Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 329: There's No Debate

(+) Yeah! (+)

Really interesting podcasts on Phyllis Schlafly, who is basically the person who singlehandedly pushed the Republicans in this direction:

https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-one-phyllis-schlafly-the-mother-70553705/

https://www.iheart.com/podcast/105-behind-the-bastards-29236323/episode/part-two-phyllis-schlafly-the-mother-70687758/

Strongly recommend giving those a listen if you want to know more about how it came to this point. Ill give you a preview: at one point, Richard Nixon is the (relative) good guy.

---

https://twitter.com/glbp6/status/1317475499736784896?s=21

---

AoC was going out and visiting people's islands over twitter, it was pretty great

---

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/18/business/media/new-york-post-hunter-biden.html

The New York Posts front-page article about Hunter Biden on Wednesday was written mostly by a staff reporter who refused to put his name on it, two Post employees said.

Bruce Golding, a reporter at the Rupert Murdoch-owned tabloid since 2007, did not allow his byline to be used because he had concerns over the articles credibility, the two Post employees said, speaking on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation.

Many Post staff members questioned whether the paper had done enough to verify the authenticity of the hard drives contents, said five people with knowledge of the tabloids inner workings. Staff members also had concerns about the reliability of its sources and its timing, the people said.

As deadline approached, editors pressed staff members to add their bylines to the story and at least one aside from Mr. Golding refused, two Post journalists said. A Post spokeswoman had no comment on how the article was written or edited.

Ms. Fonrouge had little to do with the reporting or writing of the article, said three people with knowledge of how it was prepared. She learned that her byline was on the story only after it was published, the people said.

Fucking obscene conduct here from the NYP's editors

---

I probably should have pulled this quote too:

Mr. Giuliani said he chose The Post because either nobody else would take it, or if they took it, they would spend all the time they could to try to contradict it before they put it out.

---

I guess if the nation at large did not know this already but the NY Post is a joke.

---

I knew it was a joke, but I hadn't realized a week ago that it was literally at a "put random a reporter's name on your laundered Rudy propaganda because the actual author is too embarrassed to sign his name to it" level of being a joke!

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

or if they took it, they would spend all the time they could to try to contradict it before they put it out.

ah yes, journalism

he was afraid they would do their job

christ

---

It is extremely important that people understand that the New York Post is not a real journalistic outlet in any sense at all - they should not be treated as though they are. They're a tabloid

FFDragon posted...

ah yes, journalism

he was afraid they would do their job

christ

To be fair, you shouldn't be spending all your time to contradict something. That shows bias and wanting to prove what you want. You should be taking all your time to find any surrounding information whether it contradicts or confirms the information.

---

"Contradict" was Giuliani's word. Implying he knows all they'll find, when they investigate is contradictions.

edit: Changed Meaning to Implying

---

Seanchan posted...

"Contradict" was Giuliani's word. Implying he knows all they'll find, when they investigate is contradictions.

edit: Changed Meaning to Implying

Yes. He is implying the media is biased so they will spend all their time trying to do that instead of doing a proper job.

---

https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudys-russian-agent-pal-teases-second-laptop-with-hunter-biden-kompromat

The claim appears to muddy the waters around Giulianis latest smoking gun charge against Hunter Biden. He says they came to light after an obscure Delaware computer repair shop owner found Bidens laptop in his possession and copied the hard drive before alerting federal authorities and inexplicably Giulianis own lawyer. Now, with Derkach jumping in with claims of a second laptop, that would mean private computer contents allegedly connected to Hunter Biden have somehow found their way into the hands of three separate parties: A media empire controlled by a Chinese billionaire whos tight with Steve Bannon; a random Delaware shop owner who is outspoken in his support of Trump; and Derkach, a Ukrainian conspiracy theory peddler who studied at Moscows FSB academy.

They literally want us to believe that Hunter lost three separate laptops full of incriminating info, all of which have fallen into the hands of Rudy and pals

---

I lose laptops full of incriminating info every day!

