travel ban. it's a travel "pause"

2) It's not the enactment of his campaign promise to ban Muslims from entering the US (specifically his promise to take the Muslim ban, reword it without saying Muslim, and then make it happen)

3) It's unrelated to the original EO- it's its own thing

4) It's unmotivated by political malice against a religious minority


Calling it a travel ban (a phrase that the Administration lawyers have explicitly avoided using) makes it harder to argue it's just a "pause", saying it's a politically correct version of what he wants- just supports the notion that this is his long-promised Muslim ban (which...obviously it is), and calling it a watered down version of the original just means this is absolutely related to the first, unconstitutional EO.

Trump is a prosecutor's dream come true. He literally goes on written, public record to contradict his own defense team and to support the arguments that have so far been successful for the prosecutors.

Kudos Donnie.

[Wrathbringer]

Let's be honest- you're profoundly retarded.

[tyrant-201]

It's the president's job to protect our borders. He should be able to ban whoever he deems a national security threat from entering our country.

[hello]

It's the president's job to protect our borders. He should be able to ban whoever he deems a national security threat from entering our country.

In principle I agree with this. It's just banning muslims from Isis held territory is exactly what Isis wants;a massive propoganda coup.

"Do you see how the infidels hate us! They want to divide out families! Stay here and join Isis; your only alternative!"

[tyrant-201]

In principle I agree with this. It's just banning muslims from Isis held territory is exactly what Isis wants;a massive propoganda coup.

"Do you see how the infidels hate us! They want to divide out families! Stay here and join Isis; your only alternative!"

He should also deport you.

[hello]

He should also deport you.

To where?

[Seizer]

To where?
Preferably to a place where you would not be able to access the internet.

[Methais]

Let's be honest- this just needs its own thread. The man has never met a self-destructive strategy he didn't like.

Today:

Trump decided to (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/05/us/politics/trump-travel-ban.html?_r=0) tweet about the Travel Ban:



etc.

So first, Trump signed off on pulling the original EO while it was before the Courts and then wrote and signed the new version himself. So it's unclear why he's blaming the Justice Department for his executive actions.

Second, let's review the arguments that the Administration have been using to defend the second EO in Court:

1) It's not a travel ban. it's a travel "pause"

2) It's not the enactment of his campaign promise to ban Muslims from entering the US (specifically his promise to take the Muslim ban, reword it without saying Muslim, and then make it happen)

3) It's unrelated to the original EO- it's its own thing

4) It's unmotivated by political malice against a religious minority


Calling it a travel ban (a phrase that the Administration lawyers have explicitly avoided using) makes it harder to argue it's just a "pause", saying it's a politically correct version of what he wants- just supports the notion that this is his long-promised Muslim ban (which...obviously it is), and calling it a watered down version of the original just means this is absolutely related to the first, unconstitutional EO.

Trump is a prosecutor's dream come true. He literally goes on written, public record to contradict his own defense team and to support the arguments that have so far been successful for the prosecutors.

Kudos Donnie.

I can't even imagine how much of a drama queen you must be in real life.

[time4fun]

In principle I agree with this. It's just banning muslims from Isis held territory is exactly what Isis wants;a massive propoganda coup.

"Do you see how the infidels hate us! They want to divide out families! Stay here and join Isis; your only alternative!"

Tyrant is trolling again- he doesn't actually believe that.

But honestly, Congress passes laws, and the Constitution has universal rules that govern government's actions. The President needs a certain amount of leeway, but it must be in accordance with the laws of the land- which this EO isn't. At all.

More importantly though- the real issue here is that Trump's compulsive need to defend himself regardless of the consequences (typical of narcissistic personality disorder) is causing a lot of his problems. He will almost assuredly lose a SCOTUS case at this point based entirely off of information he has voluntarily put into the record.

[Wrathbringer]

Derp derp derpa derp derp.

mmhm. Interesting.

[hello]

Well the Olympics + Superbowl of politics is in two days so, we'll see how it goes down. Word on the grapevine is at least one bombshell is gonna drop during the testimony.

[tyrant-201]

Tyrant is trolling again- he doesn't actually believe that.

But honestly, Congress passes laws, and the Constitution has universal rules that govern government's actions. The President needs a certain amount of leeway, but it must be in accordance with the laws of the land- which this EO isn't. At all.

More importantly though- the real issue here is that Trump's compulsive need to defend himself regardless of the consequences (typical of narcissistic personality disorder) is causing a lot of his problems. He will almost assuredly lose a SCOTUS case at this point based entirely off of information he has voluntarily put into the record.

I don't? Tell me what I believe?

Hillary lost the election. You need to get over it already.

[Tgo01]

He will almost assuredly lose a SCOTUS case at this point based entirely off of information he has voluntarily put into the record.

"Hillary is gonna win Texas!"

I do love these time4fun predictions.

[Methais]

Tyrant is trolling again- he doesn't actually believe that.

But honestly, Congress passes laws, and the Constitution has universal rules that govern government's actions. The President needs a certain amount of leeway, but it must be in accordance with the laws of the land- which this EO isn't. At all.

More importantly though- the real issue here is that Trump's compulsive need to defend himself regardless of the consequences (typical of narcissistic personality disorder) is causing a lot of his problems. He will almost assuredly lose a SCOTUS case at this point based entirely off of information he has voluntarily put into the record.

Can you tell me what the Powerball numbers won't be for Wednesday? I'm tired of working for a living it's time to make $50m or whatever it's worth this week.

[drauz]

Can you tell me what the Powerball numbers won't be for Wednesday? I'm tired of working for a living it's time to make $50m or whatever it's worth this week.

86 7 53 09

[Methais]

86 73 53 09

I said Powerball! :(

[SHAFT]

86 73 53 09

867-5309? What's an extra 3 between friends, right?

[drauz]

I said Powerball! :(

I promise none of those numbers will be in the Powerball!

[drauz]

867-5309? What's an extra 3 between friends, right?

Damn you're right!

[RichardCranium]

Can you tell me what the Powerball numbers won't be for Wednesday? I'm tired of working for a living it's time to make $50m or whatever it's worth this week.

375 million.

[hello]

375 million.

Have a feeling it's gonna be one of those 600 or 700 million dollar powerballs. Hmm..

[Latrinsorm]

"Hillary is gonna win Texas!"

I do love these time4fun predictions.To be fair, you said she was gonna win Ohio.

[Tgo01]

To be fair, you said she was gonna win Ohio.

I clicked that on a prediction map, I didn't foolishly link to articles that said it would be a reality.

Also Obama won Ohio both times, when was the last time Texas went Democrat?

Your false equivalences are as bad as your trolling.

[Gelston]

I clicked that on a prediction map, I didn't foolishly link to articles that said it would be a reality.

Also Obama won Ohio both times, when was the last time Texas went Democrat?

Your false equivalences are as bad as your trolling.

My prediction map will be released very soon.

[Latrinsorm]

I clicked that on a prediction map, I didn't foolishly link to articles that said it would be a reality.So you said it was gonna happen, just not that it was gonna be a reality. That's what you're going with. Okayy
Also Obama won Ohio both times, when was the last time Texas went Democrat?Not since the realignment of the 60s was complete, but I know you have a weird aversion to that so let's just not.
Your false equivalences are as bad as your trolling.The margin in Ohio was +8 Trump, the margin in Texas was +9. Seems like a pretty fair comp to me.

[time4fun]

And the wounds keep on coming:

Washington Post is reporting (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/top-intelligence-official-told-associates-trump-asked-him-if-he-could-intervene-with-comey-to-get-fbi-to-back-off-flynn/2017/06/06/cc879f14-4ace-11e7-9669-250d0b15f83b_story.html) that Trump pressured the Director of National Intelligence to convince Comey to back off the investigation into Michael Flynn back in March:


On March 22, less than a week after being confirmed by the Senate, Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats attended a briefing at the White House together with officials from several government agencies. As the briefing was wrapping up, Trump asked everyone to leave the room except for Coats and CIA Director Mike Pompeo.

The president then started complaining about the FBI investigation and Comey’s handling of it, said officials familiar with the account Coats gave to associates. Two days earlier, Comey had confirmed in a congressional hearing that the bureau was probing whether Trump’s campaign coordinated with Russia during the 2016 race.


After the encounter, Coats discussed the conversation with other officials and decided that intervening with Comey as Trump had suggested would be inappropriate, according to officials who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive internal matters.


Earlier in May, the Post reported (https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-asked-intelligence-chiefs-to-push-back-against-fbi-collusion-probe-after-comey-revealed-its-existence/2017/05/22/394933bc-3f10-11e7-9869-bac8b446820a_story.html?utm_term=.1cc240fd8bbf)tha t Trump pressured Coats and Michael Rogers (Director of the NSA) to publicly deny any collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia.

[drauz]

I think the Democrats are unwittingly playing right into the Russian long plan.

[Neveragain]

I think the Democrats are unwittingly playing right into the Russian long plan.

I think the Democrats better have their facts straight. Democrats think they have it bad now, if it turns out this is all a bunch of bullshit, they will never live down risking open war with Russia for an election loss excuse.

P.S. Holy shit this black lady is going off the deep end on Tuckers show tonight.

[Methais]

Also Obama won Ohio both times, when was the last time Texas went Democrat?

https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t34.0-12/19021541_10155027419222535_1873178048_n.png?oh=72e ea21ae5a60e5ff8f9ba865e262b76&oe=593A8805



I think the Democrats better have their facts straight. Democrats think they have it bad now, if it turns out this is all a bunch of bullshit, they will never live down risking open war with Russia for an election loss excuse.

P.S. Holy shit this black lady is going off the deep end on Tuckers show tonight.

Which face was he making?

http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/imageedit_223_2821494124.jpg

[Neveragain]

https://scontent-atl3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t34.0-12/19021541_10155027419222535_1873178048_n.png?oh=72e ea21ae5a60e5ff8f9ba865e262b76&oe=593A8805




Which face was he making?

http://thefederalistpapers.integratedmarket.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/imageedit_223_2821494124.jpg

He didn't make it to the smile, I'm actually surprised they didn't just cut her off. Her first response started like this "You white people" and then she just kept loudly rambling on about white this, white that. I think the topic was something about BLM wanting black only safe spaces or some shit......ah youtube has it up now, enjoy.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FTRsLUh2wko

[~Rocktar~]

So like a lot of self entitled liberal "victims" she is fine with racism as long as it's committed against others. Great platform here woman, set race relations back even further.

[Tenlaar]

I don't understand why they allow people to just ignore questions and even the subject at hand like that. I would have cut that woman off and moved on after about 30 seconds.

[Neveragain]

So like a lot of self entitled liberal "victims" she is fine with racism as long as it's committed against others. Great platform here woman, set race relations back even further.

Really my only concern is that nobody has come up with a decent slur to denigrate white people as a whole yet.

Is it cultural appropriation for anyone but white people to be on TV, it is a European invention after all?

[Androidpk]

So like a lot of self entitled liberal "victims" she is fine with racism as long as it's committed against others. Great platform here woman, set race relations back even further.

Seems lately that a lot of people are fine with racism if it's targeted at white people. Said people would probably also say it isn't racism because white people can't experience racism, ever.

[Androidpk]

I don't understand why they allow people to just ignore questions and even the subject at hand like that. I would have cut that woman off and moved on after about 30 seconds.

Cutting her off would be sexist and racist!

[Neveragain]

Cutting her off would be sexist and racist!

Oh wait, they did say people could come if they identify as black.

I'm 100% convinced something in our food supply has caused wide spread brain damage.

[Neveragain]

I don't understand why they allow people to just ignore questions and even the subject at hand like that. I would have cut that woman off and moved on after about 30 seconds.

Oh, we NEED to let people like this talk.

[Androidpk]

Turns out Bill and Hillary were slave owners back when he was Gov. How do you feel about this, Back?

https://twitter.com/i/moments/872315615486332929

[time4fun]

So like a lot of self entitled liberal "victims" she is fine with racism as long as it's committed against others. Great platform here woman, set race relations back even further.

Seriously, put the Fox News down. You sound insane.

[hello]

Turns out Bill and Hillary were slave owners back when he was Gov. How do you feel about this, Back?

https://twitter.com/i/moments/872315615486332929

Things get funky in the South and rural parts of the country. But to me it seems like a chance for lifers to enjoy some privelages of the outside world. Nothing "slavery" about it, quite the opposite.

[drauz]

Seriously, put the Fox News down. You sound insane.

She pretty much says exactly that. Just like that Evergreen College bullshit. Kids mad at a professor because he wouldn't get behind telling a specific race be banned from the campus for a day.

[Parkbandit]

Let's be honest- this just needs its own thread. The man has never met a self-destructive strategy he didn't like.

Today:

Trump decided to (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/05/us/politics/trump-travel-ban.html?_r=0) tweet about the Travel Ban:



etc.

So first, Trump signed off on pulling the original EO while it was before the Courts and then wrote and signed the new version himself. So it's unclear why he's blaming the Justice Department for his executive actions.

Second, let's review the arguments that the Administration have been using to defend the second EO in Court:

1) It's not a travel ban. it's a travel "pause"

2) It's not the enactment of his campaign promise to ban Muslims from entering the US (specifically his promise to take the Muslim ban, reword it without saying Muslim, and then make it happen)

3) It's unrelated to the original EO- it's its own thing

4) It's unmotivated by political malice against a religious minority


Calling it a travel ban (a phrase that the Administration lawyers have explicitly avoided using) makes it harder to argue it's just a "pause", saying it's a politically correct version of what he wants- just supports the notion that this is his long-promised Muslim ban (which...obviously it is), and calling it a watered down version of the original just means this is absolutely related to the first, unconstitutional EO.

Trump is a prosecutor's dream come true. He literally goes on written, public record to contradict his own defense team and to support the arguments that have so far been successful for the prosecutors.

Kudos Donnie.

Can you imagine the entertainment you and Backlash could do if you teamed up?

I can:

http://www.jojofun.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/franz-cisco-clown-gif-2.gif

[~Rocktar~]

Seriously, put the Fox News down. You sound insane.

For fucks sake dumbass, your memory must be gone because I have clearly stated multiple times that I don't have TV and have not had TV in my home since 2009. You are insane. Lastly, that woman is a racist piece of shit that thinks that racism is ok as long as she commits it against others. Stop defending racist pieces of shit.

[Parkbandit]

I don't have TV and have not had TV in my home since 2009. You are insane.

You are not helping your situation here.

YOU are insane.

[time4fun]

Dear god, there's a lot today. Comey released a statement (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/06/07/us/politics/document-Comey-Prepared-Remarks-Testimony.html)prior to him testifying in front of the Senate tomorrow. There's plenty of self-inflicted wound fodder in this one (not surprisingly). Some highlights:

Comey confirmed that he was invited to- and attended- a dinner with just Trump (though he believed there would be other people there). His assessment of the situation:


The President began by asking me whether I wanted to stay on as FBI Director, which I found strange because he had already told me twice in earlier conversations that he hoped I would stay, and I had assured him that I intended to.


My instincts told me that the one-on-one setting, and the pretense that this was our first discussion about my position, meant the dinner was, at least in part, an effort to have me ask for my job and create some sort of patronage relationship. That concerned me greatly, given the FBI’s traditionally independent status in the executive branch.


A few moments later, the President said, “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.”


Near the end of our dinner, the President returned to the subject of my job, saying he was very glad I wanted to stay, adding that he had heard great things about me from Jim Mattis, Jeff Sessions, and many others. He then said, “I need loyalty.”

Comey recounted a Feb 14th meeting where he was asked by the President to stay behind to meet 1:1. Apparently Trump dismissed both Sessions and Kushner who were trying to linger behind. During the meeting:


When the door by the grandfather clock closed, and we were alone, the President began by saying, “I want to talk about Mike Flynn.” Flynn had resigned the previous day. The President began by saying Flynn hadn’t done anything wrong in speaking with the Russians, but he had to let him go because he had misled the Vice President. He added that he had other concerns about Flynn, which he did not then specify.


He then said, “I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go.”

The statement goes on to recount two other meetings where Trump is clearly trying to influence the way Comey was dealing with the investigation.

Comey indicated that there were several other meetings not discussed in the statement but which he kept notes on.

[time4fun]

For fucks sake dumbass, your memory must be gone because I have clearly stated multiple times that I don't have TV and have not had TV in my home since 2009. You are insane. Lastly, that woman is a racist piece of shit that thinks that racism is ok as long as she commits it against others. Stop defending racist pieces of shit.

Yeah, that cleared up the whole "you sound insane" thing.

[Fortybox]

Yeah, that cleared up the whole "you sound insane" thing.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/HuxZRrteaEwSc/giphy.gif

[~Rocktar~]

You are not helping your situation here.

YOU are insane.

Why, because I don't want to pay for negative crap to be pumped into my home 24/7 because the free channels where I live are the basic crap networks and that's all?

[Parkbandit]

Why, because I don't want to pay for negative crap to be pumped into my home 24/7 because the free channels where I live are the basic crap networks and that's all?

Yes.

Post your manifesto here, crazy nutjob.

[Methais]

Why, because I don't want to pay for negative crap to be pumped into my home 24/7 because the free channels where I live are the basic crap networks and that's all?

https://i.imgflip.com/1qj6lh.jpg

[~Rocktar~]

That's a cute image.

Ummm, post a manifesto, damn, I would have to make one first and that sounds dangerously close to work or something.

[time4fun]

Oh and here we go again! Trump is now saying (http://in.reuters.com/article/usa-trump-russia-idINKBN1901FP) he'll happily go under oath to contradict Comey's testimony.


U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday denied accusations by former FBI director James Comey that he tried to block an investigation into a former national security adviser, adding that he was willing to give his version of events under oath.

Asked by a reporter if he had told Comey to drop a Federal Bureau of Investigation probe into former top aide Michael Flynn, Trump said, "I didn't say that."

Going through with this will basically be the end.

[hello]

Oh and here we go again! Trump is now saying (http://in.reuters.com/article/usa-trump-russia-idINKBN1901FP) he'll happily go under oath to contradict Comey's testimony.



Going through with this will basically be the end.

I seriously think he's doing all this for his own ratings and potential TV immortality. It's just not possible to be this stupid or "ignorant"; it's pure trolling at this point.

[Wrathbringer]

Oh and here we go again! Trump is now saying (http://in.reuters.com/article/usa-trump-russia-idINKBN1901FP) he'll happily go under oath to contradict Comey's testimony.



Going through with this will basically be the end.

Good, maybe you'll stfu.

[Methais]

Going through with this will basically be the end.

What happened to the 48237042389 other things that already happened that you said were definitely going to be the end of him, for super sure this time. And the time after. And the timer after that, x100000.

What happened to those?

[Gelston]

What happened to the 48237042389 other things that already happened that you said were definitely going to be the end of him, for super sure this time. And the time after. And the timer after that, x100000.

What happened to those?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cEuU64Zt4B0

[Shaps]

Oh and here we go again! Trump is now saying (http://in.reuters.com/article/usa-trump-russia-idINKBN1901FP) he'll happily go under oath to contradict Comey's testimony.

Going through with this will basically be the end.

At least he's offering to appear.. instead of plead the 5th like so many other of our bitch politicians and their associates.

[time4fun]

At least he's offering to appear.. instead of plead the 5th like so many other of our bitch politicians and their associates.

I HIGHLY doubt he'll actually appear in public testimony. There's no reason to take anything Trump says here as legitimate.

It's almost unthinkable that he won't be brought in to testify at some point in the Mueller investigation, however. I'm guessing Trump realizes that and is basically trying to make it look like it's his idea.

Speaking of which, longtime Trump friend (and head of Newsmax) told PBS (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rumor-trump-may-fire-mueller-sets-washington-alight-n771326) that Trump is considering firing Mueller:


Rumors that Trump was considering firing Mueller — whom the Justice Department appointed to investigate allegations that Trump's presidential campaign may have coordinated with Russia — emerged Monday afternoon in a Washington version of the game Telephone.

The idea gained traction after Christopher Ruddy, chief executive of the conservative news site and TV network Newsmax, said of Trump in an interview on "PBS NewsHour": "I think he's considering perhaps terminating the special counsel. I think he's weighing that option."

Under normal circumstances I wouldn't give this any weight. But after he fired Comey, I think Trump may actually be terrified and willing.

Having said that, if anything this feels like a typical Trump threat meant to try to intimidate Mueller out of being too aggressive in his presumed obstruction investigation.

[Tgo01]

Having said that, if anything this feels like a typical Trump threat meant to try to intimidate Mueller out of being too aggressive in his presumed obstruction investigation.

I was wondering what your excuse was going to be when Mueller came back and said he found no evidence of collusion or obstruction against Trump. You can't claim he's a partisan hack because pretty much everyone agrees he's pretty non-partisan when it comes to the law.

So apparently your at-the-ready excuse will be Trump intimidated him. LOL.

This shit gets funnier by the day. Maybe your LNet boyfriend WB will come along and make up some bullshit to help defend your whacky positions.

[Shaps]

I HIGHLY doubt he'll actually appear in public testimony. There's no reason to take anything Trump says here as legitimate.

It's almost unthinkable that he won't be brought in to testify at some point in the Mueller investigation, however. I'm guessing Trump realizes that and is basically trying to make it look like it's his idea.

Speaking of which, longtime Trump friend (and head of Newsmax) told PBS (http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/rumor-trump-may-fire-mueller-sets-washington-alight-n771326) that Trump is considering firing Mueller:



Under normal circumstances I wouldn't give this any weight. But after he fired Comey, I think Trump may actually be terrified and willing.

Having said that, if anything this feels like a typical Trump threat meant to try to intimidate Mueller out of being too aggressive in his presumed obstruction investigation.

I can only hope he appears and doesn't plead the 5th. As I get pissed that any elected official or representative does when it applies to matters that apply to the people of the country. I know it's their right to plead the 5th, but when they are asked a question concerning their work and how it applies to us all, I think they should be forthcoming.

As for firing Mueller.. any article that actually uses the phrase "version of the game Telephone" make me really wonder about the writer. If Trump fires Mueller, then the bullshit flag goes way up.. how I see it at least.

But still waiting to see how it plays out. Still haven't been presented one item of evidence of "collusion" between the Trump campaign and Russia. Russia screwing around with the US and others? Proven. But as I said before, they and everyone else is doing that on a daily basis. If collusion is found, then I hope the book gets thrown at whoever was doing it, but I doubt there was.. but I'll wait for the information to be released.

[Ardwen]

Trump can't fire Mueller himself anyway, in this case Rosenstein would need to. And the President is generally not supposed to testify before congress at all, seperation of powers and all that. And as to evidence theres a whole lot of circumstantial evidence that the russians were doing something with a lot of aides, but oth parties are so corruupt now it'd take decades to shovel tthru all the shit both have been buried in.

[time4fun]

I can only hope he appears and doesn't plead the 5th. As I get pissed that any elected official or representative does when it applies to matters that apply to the people of the country. I know it's their right to plead the 5th, but when they are asked a question concerning their work and how it applies to us all, I think they should be forthcoming.

As for firing Mueller.. any article that actually uses the phrase "version of the game Telephone" make me really wonder about the writer. If Trump fires Mueller, then the bullshit flag goes way up.. how I see it at least.

But still waiting to see how it plays out. Still haven't been presented one item of evidence of "collusion" between the Trump campaign and Russia. Russia screwing around with the US and others? Proven. But as I said before, they and everyone else is doing that on a daily basis. If collusion is found, then I hope the book gets thrown at whoever was doing it, but I doubt there was.. but I'll wait for the information to be released.

There's actually a lot of circumstantial evidence of collusion between the campaign and Russia. But no publicly accessible smoking gun. So it's 100% fair to NOT jump to the conclusion that there was collusion. But it's also ridiculous to pretend like that there isn't a lot of concerning evidence. Comey himself sort of pointed the way a bit during his testimony- in an exchange that mostly seemed to fly under the media radar:


BURR: Director, the term we hear most often is “collusion.” When people are describing possible links between Americans and Russian government entities related to the interference in our election, would you say that it’s normal for foreign governments to reach out to members of an incoming administration?