---

StealThisSheen posted...

I lose laptops full of incriminating info every day!

You gotta stop backing up your texts on laptops and then you wouldnt need so many.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/rudys-russian-agent-pal-teases-second-laptop-with-hunter-biden-kompromat

They literally want us to believe that Hunter lost three separate laptops full of incriminating info, all of which have fallen into the hands of Rudy and pals

I mean, it's dumb, but you should analyze the content (or lack thereof) not how you got it.

---

I know were talking local niche so it's not gonna matter to everyone, but things are looking pretty down for Perdue since..."Kamalagate", in what little you can tell from a handful of days. Biden appears to have also slightly increased his polling lead here after Trump's rally. Trump didn't go down, so I assume that's more undecideds making their decision.

---

Corrik7 posted...

mean, it's dumb, but you should analyze the content (or lack thereof) not how you got it.

You should be capable of analyzing both? This is a dumb take.

Leafeon13N posted...

You should be capable of analyzing both? This is a dumb take.

What if someone got information from obviously fake means but the info is all legit and damaging.

Are you saying the information should be ignored then?

I mean, someone clearly leaked Trump's financials illegally. I didn't see you going after the means then.

---

Corrik7 posted...

What if someone got information from obviously fake means but the info is all legit and damaging.

Are you saying the information should be ignored then?

do you not think that? You love the law and thats a big thing where you have to get your evidence properly or its inadmissible regardless of its legitimacy.
---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

do you not think that? You love the law and thats a big thing where you have to get your evidence properly or its inadmissible regardless of its legitimacy.

This isn't whether something is admissable in a court case, bud.

---

Trust me. If someone said they found an old computer with a video that showed Trump clearly raping a 10 year old girl you would be analyzing the content.

You right now seem to be discrediting the stuff because the source is questionable in origination. The source doesn't matter if the content is legitimate as far as we (the random people) go.

---

Corrik7 posted...

This isn't whether something is admissable in a court case, bud.

i understand that, but I thought you personally might hold a higher standard for what should be admissible in the court of public opinion.
---

Corrik, if someone claimed to find incriminating Trump information in a notebook that had "DONAD J TRUMMP'S PLANZ" written on it, which they found underneath a discarded newspaper on the New York subway, I would certainly not consider this to be credible enough to be newsworthy.

Even if it was labelled with a Sharpie.
---

What if it was PLANS but the S was that stylized S we all used to draw in school

---

MalcolmMasher posted...

Corrik, if someone claimed to find incriminating Trump information in a notebook that had "DONAD J TRUMMP'S PLANZ" written on it, which they found underneath a discarded newspaper on the New York subway, I would certainly not consider this to be credible enough to be newsworthy.

Even if it was labelled with a Sharpie.

What if it was laminated though?

---

If it was drawn tastefully, that would make me more skeptical.
---

FFDragon posted...

What if it was PLANS but the S was that stylized S we all used to draw in school

That's how I label all of my laptops. SEP'S PLANS

That's three stylized S's, and then I add another just for funsies

How I find the time to do it in between taking screenshots of my texts, I'm not sure

---

Maybe the real lesson here is that we should use our calendars as diaries.
---

Corrik7 posted...

What if someone got information from obviously fake means but the info is all legit and damaging.

Are you saying the information should be ignored then?

I mean, someone clearly leaked Trump's financials illegally. I didn't see you going after the means then.

The Russians (who are known to have hacked Burisma, and who are probably the actual source of this info, especially since Derkach is known to be a Russian agent) have in the past released fake info along with real hacked info (in particular they're known to have done this with emails released right before the 2017 French election). Knowing that, you absolutely cannot say that just because there were some real photos of Hunter that the emails or texts are necessarily also real.

---

MalcolmMasher posted...

Corrik, if someone claimed to find incriminating Trump information in a notebook that had "DONAD J TRUMMP'S PLANZ" written on it, which they found underneath a discarded newspaper on the New York subway, I would certainly not consider this to be credible enough to be newsworthy.