COMEY: Yes.

BURR: At what point does the normal contact cross the line into an attempt to recruit agents or influence (ph) or spies?

COMEY: Difficult to say in the abstract. It depends upon the context, whether there’s an effort to keep it covert, what the nature of the requests made of the American by the foreign government are. It’s a — it’s a judgment call based on a whole lot of facts.

Nothing Comey said was an accident. He's really good at playing the "Oh golly, I'm just a humble, regular guy doing his best to make his way through all of this" on the stand, but everything he said was calculated. He only pointed out one concrete criteria there- attempts to keep meetings covert. That's significant.

How much effort has gone into hiding and denying Trump campaign contacts with Russian officials? Trump himself repeatedly said that no one on his campaign had any contact with the Russians, but it was obvious that there were- and that he was very well aware of it. (Some meetings at Trump Tower, other meetings he was a part of, etc) Putin also initially repeatedly denied that any contacts occurred. THAT should be raising huge red flags in everyone's minds.

If he didn't do anything wrong- why the constant attempts to keep the contacts covert?

[time4fun]

Trump can't fire Mueller himself anyway, in this case Rosenstein would need to. And the President is generally not supposed to testify before congress at all, seperation of powers and all that. And as to evidence theres a whole lot of circumstantial evidence that the russians were doing something with a lot of aides, but oth parties are so corruupt now it'd take decades to shovel tthru all the shit both have been buried in.

Actually he can. Mueller still reports to Trump ultimately. There are some administrative statutes that set conditions for dismissal, but Trump isn't legally bound to follow them. The law Congress let expire had more explicit protections, but Mueller was appointed under a DoJ statute, not an act of Congress.

[Latrinsorm]

I can only hope he appears and doesn't plead the 5th. As I get pissed that any elected official or representative does when it applies to matters that apply to the people of the country. I know it's their right to plead the 5th, but when they are asked a question concerning their work and how it applies to us all, I think they should be forthcoming.

As for firing Mueller.. any article that actually uses the phrase "version of the game Telephone" make me really wonder about the writer. If Trump fires Mueller, then the bullshit flag goes way up.. how I see it at least.

But still waiting to see how it plays out. Still haven't been presented one item of evidence of "collusion" between the Trump campaign and Russia. Russia screwing around with the US and others? Proven. But as I said before, they and everyone else is doing that on a daily basis. If collusion is found, then I hope the book gets thrown at whoever was doing it, but I doubt there was.. but I'll wait for the information to be released.On the other hand, President Nixon did not collude with the Watergate burglars, and in fact had no prior knowledge of their activities whatsoever. What got him in trouble was obstructing the investigation into that burglary.

[cwolff]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/06/25/trump-accuses-clinton-of-colluding-with-democrats-to-defeat-crazy-bernie-sanders/?utm_term=.23e7ecccc8d3

This fuck just can't control himself.

[~Rocktar~]

There's actually a lot of circumstantial evidence of collusion between the campaign and Russia. But no publicly accessible smoking gun. So it's 100% fair to NOT jump to the conclusion that there was collusion. But it's also ridiculous to pretend like that there isn't a lot of concerning evidence. Comey himself sort of pointed the way a bit during his testimony- in an exchange that mostly seemed to fly under the media radar:



Nothing Comey said was an accident. He's really good at playing the "Oh golly, I'm just a humble, regular guy doing his best to make his way through all of this" on the stand, but everything he said was calculated. He only pointed out one concrete criteria there- attempts to keep meetings covert. That's significant.

How much effort has gone into hiding and denying Trump campaign contacts with Russian officials? Trump himself repeatedly said that no one on his campaign had any contact with the Russians, but it was obvious that there were- and that he was very well aware of it. (Some meetings at Trump Tower, other meetings he was a part of, etc) Putin also initially repeatedly denied that any contacts occurred. THAT should be raising huge red flags in everyone's minds.

If he didn't do anything wrong- why the constant attempts to keep the contacts covert?

Simple answer as to why anything might be hidden, because of the shit show that the media has become and sheeple like yourself. Oh and if circumstantial evidence is sufficient for guilt, why the hell isn't Hillary in prison by now, not only is there massive circumstantial evidence of pay for play corruption, criminal mishandling of classified information and tampering with evidence in a criminal investigation, we have actual proof and admissions of guilt in such things. Simple answer to that is that circumstantial evidence is only indicative of guilt when it suits you.

This is a political witch hunt and is a distraction used by the sinking CNN and others to try and make hay and save their ratings. It is also a distraction and annoyance used by the Dems in order to cause whatever mayhem they can with no regard for the law, the people of the US or anyone but themselves and I seriously hope that the midterms see them suffer deeply.

Next inane, inconsequential and overly emotional diatribe thinly disguised as a tenuously strung together series of statements?


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/06/25/trump-accuses-clinton-of-colluding-with-democrats-to-defeat-crazy-bernie-sanders/?utm_term=.23e7ecccc8d3

This fuck just can't control himself.

You need to cut and paste your relevant passages because the paywall is strong with that shit site and there is no way I am paying to have their compost delivered to me in any form.

[ClydeR]

You need to cut and paste your relevant passages because the paywall is strong with that shit site and there is no way I am paying to have their compost delivered to me in any form.


It refers to this tweet by Trump, in which he raises a question by implication. If it wasn't a crime for Clinton to collude with the Democrat party to defeat Sanders, then why should it be a crime for Trump to collude with the Russians to defeat Clinton?




https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDKk2eeUAAEDn_1.jpg

[tyrant-201]

Simple answer as to why anything might be hidden, because of the shit show that the media has become and sheeple like yourself. Oh and if circumstantial evidence is sufficient for guilt, why the hell isn't Hillary in prison by now, not only is there massive circumstantial evidence of pay for play corruption, criminal mishandling of classified information and tampering with evidence in a criminal investigation, we have actual proof and admissions of guilt in such things. Simple answer to that is that circumstantial evidence is only indicative of guilt when it suits you.

This is a political witch hunt and is a distraction used by the sinking CNN and others to try and make hay and save their ratings. It is also a distraction and annoyance used by the Dems in order to cause whatever mayhem they can with no regard for the law, the people of the US or anyone but themselves and I seriously hope that the midterms see them suffer deeply.

Next inane, inconsequential and overly emotional diatribe thinly disguised as a tenuously strung together series of statements?



You need to cut and paste your relevant passages because the paywall is strong with that shit site and there is no way I am paying to have their compost delivered to me in any form.

Out of curiosity, where do you get your news/information?

[cwolff]

And this one where he refers to himself as T while asking us to quit investigating him. LMAO

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDHP_ROVwAAzbGj.jpg

[Latrinsorm]

there's only one Mr. T

and he ain't some orange mo

[~Rocktar~]

Out of curiosity, where do you get your news/information?

News aggregation, there are a lot of programs out there that will do it for you. I get headlines and top stories from over 30 of the leading news organizations in broadcast, print and on the web. They include all the big names and many of the regional papers as well. I have not filtered out CNN, HuffPo, Washington Compost and other distinctly liberal organizations despite being decidedly Conservative.

[ClydeR]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDP9UVkUAAAx6ac.jpg




Trump definitely deserves an apology. If you say something about somebody that turns out not to be true, you should apologize.

[cwolff]

President Trump posted a short video to his Twitter account on Sunday in which he is portrayed wrestling and punching a figure whose head has been replaced by the logo for CNN.
The video, about 28 seconds long, appears to be an edited clip from a years-old appearance by Mr. Trump in WrestleMania, an annual professional wrestling event. It ends with an onscreen restyling of the CNN logo as “FNN: Fraud News Network.”


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PIYh9UZsL8

[RichardCranium]

I thought it was funny. People freaking out about it, including the responses on Twitter and also the media's response make it that much more hilarious.

[Parkbandit]

I thought it was funny. People freaking out about it, including the responses on Twitter and also the media's response make it that much more hilarious.

"OMG PRESIDENT TRUMP IS ENCOURAGING VIOLENCE AGAINST THE MEDIA!"

Fucking snowflake idiots.

[time4fun]

I thought it was funny. People freaking out about it, including the responses on Twitter and also the media's response make it that much more hilarious.


This wasn't a self-inflicted wound. It was an extremely effective distraction on a day that otherwise would have been a genuinely bad news day.

This manufactured crisis is his wheel house. His supporters aren't bothered enough by this to worry. The WSJ article, on the other hand, would have been much worse. Being at an event at the same time Putin was would also have been a bad headline.

It blows my mind that everyone continues to fall for his distractions.

[cwolff]

This wasn't a self-inflicted wound. It was an extremely effective distraction on a day that otherwise would have been a genuinely bad news day.

This manufactured crisis is his wheel house. His supporters aren't bothered enough by this to worry. The WSJ article, on the other hand, would have been much worse. Being at an event at the same time Putin was would also have been a bad headline.

It blows my mind that everyone continues to fall for his distractions.

You have a point, but I'm trusting that Mueller's investigation will continue and eventually answer all the questions being raised. Because of that I'm not super worried about the dribs and drabs we're getting from the news. In the meantime, his crazy ass tweets are working against him with all but his dumb ass followers.

[Wrathbringer]

This wasn't a self-inflicted wound. It was an extremely effective distraction on a day that otherwise would have been a genuinely bad news day.

This manufactured crisis is his wheel house. His supporters aren't bothered enough by this to worry. The WSJ article, on the other hand, would have been much worse. Being at an event at the same time Putin was would also have been a bad headline.

It blows my mind that everyone continues to fall for his distractions.

It blows my mind that you continue to fall for the liberal bs you regurgitate here.

[Back]

It blows my mind that you continue to fall for the liberal bs you regurgitate here.

It blows my mind that you think anyone takes you seriously.

[Latrinsorm]

"OMG PRESIDENT TRUMP IS ENCOURAGING VIOLENCE AGAINST THE MEDIA!" Fucking snowflake idiots.
Is anyone really surprised at this? You can't keep talking about killing people for their politics and not think this is going to happen.Hmm......

[Gelston]

It blows my mind that you continue to fall for the liberal bs you regurgitate here.

Haha, I almost thought time4dung was responding to herself.

[Candor]

It blows my mind that you think anyone takes you seriously.

Put Wrathbringer on ignore. Trust me, you won't miss him.

[Parkbandit]

It blows my mind that you think anyone takes you seriously.

Irony.

[Tgo01]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PIYh9UZsL8

The bitch said "JIF." That alone is 100 times worse than everything Trump has done combined.

Also I found it kind of funny. Remember the collective shit people lost when Obama tried to be "hip" with the kids? Now Trump is embracing memes and he's literally Hitler. You people need to get a grip on reality already.

[Tgo01]

The bitch said "JIF." That alone is 100 times worse than everything Trump has done combined.

Also I found it kind of funny. Remember the collective shit people lost when Obama tried to be "hip" with the kids? Now Trump is embracing memes and he's literally Hitler. You people need to get a grip on reality already.

I'll throw you Democrats a little bone here.

IF Trump made this entire video himself for the sole purpose of making it look like he was "attacking" CNN then I might see the outrage. Might.

What I mean by this is if one day in the Oval Office Trump is like "Hey guys, bring a guy with a camera in here and a guy wearing a CNN logo mask. I want to make it look like I'm tackling the guy to the ground and punching him in the face. It will be glorious!"

THEN okay. Sure. Maybe.

But come the fuck on. This is a clip from what, 10 years ago or something, that someone imposed CNN's logo on the guy's head and Trump just Tweeted it because it's funny.

Calm the fuck down.

[Back]

Yeah. Indignant outrage over a meme is silly. Then again most people aren't battle-hardened internet warriors like we are.

[Parkbandit]

Yeah. Indignant outrage over a meme is silly. Then again most people aren't battle-hardened internet warriors like we are.

Is that what you call yourself?

It's just like war!

[Back]

Is that what you call yourself?

It's just like war!

You know thats not what I said or meant, moron. Most of us on the PC have been running around the Internet since it started while a good majority of the world is only now discovering it within recent years. We've developed the thick, scaly, alligator-like skin from trying our hardest to insult each other, so a video of Trump body-slamming a CNN logo is nothing to us but the Internet newb thinks it's the work of Satan. Anyway, quit being a Nancy.