Even if it was labelled with a Sharpie.

You should be analyzing the content. Too many are analyzing the origination.

If China had such a tape that was illegally taped via a voyeur stalker initially as hypothetically poised before and leaked it to say whatever wacko democrat, who released it. You wouldn't care if it actually originated from China or from some pervert committing a crime or how the Chinese labeled it. You would care what the video shows.

The content here with Biden may be fake, but the discrediting seems to be coming from where it came from and not the content itself. Though from everything I heard, there isn't even anything bad in the content anyways as far as Joe Biden goes.

(Ironically, my girl told me yesterday that "Biden is in big shit huh". I said why? She goes "Well, didn't you hear on the news how they uncovered laptops that proved Biden was money laundering with that Pelosi lady?". And I just laughed and said... What news you been watching. Lol).

---

StealThisSheen posted...

That's how I label all of my laptops. SEP'S PLANS

That's three stylized S's, and then I add another just for funsies

How I find the time to do it in between taking screenshots of my texts, I'm not sure

I label mine "LotM's legitimate business (definitely NOT crimes)", and then every day spill some coffee on the laptop and fly to the opposite side of the country to drop them off with a blind computer repair guy (so he can't ID me!), and then never pick up the computer. But I keep fucking up and forgetting to remove the stickers from my dead brother's foundation!

---

StealThisSheen posted...

That's how I label all of my laptops. SEP'S PLANS

That's three stylized S's, and then I add another just for funsies

How I find the time to do it in between taking screenshots of my texts, I'm not sure

My wrestling logo was my initials around the stylized s. Because my wrestling name was going to be TJ strife.

---

Corrik7 posted...

You should be analyzing the content. Too many are analyzing the origination.

If China had such a tape that was illegally taped via a voyeur stalker initially as hypothetically poised before and leaked it to say whatever wacko democrat, who released it. You wouldn't care if it actually originated from China or from some pervert committing a crime or how the Chinese labeled it. You would care what the video shows.

The content here with Biden may be fake, but the discrediting seems to be coming from where it came from and not the content itself. Though from everything I heard, there isn't even anything bad in the content anyways as far as Joe Biden goes.

(Ironically, my girl told me yesterday that "Biden is in big shit huh". I said why? She goes "Well, didn't you hear on the news how they uncovered laptops that proved Biden was money laundering with that Pelosi lady?". And I just laughed and said... What news you been watching. Lol).

No, source matters.

---

You should be analyzing the content. Too many are analyzing the origination.

So if the National Enquirer runs a headline that Politician X eats babies raw, we should expect the media to spend actual time looking into the issue, interviewing Politician X about it, and so on?
---

I can't beleive I forgot to remove the Amazon label from the box I got my 5lb jar of Starburst in, and that all those fake ballots I sent to Alaska have my return address stamped right on there.

Also they were fake ballots for Ossof, FUCK.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

I label mine "LotM's legitimate business (definitely NOT crimes)", and then every day spill some coffee on the laptop and fly to the opposite side of the country to drop them off with a blind computer repair guy (so he can't ID me!), and then never pick up the computer. But I keep fucking up and forgetting to remove the stickers from my dead brother's foundation!

So, why doesn't Joe or Hunter Biden just deny it then? Why don't they just say these emails are not Hunter's? Trump has already said the tax returns the NYT released are not his real tax returns.

(Also, Hillary should release her 33,000 deleted emails).

---

The content here with Biden may be fake, but the discrediting seems to be coming from where it came from and not the content itself.

if you take away the source, I have no knowledge to push it in either direction fake or real. the source being suspicious is the one piece of information I have to work with.
---

This certainly is one of the dumbest hills that corrik has tried to die on.

---

Corrik7 posted...

If China had such a tape that was illegally taped via a voyeur stalker initially as hypothetically poised before and leaked it to say whatever wacko democrat, who released it. You wouldn't care if it actually originated from China or from some pervert committing a crime or how the Chinese labeled it. You would care what the video shows.