[Parkbandit]

You know thats not what I said or meant, moron. Most of us on the PC have been running around the Internet since it started while a good majority of the world is only now discovering it within recent years. We've developed the thick, scaly, alligator-like skin from trying our hardest to insult each other, so a video of Trump body-slamming a CNN logo is nothing to us but the Internet newb thinks it's the work of Satan. Anyway, quit being a Nancy.

You're such a battle-hardened internet warrior.

[Methais]

there's only one Mr. T

and he ain't some orange mo

Who said anything about Mr.?

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSmL8DngLmwsYGoOfhVe9vhc7e2aCXLM 1NvqiRlHjn30wLpXeLv

https://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/trailerpark/images/1/1a/Tyrone.gif/revision/latest?cb=20120326225123

[Methais]

Anyway, quit being a Nancy.

Sexist.

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/4fAvm15ThV4/maxresdefault.jpg

[Tgo01]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PIYh9UZsL8

You'll be happy to know CNN tracked down the kid from Reddit who posted the original gif. Somehow found his Facebook page, emailed him, called him, and coerced an apology out of him with threats of revealing his real name and location should he step out of line again.

But Trump posted something mean on Twitter!

[drauz]

You'll be happy to know CNN tracked down the kid from Reddit who posted the original gif. Somehow found his Facebook page, emailed him, called him, and coerced an apology out of him with threats of revealing his real name and location should he step out of line again.

But Trump posted something mean on Twitter!

Well the only reason he was afraid of his name getting revealed was because he also had lots of racist pics and such. He wasn't afraid regarding the CNN gif.

[Tgo01]

Well the only reason he was afraid of his name getting revealed was because he also had lots of racist pics and such. He wasn't afraid regarding the CNN gif.

Regardless of why he was afraid, CNN clearly used that fear to get an apology out of him.

[drauz]

Regardless of why he was afraid, CNN clearly used that fear to get an apology out of him.

Eh, its not great but they didn't do anything wrong. They are butthurt and that guy should be lucky they didn't post his info.

[Tgo01]

Eh, its not great but they didn't do anything wrong. They are butthurt and that guy should be lucky they didn't post his info.

After CNN "tracked him down" the guy (who I hear might be a 15 year old kid) pleaded with them not to reveal his personal information because he feared for his life. CNN got this lengthy apology out of him, he deleted all of his posts and his account, and warned others not to engage in this type of behavior, and CNN said they will keep his information private but they reserve the right to reveal his private information should any of this change.

That is the literal definition of blackmail. I couldn't make up a more apt example of blackmail if I tried.

[Tisket]

Yeah, they like playing victim but, CNN wasn't the good guy in this. A media giant bullied a kid. Whoopee.

[drauz]

After CNN "tracked him down" the guy (who I hear might be a 15 year old kid) pleaded with them not to reveal his personal information because he feared for his life. CNN got this lengthy apology out of him, he deleted all of his posts and his account, and warned others not to engage in this type of behavior, and CNN said they will keep his information private but they reserve the right to reveal his private information should any of this change.

That is the literal definition of blackmail. I couldn't make up a more apt example of blackmail if I tried.

Well blackmail requires money being involved, so its not really blackmail. Sounds like he instigated the deal so that right there is the opposite of blackmail.

[Tisket]

Well blackmail requires money being involved, so its not really blackmail. Sounds like he instigated the deal so that right there is the opposite of blackmail.

Don't you think the power dynamic was a little unbalanced in this? I mean, c'mon.

[Tgo01]

Well blackmail requires money being involved, so its not really blackmail. Sounds like he instigated the deal so that right there is the opposite of blackmail.

Blackmail does not require money to be involved. Extortion involves money, blackmail can be demanding someone do something, like blackmailing a senator with threatening to expose embarrassing information unless the senator votes a particular way.

Also it doesn't matter if the kid initiated the deal, CNN committing the act of blackmail is still blackmail.

[drauz]

Don't you think the power dynamic was a little unbalanced in this? I mean, c'mon.

Again he isn't afraid because of the Trump gif, its because of his other posts which seemed to have very racist content.

There is always going to be a huge power gap for anyone they report on except celebrities and politicians. I don't think they should have even looked into who made the gif, its second rate journalism at best. That being said they still did nothing wrong, maybe a little shady. I don't know how this is even news...

[Tgo01]

I don't know how this is even news...

Because it's a multi billion dollar news organization brazenly admitting they engaged in blackmail.

[Tisket]

It isn't even about blackmail.

It's about power. CNN has the power to destroy this kid's life. Why? Because he posted stupid shit on the internet.

A news organization using vigilante justice isn't one deserving of respect.

[drauz]

Blackmail does not require money to be involved. Extortion involves money, blackmail can be demanding someone do something, like blackmailing a senator with threatening to expose embarrassing information unless the senator votes a particular way.

Also it doesn't matter if the kid initiated the deal, CNN committing the act of blackmail is still blackmail.

Negative.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/873


Whoever, under a threat of informing, or as a consideration for not informing, against any violation of any law of the United States, demands or receives any money or other valuable thing

CNN gained nothing valuable so it is not blackmail.

[Tisket]

CNN should have laughed it off and posted the gif themselves.

The losers need to get a fucking sense of humor.

[drauz]

CNN should have laughed it off and posted the gif themselves.

The losers need to get a fucking sense of humor.

Exactly, they should have just left it at that. If they had done this level of investigating for the Malaysian flight we might know where it is right now.

[Tisket]

CNN gained nothing valuable so it is not blackmail.

That's simply untrue. There is no such thing as bad publicity. It's how they stay relevant.

[Tisket]

The very best thing that ever happened to CNN was being targetted by Trump. If you think they didn't love every time he took a jab at them you are deluding yourself.

[drauz]

That's simply untrue. There is no such thing as bad publicity. It's how they stay relevant.

They were getting the publicity no matter what they did. They gained zero value by not posting his information.

[drauz]

The very best thing that ever happened to CNN was being targetted by Trump. If you think they didn't love every time he took a jab at them you are deluding yourself.

targeted*

[Tisket]

targeted*

I hate you with the fury of a 1000 fiery suns.

[Tgo01]

Negative.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/873



CNN gained nothing valuable so it is not blackmail.

Demanding an apology, the deletion of his posts and account, and "warning" others not to do the same thing could be viewed as CNN gaining something "valuable." This sentence by no means implies a tangible object.

But even so, you are going by the federal law's wording of blackmail. The usage of the term blackmail does indeed include compelling someone to do something against their will. So even if I were to grant you this isn't the federal crime of blackmail, it sure as shit is blackmail nonetheless.

Not to mention CNN better be careful of state laws because some state laws do explicitly spell out threatening someone to commit or not commit a lawful act under force of threat.

NY state:

http://statelaws.findlaw.com/new-york-law/new-york-extortion-laws.html


The most basic form of the offense is second degree coercion, which occurs when a person compels another person to engage or refrain from engaging in lawful conduct by instilling a fear of:

Michigan state law:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(u2mvhmz31p3j3511fmk1dfwb))/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-750-213


with intent to compel the person so threatened to do or refrain from doing any act against his will

[Tisket]

They were getting the publicity no matter what they did. They gained zero value by not posting his information.

CNN is all about keeping CNN in the news. There is great gain in doing so. They would have "gained zero value" by not finding the kid in the first place.

[drauz]

Demanding an apology, the deletion of his posts and account, and "warning" others not to do the same thing could be viewed as CNN gaining something "valuable." This sentence by no means implies a tangible object.

But even so, you are going by the federal law's wording of blackmail. The usage of the term blackmail does indeed include compelling someone to do something against their will. So even if I were to grant you this isn't the federal crime of blackmail, it sure as shit is blackmail nonetheless.

Not to mention CNN better be careful of state laws because some state laws do include threatening someone to commit or not commit a lawful act under force of threat.

NY state:

http://statelaws.findlaw.com/new-york-law/new-york-extortion-laws.html



Michigan state law:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(u2mvhmz31p3j3511fmk1dfwb))/mileg.aspx?page=getobject&objectname=mcl-750-213

He posted the apology before he even spoke with CNN, so no not blackmail.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/5/cnn-threatens-reveal-reddit-user-real-identity-ove/


The man behind the video, who goes by the Reddit username “HanA**holeSolo,” posted an apology to Reddit on Tuesday calling the video a “prank, nothing more.”
“The meme was created purely as satire, it was not meant to be a call to violence against CNN or any other news affiliation,” he wrote. “I had no idea anyone would take it and put sound to it and then have it put up on the President’s Twitter feed.”

He also apologized for posts that he said were “racist, bigoted, and anti-semitic,” calling them attempts to “get a reaction” out of people.

CNN said it unsuccessfully attempted to contact the man on Monday, the day before he issued the apology.

He called CNN back on Tuesday, after he posted the apology, and “sounded nervous about his identity being revealed and asked not to be named out of fear for his personal safety and for the public embarrassment it would bring to him and his family,” CNN reported.

[drauz]

I hate you with the fury of a 1000 fiery suns.

I'm a winter so I expect the dress to match!

[Neveragain]

He posted the apology before he even spoke with CNN, so no not blackmail.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/5/cnn-threatens-reveal-reddit-user-real-identity-ove/

But not before he received the threatening e-mail.

[Tgo01]

He posted the apology before he even spoke with CNN, so no not blackmail.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/5/cnn-threatens-reveal-reddit-user-real-identity-ove/

So what? So you're just chilling at home, thinking your internet trolling ways are anonymous, suddenly you get a phone call from CNN. Shit. Your anonymity is shot to shit. You scramble to apologize, delete your posts and your account, and call back CNN to inform them what you did, and CNN says they reserve the right to reveal his information if any of this changes.

That is fucking blackmail. No matter how you want to spin that. That was a threat on CNN's part. They might have avoided this entire shit show if they had left that one single sentence out of their article.

This is assuming I even believe a single word from CNN anymore at this point, which I do not. So if they claim he apologized first and then they spoke, I call bullshit. I also wonder what message they left for him or what their email said that made him shit his pants, assuming I accept CNN's timeline of events here.

[drauz]

But not before he received the threatening e-mail.

I see no mention of an e-mail.

[Tgo01]

I see no mention of an e-mail.

Read CNN's article itself:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-user-trump-tweet/index.html


The apology came after CNN's KFile identified the man behind "HanA**holeSolo." Using identifying information that "HanA**holeSolo" posted on Reddit, KFile was able to determine key biographical details, to find the man's name using a Facebook search and ultimately corroborate details he had made available on Reddit.
On Monday, KFile attempted to contact the man by email and phone but he did not respond. On Tuesday, "HanA**holeSolo" posted his apology on the subreddit /The_Donald and deleted all of his other posts.

[drauz]

So what? So you're just chilling at home, thinking your internet trolling ways are anonymous, suddenly you get a phone call from CNN. Shit. Your anonymity is shot to shit. You scramble to apologize, delete your posts and your account, and call back CNN to inform them what you did, and CNN says they reserve the right to reveal his information if any of this changes.

That is fucking blackmail. No matter how you want to spin that. That was a threat on CNN's part. They might have avoided this entire shit show if they had left that one single sentence out of their article.

This is assuming I even believe a single word from CNN anymore at this point, which I do not. So if they claim he apologized first and then they spoke, I call bullshit. I also wonder what message they left for him or what their email said that made him shit his pants, assuming I accept CNN's timeline of events here.


In a tweet Tuesday night, Mr. Kaczynski said CNN’s intent was “misinterpreted.”
This line is being misinterpreted. It was intended only to mean we made no agreement w/the man about his identity.
.

[Tgo01]

In a tweet Tuesday night, Mr. Kaczynski said CNN’s intent was “misinterpreted.”
This line is being misinterpreted. It was intended only to mean we made no agreement w/the man about his identity.

CNN in damage control mode? Can't imagine why.

[drauz]

CNN in damage control mode? Can't imagine why.

Well I doubt that guy is going to out himself, so all we really have is the side CNN is giving.....

[drauz]

So what? So you're just chilling at home, thinking your internet trolling ways are anonymous, suddenly you get a phone call from CNN. Shit. Your anonymity is shot to shit. You scramble to apologize, delete your posts and your account, and call back CNN to inform them what you did, and CNN says they reserve the right to reveal his information if any of this changes.

That is fucking blackmail. No matter how you want to spin that. That was a threat on CNN's part. They might have avoided this entire shit show if they had left that one single sentence out of their article.

This is assuming I even believe a single word from CNN anymore at this point, which I do not. So if they claim he apologized first and then they spoke, I call bullshit. I also wonder what message they left for him or what their email said that made him shit his pants, assuming I accept CNN's timeline of events here.

I see you playing pokemon and you offer me a rare card (?) to not tell anyone that you play. I offer none of the stipulations, you do. I accept the offer and take the card. Have I committed blackmail?

[Tgo01]

Well I doubt that guy is going to out himself, so all we really have is the side CNN is giving.....

You're right, and CNN's side is self-damaging enough.

First they tracked down a supposedly 15 year old kid because he posted a gif about Trump tackling CNN.

Then they find his phone number and email address and both call him and leave an email.

They said who knows what in these messages and it scared him enough to issue an apology which commends the incredible work journalists do everyday by putting their lives on the line to bring us the news (LOL! I'm sure he came up with that all on his own), all within 24 hours of receiving said phone call and email.

CNN reports on all of this and ends it by stating they will keep his information private unless he pisses off CNN again in the future.

We don't even need the other side of the story. CNN did a good job destroying themselves all on their own.

[Tgo01]

I see you playing pokemon and you offer me a rare card (?) to not tell anyone that you play. I offer none of the stipulations, you do. I accept the offer and take the card. Have I committed blackmail?

You commit blackmail once you tell me that you'll only keep my secret as long as I keep my side of the bargain. That is that blackmail part and as I said it's the reason why CNN is finding themselves in deep shit.

To look at it in a more accurate comparison of what's going on here; if I tell you I'll give you a rare Pokemon card every week you keep my secret and you tell me you'll keep my secret as long as the Pokemon cards keep coming, then it's blackmail on your part. You are no longer a passive actor in this transgression, you are very much an active actor.

[drauz]

You commit blackmail once you tell me that you'll only keep my secret as long as I keep my side of the bargain. That is that blackmail part and as I said it's the reason why CNN is finding themselves in deep shit.

To look at it in a more accurate comparison of what's going on here; if I tell you I'll give you a rare Pokemon card every week you keep my secret and you tell me you'll keep my secret as long as the Pokemon cards keep coming, then it's blackmail on your part. You are no longer a passive actor in this transgression, you are very much an active actor.

I feel like that's a stretch. You could view almost any monthly subscription in that light. I'll give you access to one character slot in this game called Gemstone for 14.95 a month, but if you ever stop paying I will take away your access to it.

[Tgo01]

I feel like that's a stretch. You could view almost any monthly subscription in that light. I'll give you access to one character slot in this game called Gemstone for 14.95 a month, but if you ever stop paying I will take away your access to it.

Yes, if Simu sent me an email stating "We recorded a log of you cybering a donkey in game last night. If your subscription ever runs out then we will release this cyber log on the internet along with your real name and address and any other personal information we have on you. Pervert." Then it's blackmail.

[drauz]

Yes, if Simu sent me an email stating "We recorded a log of you cybering a donkey in game last night. If your subscription ever runs out then we will release this cyber log on the internet along with your real name and address and any other personal information we have on you. Pervert." Then it's blackmail.

But that isn't what CNN is saying though.

[Tenlaar]

But that isn't what CNN is saying though.

Yeah, well, facts are racist. Or something.

[Tgo01]

But that isn't what CNN is saying though.

Well, no, not literally talking about donkey cyber, but otherwise yes, that is exactly what happened.

Even if we accept CNN's version of events, they tracked this person down, called him (and presumably left a message) and emailed him. Guy freaks out, apologizes (going into detail about what heroes reporters are), deletes all of his posts, calls up CNN, apologizes more, and states he is worried for his safety if his identity is revealed. CNN says they will keep his identity a secret as long as the guy doesn't piss them off again.

In what way is this different from my analogy of Simu and donkey sex?

[drauz]

Well, no, not literally talking about donkey cyber, but otherwise yes, that is exactly what happened.

Even if we accept CNN's version of events, they tracked this person down, called him (and presumably left a message) and emailed him. Guy freaks out, apologizes (going into detail about what heroes reporters are), deletes all of his posts, calls up CNN, apologizes more, and states he is worried for his safety if his identity is revealed. CNN says they will keep his identity a secret as long as the guy doesn't piss them off again.

In what way is this different from my analogy of Simu and donkey sex?

Bolded the incorrect part.

[Gelston]

I see you playing pokemon and you offer me a rare card (?) to not tell anyone that you play. I offer none of the stipulations, you do. I accept the offer and take the card. Have I committed blackmail?

You play pokeman. Fag.

[drauz]

You play pokeman. Fag.

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?103073-Pokemans-keep-appearing-on-my-dining-room-table&highlight=POKEMON+GO

Go on..

[Gelston]

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?103073-Pokemans-keep-appearing-on-my-dining-room-table&highlight=POKEMON+GO

Go on..

I only experimented. I no longer do it.

[Parkbandit]

I only experimented. I no longer do it.

Plus, he never inhaled.

[Parkbandit]

He posted the apology before he even spoke with CNN, so no not blackmail.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jul/5/cnn-threatens-reveal-reddit-user-real-identity-ove/

Maybe it's not the textbook definition of "blackmail", but they are most certainly threatening him.

CNN reporter Andrew Kaczynski opted not to identify the user “because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again.”


But Kaczynski then added that “CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change"

There's nothing redeeming about this guy, IF CNN's reporting is accurate.. he's posted racist and anti-semetic shit on the Internet for a while... but CNN went after this guy BECAUSE he made that gif.

CNN made this guy look like a victim.. which is probably a tough thing to do (again, if CNN's reporting is accurate.. which let's be honest, it really hasn't been).

[Savageheart]

You take away peoples anonymity and the internet becomes quite different for some.

Those calling it blackmail? I think the courts take a dim view on that should an actual law be broken.

I don't believe it was, but I'm biased. I don't know how to legally interpret your right to privacy when you post something that is available globally - under a pseudonym.

[Neveragain]

You take away peoples anonymity and the internet becomes quite different for some.

Those calling it blackmail? I think the courts take a dim view on that should an actual law be broken.

I don't believe it was, but I'm biased. I don't know how to legally interpret your right to privacy when you post something that is available globally - under a pseudonym.

My guess is the next few weeks will be a hell of a run. These kids are going to dig up anything they can on anyone associated with CNN and go public with it. I'm willing to bet just publishing a list of CNN employees private info will trigger the "news" network.

[Back]

You take away peoples anonymity and the internet becomes quite different for some.

Those calling it blackmail? I think the courts take a dim view on that should an actual law be broken.

I don't believe it was, but I'm biased. I don't know how to legally interpret your right to privacy when you post something that is available globally - under a pseudonym.

yeah man. Anonymity isn't what it used to be. I think it's a good thing we are moving away from it. Anonymity sometimes really brings out the worst in people. Myself included. If you can't say something nice about someone then don't say it. If you can't post something like you were face to face with people then don't post it.

[Savageheart]

My guess is the next few weeks will be a hell of a run. These kids are going to dig up anything they can on anyone associated with CNN and go public with it. I'm willing to bet just publishing a list of CNN employees private info will trigger the "news" network.

CNN accredits their journalists and op-ed columnists, they aren't masking content.

What else to do mean by associated, unless you're talking more about the many and possibly frivolous "anonymous sources" of late.

If that's where they are headed well that might get interesting, if they can prove anything. Otherwise you're just saying what, my neighbor John at <random address> watches CNN.

BURN HEEEEEM

[drauz]

Maybe it's not the textbook definition of "blackmail", but they are most certainly threatening him.

CNN reporter Andrew Kaczynski opted not to identify the user “because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again.”


But Kaczynski then added that “CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change"

There's nothing redeeming about this guy, IF CNN's reporting is accurate.. he's posted racist and anti-semetic shit on the Internet for a while... but CNN went after this guy BECAUSE he made that gif.

CNN made this guy look like a victim.. which is probably a tough thing to do (again, if CNN's reporting is accurate.. which let's be honest, it really hasn't been).

I get that its a shitty thing for major corporation to do over something like this. I just don't think its blackmail.

[drauz]

CNN accredits their journalists and op-ed columnists, they aren't masking content.

What else to do mean by associated, unless you're talking more about the many and possibly frivolous "anonymous sources" of late.

If that's where they are headed well that might get interesting, if they can prove anything. Otherwise you're just saying what, my neighbor John at <random address> watches CNN.

BURN HEEEEEM

I think he means people from the internet finding incriminating things out about people who work for CNN and their associates.

[cwolff]

I get that its a shitty thing for major corporation to do over something like this. I just don't think its blackmail.

It ain't no fucking blackmail. Parkbandit is simply stupid. The should publish the guys name if they have the goods on him. If they don't have it well confirmed then they shouldn't publish.

BUT: #1 thing is that they are not in the vigilante business and are even dumber than PB for appearing to threaten retribution against this guy. Either it's news or not. That's the only criteria they need to consider.

[Back]

It ain't no fucking blackmail. Parkbandit is simply stupid. The should publish the guys name if they have the goods on him. If they don't have it well confirmed then they shouldn't publish.

BUT: #1 thing is that they are not in the vigilante business and are even dumber than PB for appearing to threaten retribution against this guy. Either it's news or not. That's the only criteria they need to consider.

The guy who made the vid is the guy responsible. Fairly damn simple. It's Trump's fault he got outted.

[time4fun]

CNN accredits their journalists and op-ed columnists, they aren't masking content.

What else to do mean by associated, unless you're talking more about the many and possibly frivolous "anonymous sources" of late.



Anonymous sources is definitely a tough concept in journalism. But they're not a bad thing as long as you follow some basic rules:

1) If it's not a reputable news source, ignore any "anonymous sources" (also question your life choices for reading the source to begin with)
2) If there's just one anonymous source- probably not worth paying much attention to.
3) If no other news sources verify the information within a day or two, ignore.

So when leftypinkoblogonews or rightwingalternativefacts.com claim they have some anonymous source saying Trump/Clinton is about to go to prison, you can really ignore that.

When Washington Post cites 5 anonymous sources, and then CNN and NYT write articles confirming the information with their own set of multiple sources, you're in pretty good shape.

And- most importantly- if the White House's official statement tacitly acknowledges the information (which is usually the case in the latter scenario), stop questioning it.

Remember- a lot of these people are either whistle blowing or just don't want to deal with the media circus that will come if their names enter the public domain. But they have information that they deem to be vital for the country's understanding of important issues (*cough*governmentransparency*cough*)

[time4fun]

It ain't no fucking blackmail. Parkbandit is simply stupid. The should publish the guys name if they have the goods on him. If they don't have it well confirmed then they shouldn't publish.

BUT: #1 thing is that they are not in the vigilante business and are even dumber than PB for appearing to threaten retribution against this guy. Either it's news or not. That's the only criteria they need to consider.

I agree to a large extent, but we also have to look at the climate that journalists are working in right now. During the campaign, journalists often spoke about the open hostility they would feel going to Trump campaign rallies (Trump himself would turn the crowd's attention to the press pool and talk about how horrible they all were). They often felt scared for their safety, and I've heard a few journalists talk about the death threats they're getting since the new open war on the media.

I would wager that's why CNN is taking a surprisingly strong stance here. Their journalists don't feel safe, and videos like this one fan the flames.

[cwolff]

I agree to a large extent, but we also have to look at the climate that journalists are working in right now. During the campaign, journalists often spoke about the open hostility they would feel going to Trump campaign rallies (Trump himself would turn the crowd's attention to the press pool and talk about how horrible they all were). They often felt scared for their safety, and I've heard a few journalists talk about the death threats they're getting since the new open war on the media.

I would wager that's why CNN is taking a surprisingly strong stance here. Their journalists don't feel safe, and videos like this one fan the flames.