It's not a video, it's an Email. Those are incredibly easy to fake, and all signs point to it being faked. Hunter Biden lives in California, and the computer store owner can't identify Hunter as the person who dropped them off. No metadata has been examined, and everything wasn't vetted. So they're dubious at best.

---

Lets just start from the beginning.

Have Joe or Hunter said the story was fake yet?

---

Corrik, you do realize that whether or not information originates from a trustworthy source has a direct effect on whether or not that information is considered trustworthy, right? These aren't unrelated things.
---

My favorite part of this whole charade is that he's treating video as though it's some holy medium bound to the truth, and not at all able to be manipulated through the use of basic graphical tools or deep fake technology.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

No, source matters.

I don't care if a flamingo gypsy that fed me a granola waffle that made me shit turn purple and taste like rainbow sherbet provided the information. If the information is legit, I am going to take it into account. You would be a fool not to.

---

Corrik7 posted...

I don't care if a flamingo gypsy that fed me a granola waffle that made me shit turn purple and taste like rainbow sherbet provided the information. If the information is legit, I am going to take it into account. You would be a fool not to.

"How do we tell the information is legit if the source is very obviously not?"

there is nothing to point to this being legit, therefore...

---

Corrik using the Vlado playbook to approximately the same level of effectiveness.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

"How do we tell the information is legit if the source is very obviously not?"

there is nothing to point to this being legit, therefore...

Is there anything pointing to it not being true?

I mean, I haven't read the content or hell maybe the content hasn't been released yet Idk. All I do know is that everything I have heard from it is nothing bad or a bunch of nothing as far as Joe Biden is concerned. Just embarrassing for Hunter.

Redsox asked earlier, but no one answered the question of has the Biden campaign even denounced it? I have seen Hunter hasn't denied dropping off the laptop there, and Joe denied a meeting took place or something but that's about it.

I also have seen that Guliani has said he supposedly is going to release emails from Hunter and Joe's attorney demanding the hard drive returned to them. (Which could be false, but again who knows).

It's hard to say it's fake definitively if the content hasn't even been called fake by the Biden's themselves?

---

MoogleKupo141 posted...

if you take away the source, I have no knowledge to push it in either direction fake or real. the source being suspicious is the one piece of information I have to work with.

Honestly, the source that makes me immediately suspicious is Rudy Giuliani, even more than NYPost.

Giuliani was the guy who called in FBI favours to get another computer looked at for Hillary's emails in the last week of the election in 2016. Those turned out to be nothing, there wasn't a single new email on the "extra server" they found, but Giuliani engineered it to get Hillary's emails back into the news cycle.

Giuliani was tied up in the Ukraine stuff, hired Lev Parnas, went to the Ukraine when they were trying to strongarm the Ukranian president. Once again, trying to engineer a news story.

He is an engineer of fake news, he's been multiple times the driver of fake news stories.

The news story having its sole source be him immediately makes me think it's fake.

It would be like if Michael Avenatti showed up with an October surprise about Donald Trump. I would be fairly suspicious just because it came from Avenatti. (Thankfully I think Avenatti is in jail right now, so hopefully we won't need to deal with his BS this election cycle).

---

Corrik7 posted...

Redsox asked earlier, but no one answered the question of has the Biden campaign even denounced it? I have seen Hunter hasn't denied dropping off the laptop there, and Joe denied a meeting took place or something but that's about it.

The Biden campaign have said that the supposed meeting between Biden and the Ukrainian guy was not in his schedule. That doesn't necessarily mean the email was fake (it could have been this guy just walking up and shaking Joe's hand, or it could have been set up but then never materialized), but that's some evidence against.

---

As it stands right now, there's not really any reason for Biden to start denying anything because... There's not truly anything there, yet. All it'd do is draw attention to it.

It'd be like if I started posting on here "Joe Biden eats babies," and suddenly the Biden campaign put out a statement saying he doesn't eat babies. People are suddenly gonna be like "Wait, who said he ate babies? What's that about?"

It's giving undeserved attention to it.

---