I see what you're saying though I disagree that it's a strong stance. It seems to me that they screwed the pooch on this one. That guy who wrote the article is trying to dig himself out of the hole on twitter and not doing such a good job. He also gave Uday Trump ammunition to claim that CNN was threatening a 15 year old boy. Of course, this hansoloasshole dude is not 15, but they left the hole open for the Trump kid to fill.

[cwolff]

So...are the currency manipulators or not?


President Trump promised on the campaign trail to be tough on China on trade and to label the country a currency manipulator on his first day in office. So far, he hasn't followed through on either of those vows article (http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/11/news/economy/trump-china-currency-manipulator/)


Trump, who is spending the Easter weekend at his Florida estate, wrote on Twitter, "Why would I call China a currency manipulator when they are working with us on the North Korean problem?" article (http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/16/politics/donald-trump-china-currency-manipulators/index.html)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DD98vSaVoAEgREI.jpg:large

[time4fun]

I see what you're saying though I disagree that it's a strong stance. It seems to me that they screwed the pooch on this one. That guy who wrote the article is trying to dig himself out of the hole on twitter and not doing such a good job. He also gave Uday Trump ammunition to claim that CNN was threatening a 15 year old boy. Of course, this hansoloasshole dude is not 15, but they left the hole open for the Trump kid to fill.

Agreed that their statement didn't play well- and at a bad time.

[Parkbandit]

I get that its a shitty thing for major corporation to do over something like this. I just don't think its blackmail.

I can't argue with you about that. Definitely shitty.. borderline threatening.

And it turns out this is just a 15 year old kid... which makes it 10x more shitty.

[Parkbandit]

When Washington Post cites 5 anonymous sources, and then CNN and NYT write articles confirming the information with their own set of multiple sources, you're in pretty good shape.

Well.. except where Comey said the NYT article was a complete fabrication.... but hey, who knows if Comey is telling the truth anymore.

[Parkbandit]

It ain't no fucking blackmail. Parkbandit is simply stupid. The should publish the guys name if they have the goods on him. If they don't have it well confirmed then they shouldn't publish.

BUT: #1 thing is that they are not in the vigilante business and are even dumber than PB for appearing to threaten retribution against this guy. Either it's news or not. That's the only criteria they need to consider.

Where did I state that it was blackmail? Here, let me post again what I said... this time, I will underline the important word:

"Maybe it's not the textbook definition of "blackmail", but they are most certainly threatening him."

[Parkbandit]

The guy who made the vid is the guy responsible. Fairly damn simple. It's Trump's fault he got outted.

No one is claiming he's not responsible. It's a 15 year old kid.

You've done far dumber things on the Internet.

[time4fun]

Well.. except where Comey said the NYT article was a complete fabrication.... but hey, who knows if Comey is telling the truth anymore.

He didn't say it was a complete fabrication- YOUR statement was a complete fabrication. In fact, Comey didn't give any indication at all as to what part of the story was inaccurate.

And when NYT reached out to ask for information to correct the article, the FBI refused to clarify. Believe it or not, major media outlets make attempts to discuss these articles with our Intelligence Agencies and the Administration before they're published- to make sure they aren't sharing something potentially dangerous and to make sure they're accurate.

Candidly, if the worst you can say about the reporting on the US/Russia Investigations so far is that one time the FBI said that one part of one article was inaccurate, then the reporting is pretty damn solid. And so far- it has been very solid. I've seen you personally argue against the veracity of articles that the administration had already tacitly acknowledged as accurate countless times.

Your commitment to the idea that these news agencies are inaccurate and lying isn't based on the articles themselves- it's based on your need to protect your own worldview.

[Parkbandit]

He didn't say it was a complete fabrication- YOUR statement was a complete fabrication. In fact, Comey didn't give any indication at all as to what part of the story was inaccurate.

And when NYT reached out to ask for information to correct the article, the FBI refused to clarify. Believe it or not, major media outlets make attempts to discuss these articles with our Intelligence Agencies and the Administration before they're published- to make sure they aren't sharing something potentially dangerous and to make sure they're accurate.

Candidly, if the worst you can say about the reporting on the US/Russia Investigations so far is that one time the FBI said that one part of one article was inaccurate, then the reporting is pretty damn solid. And so far- it has been very solid. I've seen you personally argue against the veracity of articles that the administration had already tacitly acknowledged as accurate countless times.

Your commitment to the idea that these news agencies are inaccurate and lying isn't based on the articles themselves- it's based on your need to protect your own worldview.

Comey about the NYT article: “in the main, it was not true.”

He didn't say that one part of the article was not true.. he said the article was not true.

I find it hilarious you are still parroting the "Hillary lost because of Russia!"

In before you say that Hillary won the election by 3 million votes for the 30th time.............................................. ............................

[Methais]

Negative.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/873



CNN gained nothing valuable so it is not blackmail.

They got the dude to make a big long apology and delete all his shit. That has value to CNN, even if it's just "haha we got him" patting themselves on the back.


I hate you with the fury of a 1000 fiery suns.

Do they have suns that aren't fiery though?

[Methais]

Yes, if Simu sent me an email stating "We recorded a log of you cybering a donkey in game last night. If your subscription ever runs out then we will release this cyber log on the internet along with your real name and address and any other personal information we have on you. Pervert." Then it's blackmail.

I thought I latched the door. :(

[Back]

I agree to a large extent, but we also have to look at the climate that journalists are working in right now. During the campaign, journalists often spoke about the open hostility they would feel going to Trump campaign rallies (Trump himself would turn the crowd's attention to the press pool and talk about how horrible they all were). They often felt scared for their safety, and I've heard a few journalists talk about the death threats they're getting since the new open war on the media.

I would wager that's why CNN is taking a surprisingly strong stance here. Their journalists don't feel safe, and videos like this one fan the flames.

I don't think CNN is taking that strong of a stance. Some dude has been dragging them through the mud on-line for years. What are they supposed to do? Just sit back and say oh well? The dude got caught because he was sloppy, left a trail, and they figured it out. They are more than showing they are the bigger person here by NOT outing him. Anyone could have outted him but that is his mistake. Talk shit about someone behind their back and if they find out they confront you for it and it's their fault? No. Not in the real world.

[Gelston]

Do they have suns that aren't fiery though?

No suns are fiery.

[Wrathbringer]

No suns are fiery.

How do you know? Have you been to one?

[Gelston]

How do you know? Have you been to one?

Scientists have sent probes into one.

[Wrathbringer]

Scientists have sent probes into one.

Have you sent probes into one?

[Gelston]

Have you sent probes into one?

My tax dollars did.

[Wrathbringer]

My tax dollars did.

So you don't actually know.

[Gelston]

So you don't actually know.

Yes, I do. The benefit of being a human is that people have assigned jobs to gather this knowledge and present it. You don't have to do everything yourself.

[Tisket]

Do they have suns that aren't fiery though?


No suns are fiery.

Fine, let me rephrase...

I hate drauz with the burning fury of a thousand suns.

Better?

[Gelston]

Fine, let me rephrase...

I hate drauz with the burning fury of a thousand suns.

Better?

I hate drauz with the nuclear fission energy output of a thousand suns.

[Tisket]

I hate drauz with the nuclear fission energy output of a thousand suns.

Okay, Bill Nye.

[Gelston]

Okay, Bill Nye.

Leave Bill Nye the Engineer Guy out of this!

[Wrathbringer]

Yes, I do. The benefit of being a human is that people have assigned jobs to gather this knowledge and present it. You don't have to do everything yourself.

So you're trusting the findings of others because you don't actually know yourself.

[drauz]

Fine, let me rephrase...

I hate drauz with the burning fury of a thousand suns.

Better?

http://68.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_luo5s8jq9O1r2o04io1_250.gif

[Gelston]

So you're trusting the findings of others because you don't actually know yourself.

Stop being a Latrin.

[Gelston]

http://68.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_luo5s8jq9O1r2o04io1_250.gif

Your chauffeur wears combat boots.

[Latrinsorm]

Demanding an apology, the deletion of his posts and account, and "warning" others not to do the same thing could be viewed as CNN gaining something "valuable." This sentence by no means implies a tangible object. But even so, you are going by the federal law's wording of blackmail. The usage of the term blackmail does indeed include compelling someone to do something against their will. So even if I were to grant you this isn't the federal crime of blackmail, it sure as shit is blackmail nonetheless. Not to mention CNN better be careful of state laws because some state laws do explicitly spell out threatening someone to commit or not commit a lawful act under force of threat. NY state: http://statelaws.findlaw.com/new-york-law/new-york-extortion-laws.htmlThe most basic form of the offense is second degree coercion, which occurs when a person compels another person to engage or refrain from engaging in lawful conduct by instilling a fear of any other act calculated to harm the victim's career.

So if one person, let's call him President Trump, compelled another person, let's call him Director Comey, to refrain from engaging in lawful conduct by instilling a fear of being fired, would you call that sure as shit literal blackmail?

[Gelston]

So if one person, let's call him President Trump, compelled another person, let's call him Director Comey, to refrain from engaging in lawful conduct by instilling a fear of being fired, would you call that sure as shit literal blackmail?

A boss telling an employee to do his job the the Boss' liking or else he is fired? Oh my!

[Tgo01]

https://youtu.be/p7qvT7227lI?t=13m

The relevant part starts at 13 minutes. Ben Shapiro is a lawyer, a JEW lawyer at that.

So BOOM! Lawyered! Tgo01 wins again! Flawless victory! Finish him! Fatality!

[Latrinsorm]

A boss telling an employee to do his job the the Boss' liking or else he is fired? Oh my!A news organization saying they're going to do their job? Oh my!

[drauz]

The most basic form of the offense is second degree coercion, which occurs when a person compels another person to engage or refrain from engaging in lawful conduct by instilling a fear of any other act calculated to harm the victim's career.

So if one person, let's call him President Trump, compelled another person, let's call him Director Comey, to refrain from engaging in lawful conduct by instilling a fear of being fired, would you call that sure as shit literal blackmail?

Actually it wasn't all lawful conduct. Many posts incited violence.

[Neveragain]

A news organization saying they're going to do their job? Oh my!

So CNN's job is to keep some random 15 year old internet troll in check?

That's like a 9 out of 10 on the creep scale.

CNN - Sorry folks we are going to have to cut away from this latest terrorist attack. We have just received word that little Johny has posted a meme on the interwebs that questions our integrity. We warned you, Johny!

[drauz]

So CNN's job is to keep some random 15 year old internet troll in check?

That's like a 9 out of 10 on the creep scale.

CNN - Sorry folks we are going to have to cut away from this latest terrorist attack. We have just received word that little Johny has posted a meme on the interwebs that questions our integrity. We warned you, Johny!

He's not 15.

[Neveragain]

He's not 15.

Who cares, it's fucking stupid. I would get better news from the local Jr. High journalism club.

Honestly, they did almost exactly as I stated. N. Korea launches yet another missile and CNN is hunting down the creator of a meme.

BUT HE'S NOT 15!

[drauz]

Who cares, it's fucking stupid. I would get better news from the local Jr. High journalism club.

Honestly, they did almost exactly as I stated. N. Korea launches yet another missile and CNN is hunting down the creator of a meme.

BUT HE'S NOT 15!

Well you brought up that fact so I figured you did..

[OMGWTFBBQ]

Who cares, it's fucking stupid. I would get better news from the local Jr. High journalism club.

Honestly, they did almost exactly as I stated. N. Korea launches yet another missile and CNN is hunting down the creator of a meme.

BUT HE'S NOT 15!

CNN is a joke

[drauz]

http://i.imgur.com/iYiHRPI.gif

[time4fun]

CNN is a joke

Because..?

[Tgo01]

Because..?

I...I think she's serious.

[Tisket]

I...I think she's serious.

Jesus.

[OMGWTFBBQ]

Because..?

Tacos

[Tgo01]

Uh-oh...

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241


If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;

They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years

Sounds like a pretty open and shut case.

I wonder if time4dipshit still thinks CNN did nothing wrong.

[drauz]

Uh-oh...

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241



Sounds like a pretty open and shut case.

I wonder if time4dipshit still thinks CNN did nothing wrong.

Criminally? Nothing will happen.

[Tgo01]

Criminally? Nothing will happen.

Well yeah, but that's only because laws only pertain to us peasants, not because CNN didn't break any laws.

This will end up just like Hillary I'm sure as far as the law goes. But I'm sure someone's head is going to roll at CNN.

That's a figure of speech, CNN! Please don't track me down and dox me!!

[drauz]

Well yeah, but that's only because laws only pertain to us peasants, not because CNN didn't break any laws.

This will end up just like Hillary I'm sure as far as the law goes. But I'm sure someone's head is going to roll at CNN.

That's a figure of speech, CNN! Please don't track me down and dox me!!

Also was it two or more people or was it the one journalist?

[Tgo01]

Also was it two or more people or was it the one journalist?

The guy said his team tracked the person down. I think it would be easy enough to take this to mean the entire team (and possibly any editor that approved the article) worked together to silence him.

[drauz]

The guy said his team tracked the person down. I think it would be easy enough to take this to mean the entire team (and possibly any editor that approved the article) worked together to silence him.

That would be almost impossible to prove unless one of them steps up and admits it.

[Tgo01]

That would be almost impossible to prove unless one of them steps up and admits it.

They don't need to prove anything, CNN admitted it.

If his team worked together to track him down that right there is two or more people conspiring. I can't believe they would actually say "Well...technically only one person wrote the article..."

[drauz]

They don't need to prove anything, CNN admitted it.

If his team worked together to track him down that right there is two or more people conspiring. I can't believe they would actually say "Well...technically only one person wrote the article..."

More than one person may have worked on the article but what you described doesn't mean anything. He could have have been in the city and working with someone on their computer in the NY office to find him. That says nothing about how/why the person decided to delete all his stuff, etc.

[Tgo01]

That says nothing about how/why the person decided to delete all his stuff, etc.

Again it was CNN's threat to expose his personal information should he get out of line again.

[drauz]

Again it was CNN's threat to expose his personal information should he get out of line again.

This would be a nightmare to prosecute and probably wouldn't get very far if at all.

[Tgo01]

This would be a nightmare to prosecute and probably wouldn't get very far if at all.

We'll just have to agree I'm right.

[drauz]

We'll just have to agree I'm right.

http://i.imgur.com/cXmx75S.gif

[Tgo01]

http://i.imgur.com/cXmx75S.gif

What would you know? You spend too much time worrying about TPS reports.

[drauz]

What would you know? You spend too much time worrying about TPS reports.

https://media4.giphy.com/media/b7MdMkkFCyCWI/giphy.gif

[Back]

This thread is becoming a catch all thread for everything Trump related. The God Emperor has finally admitted that Russia meddled in the election. Of course in the same breath he blames Obama.


President Trump (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/trump/) said Thursday that he agreed Russia interfered in the U.S. presidential race and slammed former President Barack Obama for doing nothing about it, saying he didn’t “choke” but made a political decision.The president said Mr. Obama ignored Russian meddling in the election because he thought, as did most people, that Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton was going to win the election.

“The reason is he thought Hillary was going to win. If he thought I was going to win, he would have done plenty about it,” Mr. Trump (http://www.washingtontimes.com/topics/trump/) said at a press conference in Poland. “His people said he choked. I don’t think he choked.”

[Ashlander]

This thread is becoming a catch all thread for everything Trump related. The God Emperor has finally admitted that Russia meddled in the election. Of course in the same breath he blames Obama.

Given that Obama was president at the time and he was reported to know about the meddling but did nothing about it how exactly isn't some of the blame on him?

[Neveragain]

This thread is becoming a catch all thread for everything Trump related. The God Emperor has finally admitted that Russia meddled in the election. Of course in the same breath he blames Obama.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cruh2p_Wh_4

Of course you know but need to lie about the fact that the story being sold to the American people is that The God Emperor was colluding with the Russians. There was no Trump president in 2016, this all lies squarely in the hands of the Obama admin and their failure to be honest with the voters, that is, if the hacking is severe as they make it out to be.

P.S. This thread is becoming a viewing window to watch Democrats step in their own bear traps on a daily basis.

[Back]

Given that Obama was president at the time and he was reported to know about the meddling but did nothing about it how exactly isn't some of the blame on him?

You used a key word. Blame. That's what weak leaders do. Blame other people. Of course Trump denied it this whole time but now he admits it and blames it all on Obama. BUT OBAMA BUT HILLARY! This guy is a joke.

Obama did what he did best. He made a measured response. You may or may not agree with his response but I believe he acted in everyone's best interests. I will say that Trump was probably right in saying Obama thought Hillary would win. EVERYONE, even Trump, thought that.

[Wrathbringer]

You used a key word. Blame. That's what weak leaders do. Blame other people.

This is all Obama did. For 8 years.

[time4fun]

I...I think she's serious.

It's hilarious watching you regurgitate right wing talking points with not a clue as to what your reasons are.

Even more so to watch someone who has cited the Daily Caller looking down on CNN.

[time4fun]

Given that Obama was president at the time and he was reported to know about the meddling but did nothing about it how exactly isn't some of the blame on him?

Did nothing?

[time4fun]

Uh-oh...

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/241



Sounds like a pretty open and shut case.

I wonder if time4dipshit still thinks CNN did nothing wrong.

It must be nice to be so deeply ignorant of the issues you're discussing that you think you know what you're talking about.

Hey genius- what Constitutional right was infringed upon?

[Parkbandit]

Honestly.. President Obama thought Hillary would win and didn't want Trump to have an excuse to question her election, so he told Putin "knock it off" and that's about it. Once Trump won, it became "because" Russia because.. gee, how else would you explain Hillary losing so badly?

I don't blame President Obama.. I blame his limp wristed foreign policy of making "red line" threats that he doesn't know how to actually back up.

[Parkbandit]

Did nothing?

Point awarded to time4fun.

Yes, President Obama did something.. he told Putin to "knock if off".

[time4fun]

Honestly.. President Obama thought Hillary would win and didn't want Trump to have an excuse to question her election, so he told Putin "knock it off" and that's about it. Once Trump won, it became "because" Russia because.. gee, how else would you explain Hillary losing so badly?

I don't blame President Obama.. I blame his limp wristed foreign policy of making "red line" threats that he doesn't know how to actually back up.

As usual, your grasp of chronology is lacking.

Just because Trump is finally not denying it fully (you know, after receiving security briefings telling him it happened) doesn't mean that the rest of the world just discovered this. There were questions on it during the debates last year- did you not bother watching any of them?

This was something discussed last year, and the investigations into it started in 2015 in some cases.

Learn to deal in facts.

[Neveragain]

As usual, your grasp of chronology is lacking.

Just because Trump is finally not denying it fully (you know, after receiving security briefings telling him it happened) doesn't mean that the rest of the world just discovered this. There were questions on it during the debates last year- did you not bother watching any of them?

This was something discussed last year, and the investigations into it started in 2015 in some cases.

Learn to deal in facts.

So the investigation into Trump colluding with the Russians started back in 2015?

[Parkbandit]

As usual, your grasp of chronology is lacking.

Just because Trump is finally not denying it fully (you know, after receiving security briefings telling him it happened) doesn't mean that the rest of the world just discovered this. There were questions on it during the debates last year- did you not bother watching any of them?

This was something discussed last year, and the investigations into it started in 2015 in some cases.

Learn to deal in facts.

First of all, Jim Webb announced he would be running for President on Nov 19, 2014 and didn't suspend his campaign until October 20, 2015.. even though he DID say he was looking at running as an Independent. He didn't rule that out officially until February 11, 2016.

Learn to deal in facts.

[time4fun]

So the investigation into Trump colluding with the Russians started back in 2015?

No- the investigations into Russian meddling in the US election went back to 2015. And if you had bothered watching the Congressional testimony given by several current and former members of the Intelligence Community you'd know that.

[time4fun]

First of all, Jim Webb announced he would be running for President on Nov 19, 2014 and didn't suspend his campaign until October 20, 2015.. even though he DID say he was looking at running as an Independent. He didn't rule that out officially until February 11, 2016.

Learn to deal in facts.

Are you drunk?

[Wrathbringer]

I'm profoundly retarded.

I know.

[Parkbandit]

Are you drunk?

I was just following your example of posting obscure "points" that had nothing to do with the post quoted.

[Neveragain]

No- the investigations into Russian meddling in the US election went back to 2015. And if you had bothered watching the Congressional testimony given by several current and former members of the Intelligence Community you'd know that.

So trump didn't collude with the Russians?

You're so blazingly obtuse.

[time4fun]

I was just following your example of posting obscure "points" that had nothing to do with the post quoted.

Your entire statement rests on the assumption that on one was taking the Russia election meddling seriously until Clinton lost. Both of those statements are abjectly false, evidenced by the fact that the US was investigating this long before the election results were announced (and was taking action on it before then as well).

What I find genuinely "interesting" is that you blatantly denied- repeatedly- that Russia was meddling in our elections last year and most of this year. I brought it up several times during the election, and you, Curly, and Mo laughed yourselves silly about how ridiculous that claim was. (Because you were told by certain media outlets and a certain President that it wasn't true) NOW you're finally acknowledging that it actually happened, but there's apparently no part of your brain that has kicked in to red flag the fact that you're still getting information from sources that lied to you about the subject for a year.

But that would require you to admit to yourself how wrong you have continually been on the subject of Russia (both in terms of our election and Trump).

My advice- start reading more than just headlines, and start consuming news from reputable news sources.

[time4fun]

So trump didn't collude with the Russians?

You're so blazingly obtuse.

No one was talking about Trump/Russia collusion. R.I.F.

[Parkbandit]

Your entire statement rests on the assumption that on one was taking the Russia election meddling seriously until Clinton lost.

Wrong assumption. My entire statement was that Obama did not want to make this a big deal because it would give Trump ammunition when he lost the election. This is evidenced by President Obama's responses and how he told Putin himself to "knock it off" and that was that. President Obama downplayed Russia involvement from the beginning.


Both of those statements are abjectly false, evidenced by the fact that the US was investigating this long before the election results were announced (and was taking action on it before then as well).

What was the other statement you assumed incorrectly?


What I find genuinely "interesting" is that you blatantly denied- repeatedly- that Russia was meddling in our elections last year and most of this year. I brought it up several times during the election, and you, Curly, and Mo laughed yourselves silly about how ridiculous that claim was.

No. You claimed that Russia hacked into both DNC and RNC computers and because they only released the DNC stuff that this was clear evidence of Trump collusion. Me, Curly and Mo laughed ourselves silly at your stupidity and continue to do so today.


(Because you were told by certain media outlets and a certain President that it wasn't true) NOW you're finally acknowledging that it actually happened, but there's apparently no part of your brain that has kicked in to red flag the fact that you're still getting information from sources that lied to you about the subject for a year.

Not a single, solitary vote was changed by Russia.. this has been stated by numerous sources.


But that would require you to admit to yourself how wrong you have continually been on the subject of Russia (both in terms of our election and Trump).

So far, I've been proven right... right on my prediction and right on the collusion.

So far, you've been proven wrong... but let's be honest.. that's the place you are most comfortable. It's a continued theme of yours since Feb 2015 when you started posting here.


My advice- start reading more than just headlines, and start consuming news from reputable news sources.

Like Huffingtonpost.com, moveon.org and CNN.com like you?

No thanks. Look where that's gotten you... LOL.

[Neveragain]

No one was talking about Trump/Russia collusion. R.I.F.

But Trump/Russian collusion is the narrative you have been pushing since the election, that's what this has all been about. I don't think a single person in these threads questions that Russia tries to interfere with our elections, they have been for decades. The problem this time is that cunts like you insisted Trump colluded with the Russians.

So we can finally bring this to a close now that you have admitted Trump did not collude with the Russians and the whole fictional story was an attempt by Democrats to delegitimize the elections just like the Russians want.

At this point you should probably just focus on getting your "brother" legal status before he gets ICED and we all get to celebrate another win.

[OMGWTFBBQ]

But Trump/Russian collusion is the narrative you have been pushing since the election, that's what this has all been about. I don't think a single person in these threads questions that Russia tries to interfere with our elections, they have been for decades. The problem this time is that cunts like you insisted Trump colluded with the Russians.

So we can finally bring this to a close now that you have admitted Trump did not collude with the Russians and the whole fictional story was an attempt by Democrats to delegitimize the elections just like the Russians want.

At this point you should probably just focus on getting your "brother" legal status before he gets ICED and we all get to celebrate another win.

https://media1.giphy.com/media/3o6ZtkGbDZfQMbNSPC/giphy.gif

[Neveragain]

https://media1.giphy.com/media/3o6ZtkGbDZfQMbNSPC/giphy.gif

Dude it's just sad that the party I used to identify with has been reduced to never-never land stories and chasing after meme creators. Fuck I knew there was a reason I left the party, I had no idea it would get this bad.

[Methais]

Fine, let me rephrase...

I hate drauz with the burning fury of a thousand suns.

Better?

Are all suns angry though? Do suns even have emotions like fury?

[Methais]

I...I think she's serious.

See sig.

[Methais]

I...I think she's serious.


It must be nice to be so deeply ignorant of the issues you're discussing that you think you know what you're talking about.

Hey genius- what Constitutional right was infringed upon?

What Constitutional right does jaywalking infringe on?

[Methais]

And for fuck's sake it's Moe not Mo. Reported.

[Tisket]

Are all suns angry though? Do suns even have emotions like fury?

Fine. Let me rephrase: I hate drauz.

There, pick that apart!

[Savageheart]

Fine. Let me rephrase: I hate drauz.

There, pick that apart!

So you have an intense and passionate feeling for Drauz?

[Gelston]

Fine. Let me rephrase: I hate drauz.

There, pick that apart!

t-h-a-t

[Tgo01]

It's hilarious watching you regurgitate right wing talking points with not a clue as to what your reasons are.

Uh, I've explained my reasons in my own words in about two dozen posts now. But facts are racist.


IEven more so to watch someone who has cited the Daily Caller looking down on CNN.

CNN is officially the biggest joke in the fucking world right now. Only a complete partisan hack would say otherwise. You know, you.

From now on I will laugh my ass off at anyone who seriously posts CNN as a legit news source for anything, even if it's just a fluff piece about how one of their reporters spends times with his family. "HAHA! I bet you don't even have a family!" I'll say.

[Tgo01]

It must be nice to be so deeply ignorant of the issues you're discussing that you think you know what you're talking about.

"I'm so very very smart!"


Hey genius- what Constitutional right was infringed upon?

This little thing you might have heard of called freedom of speech? Maybe?

[Savageheart]

CNN posted a retraction and 3 individuals lost there jobs based on one false article - that seems to be how a responsible organization would respond.

It's perhaps a higher standard than the current Administration is holding accountable to. According to the Washington Post up to 492 provably false statements, the Star has it at 358... By Donald Trump.

Opinions may vary, but I don't find them more left than Fox is right. Both parties print true things, and heavy handed Op-Eds. Both ignore the more cogent stories which prove solid arguments for their antagonists.

Was there a previous time where you held CNN in any esteem Tgo? No doubt they fucked up, but they are also experiencing their highest watched second quarter ever. A far sight from failure.

Regarding your statement Neveragain, I find myself in that bizarre place once again where I cannot tell if you're making fun of T4F or stating things you believe to be true. Those things are not always the same thing and rarely make sense outside their environment.

The Special Counsel has not dismissed any collusion between the campaign and foreign states yet, I will wait and see what their findings are. Last I checked they asked for more head count again.

Just because it's not on the front page every day does not mean it's gone or dismissed at this point.

Saying it's a fantasy or moving the goal posts to "Trump must be in direct contact himself for this thing to be true" is a rosy picture at best.

[Tgo01]

CNN posted a retraction and 3 individuals lost there jobs based on one false article - that seems to be how a responsible organization would respond.

A "responsible" organization wouldn't have let such a shitshow of a "story" be released in the first placed based on such bullshit as yet another single anonymous source. But okay.

And even if I were to grant you that act was "responsible" in nature, does that prove the organization is forever "responsible" and could never fuck up again? Cause if that's what you're suggesting you're stupid.


Was there a previous time where you held CNN in any esteem Tgo?

Yeah, they used to be one of those sources I could look at and say "Sounds legit." Fuck that shit. They are worse than Fox and MSNBC combined now.


but they are also experiencing their highest watched second quarter ever. A far sight from failure.

Yes, because they are jumping on the Trump derangement syndrome bandwagon. That's hardly a "good" reason they are enjoying better ratings right now.

It's like making the move from "legit journalism" to "supermarket tabloid" because you want to "give the people want they want" and still expecting to thought of as a legit news network.

[cwolff]

Savageheart, you're the voice of reason. Maybe you are in the wrong forum? haha

CNN, along with Joe and Mika, helped to make Trump a viable candidate. Trump fans should appreciate them for giving so much airtime over to Trump's candidacy.

CNN has a stable of partisan hacks who are constantly on every CNN talking head program spinning Trump propaganda. Give credit where credit is due. CNN bent over backwards to have a "fair and balanced" panel on every show with equal airtime given to the Jeffrey Lords and Kellyanne Conway types. As someone who thinks Trump is obviously the worst thing to happen to our nation in a generation, CNN's equal time policy is an endless frustration.

[Savageheart]

And even if I were to grant you that act was "responsible" in nature, does that prove the organization is forever "responsible" and could never fuck up again? Cause if that's what you're suggesting you're stupid.

I see how you could get there, but it is not at all what I suggested nor would suggest.

What makes sense to me is that when a news organization makes mistakes (which happen) they are dealt with immediately, completely, and without any reservation.

Further, when they do publish retractions they are not buried between the smallest bylines it's a big plus.

Again, these are my personal measures. You're entitled to point and laugh at CNN for this incident for the rest of your life, it was their fuck up.

It's hard for anyone to forgive transgressions outside of their appeal, we all say stupid shit sometimes (well maybe not you), I'm not inclined to forgive so much as demonize that shit from someone I dislike.

Meanwhile my wife still orders Filet Mignon medium well, and I keep my mouth shut and a smile on my face.

[time4fun]

"I'm so very very smart!"



This little thing you might have heard of called freedom of speech? Maybe?

Freedom of Speech- like all Constitutional rights- covers the relationship between the US Government and a citizen. It does not pertain to relationships between private citizens and private entities. Otherwise every NDA in the country would land someone in jail.

Word of advice Tgo- I'd think twice between calling anyone else a dipshit or stupid- because when you do it's usually a sign that you're about to say something incredibly embarrassing.

And for someone who is so continually ignorant of how the law and US politics work (let alone actual current events), you're oddly confident in your own "news sources". Maybe if you spent more time with reputable news sources, you'd have some clue as to what you were talking about.

[Wrathbringer]

I'm quite twatty.

Yes, you are.

[Parkbandit]

And for someone who is so continually ignorant of how the law and US politics work (let alone actual current events), you're oddly confident in your own "news sources". Maybe if you spent more time with reputable news sources, you'd have some clue as to what you were talking about.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PY-uJRVVOVI/UBs0qArSDUI/AAAAAAAAFmg/bUq_NmKO27A/w1200-h630-p-nu/hypocrisy-meter2.gif

Tell us again how Hillary received 3 million more votes.

Please?

[time4fun]

Opinions may vary, but I don't find them more left than Fox is right. Both parties print true things, and heavy handed Op-Eds. Both ignore the more cogent stories which prove solid arguments for their antagonists.



The single greatest accomplishment of Fox News was convincing a quarter of this country that CNN was somehow a liberal-leaning outlet. It's part of their overall "You can't trust anyone but us" strategy. Which means you've got a sizable chunk of this country that actually believes the only "fair and objective" reporting comes from conservative news outlets- which is sort of like saying the only fair reporting on medication comes from pharma-sponsored magazines. When you say it out loud- you realize how incredibly insane it is.

CNN is not left-leaning unless you happen to looking out from a decidedly right leaning vantage point.

What's really funny is that during the Clinton email scandal, Republicans had no problem citing and reading CNN, WaPo, and NYT. They didn't become dangerous until they were focused on a Republican candidate.

And we've got a big chunk of this country cheering on a guy who is attacking the Free Press- one of the most important pillars in a Democracy (that's why "free press" is explicitly called out in the 1st Amendment). ANYONE who attacks the Free Press is dangerous.

[time4fun]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-PY-uJRVVOVI/UBs0qArSDUI/AAAAAAAAFmg/bUq_NmKO27A/w1200-h630-p-nu/hypocrisy-meter2.gif

Tell us again how Hillary received 3 million more votes.

Please?

Tell us again about how intent only became a factor in criminal law last year when Clinton was facing inquiries for her email use.

There's not a single person on this forum that considers you to be anything even close to well-informed PB. I'd spend less time throwing stones and more time reading.

[Wrathbringer]

Tell us again about how intent only became a factor in criminal law last year when Clinton was facing inquiries for her email use.

There's not a single person on this forum that considers you to be anything even close to well-informed PB. I'd spend less time throwing stones and more time reading.

Wrong. I consider him to be well-informed and you to be well, retarded.

[Neveragain]

My guess is the next few weeks will be a hell of a run. These kids are going to dig up anything they can on anyone associated with CNN and go public with it. I'm willing to bet just publishing a list of CNN employees private info will trigger the "news" network.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/05/cnn-staff-reeling-after-personal-info-leaked/

I really don't know why anyone questions my political expertise at this point.

[Tgo01]

Savageheart, you're the voice of reason

"Savageheart you say shit I mostly agree with. You're the voice of reason here!"


CNN, along with Joe and Mika, helped to make Trump a viable candidate. Trump fans should appreciate them for giving so much airtime over to Trump's candidacy.

Trump was always a viable candidate, the mainstream media attacking him didn't make him a viable candidate.


CNN bent over backwards to have a "fair and balanced" panel on every show with equal airtime given to the Jeffrey Lords and Kellyanne Conway types. As someone who thinks Trump is obviously the worst thing to happen to our nation in a generation, CNN's equal time policy is an endless frustration.

LOL!

You mean the CNN hosts who practically suck the dick of every left leaning guest they have on air, while literally rolling their eyes at their right leaning guests? You call that "fair and balanced"? Oh wait, you yourself put "fair and balanced" in quotes so maybe you're just being sarcastic. In which case good job. Two thumbs up.

[Tgo01]

What makes sense to me is that when a news organization makes mistakes (which happen) they are dealt with immediately, completely, and without any reservation.

Further, when they do publish retractions they are not buried between the smallest bylines it's a big plus.

So because you can point to one or two instances of CNN issuing retractions this means they can't have engaged in blackmail because they didn't apologize for engaging in blackmail and issue a retraction of said blackmail?

That's not the dumbest argument I've ever heard in my entire life, but it's in the top 20 for sure.


You're entitled to point and laugh at CNN for this incident for the rest of your life, it was their fuck up.

If you weren't such a partisan hack yourself you would laugh at CNN for the rest of your life as well. But you're too busy pretending to be non-partisan while at the same time almost always taking the left's side.


It's hard for anyone to forgive transgressions outside of their appeal, we all say stupid shit sometimes (well maybe not you), I'm not inclined to forgive so much as demonize that shit from someone I dislike.

This wasn't a "mistake." It takes a very deliberate effort to actually allocate resources into "tracking down" an anonymous Reddit user in real life, publish an article about your findings, issue a very obvious threat to them in print, and have all of the editors and managers approve of said article.

This was by no means a "mistake."

What does CNN have to do to get your negative attention? Accuse someone of being a rapist?

[Tgo01]

Freedom of Speech- like all Constitutional rights- covers the relationship between the US Government and a citizen.

Did you even fucking READ the FEDERAL LAW I just fucking linked to?

Holy fucking shit.

You can't possibly be this fucking dumb.

It's just simply not possible. IT'S NOT POSSIBLE!

[Astray]

Did you even fucking READ the FEDERAL LAW I just fucking linked to?

Holy fucking shit.

You can't possibly be this fucking dumb.

It's just simply not possible. IT'S NOT POSSIBLE!

Bro. You're playing pigeon chess.