And now, "Alternative History"

[UncleMark]

National Archives Blurs Anti-Trump Messages in Women’s March Photo

https://slate.com/news-and-politics...s-anti-trump-messages-womens-march-photo.html

The National Archives admitted that it altered a photograph of the 2017 Women’s March by blurring some signs held by protesters that were critical of President Donald Trump. The Archives also blurred some signs held by protesters that made specific references to women’s anatomy, reports the Washington Post.
[...]
The Archives admitted that it edited the photograph. “As a non-partisan, non-political federal agency, we blurred references to the President’s name on some posters, so as not to engage in current political controversy,” Archives spokeswoman Miriam Kleiman said in an emailed statement to the Post. And the move to remove references to women’s genitals had to do with the groups of students and young people that visit the exhibit. The Archives was sure to note that David Ferriero, the archivist who was appointed by then-President Barack Obama in 2009, supported the decision.
[...]
Historian Douglas Brinkley of Rice University said that “there’s no reason for the National Archives to ever digitally alter a historic photograph.” If for some reason an image is deemed inappropriate it simply shouldn’t be used rather than edited, he said.​

 

[VanPastorMan]

National Archives Blurs Anti-Trump Messages in Women’s March Photo

https://slate.com/news-and-politics...s-anti-trump-messages-womens-march-photo.html

The National Archives admitted that it altered a photograph of the 2017 Women’s March by blurring some signs held by protesters that were critical of President Donald Trump. The Archives also blurred some signs held by protesters that made specific references to women’s anatomy, reports the Washington Post.
[...]
The Archives admitted that it edited the photograph. “As a non-partisan, non-political federal agency, we blurred references to the President’s name on some posters, so as not to engage in current political controversy,” Archives spokeswoman Miriam Kleiman said in an emailed statement to the Post. And the move to remove references to women’s genitals had to do with the groups of students and young people that visit the exhibit. The Archives was sure to note that David Ferriero, the archivist who was appointed by then-President Barack Obama in 2009, supported the decision.
[...]
Historian Douglas Brinkley of Rice University said that “there’s no reason for the National Archives to ever digitally alter a historic photograph.” If for some reason an image is deemed inappropriate it simply shouldn’t be used rather than edited, he said.​

I got a question. You are probably a liberal Democrat and I truly want to know what your thoughts are concerning what CNN did to Bernie Sanders? They were saying that Bernie Sanders was against a woman becoming President ie Elizabeth Warren. He denied it vehemently and then the CNN host asked Warren, "how did you feel when Bernie Sanders said this?" So CNN was siding with Warren against Sanders. What are your thoughts?

 

[UncleMark]

I got a question. You are probably a liberal Democrat and I truly want to know what your thoughts are concerning what CNN did to Bernie Sanders? They were saying that Bernie Sanders was against a woman becoming President ie Elizabeth Warren. He denied it vehemently and then the CNN host asked Warren, "how did you feel when Bernie Sanders said this?" So CNN was siding with Warren against Sanders. What are your thoughts?

Non-sequitur.

 

[CO. Hoosier]

I got a question. You are probably a liberal Democrat and I truly want to know what your thoughts are concerning what CNN did to Bernie Sanders? They were saying that Bernie Sanders was against a woman becoming President ie Elizabeth Warren. He denied it vehemently and then the CNN host asked Warren, "how did you feel when Bernie Sanders said this?" So CNN was siding with Warren against Sanders. What are your thoughts?

Sanders should have slammed his palm on his podium and interrupted at that point in the strongest tone he could muster. The debate moderators have gotten away with too much for too long. Too much attention is paid to the rules for candidates and not enough for the rules for moderators. I think the debates would be more informative if we used more unknowns as moderators in stead of celebrity newsies.

 

[VanPastorMan]

Non-sequitur.

Are you commenting on the moderator or on the situation? I ask this because I am trying to put myself in the place of a Bernie supporter. The Democrats screwed Bernie in 16 and now CNN is picking sides. If I was a Bernie guy then I would be like, "Crap!".

 

[UncleMark]

Are you commenting on the moderator or on the situation? I ask this because I am trying to put myself in the place of a Bernie supporter. The Democrats screwed Bernie in 16 and now CNN is picking sides. If I was a Bernie guy then I would be like, "Crap!".

You don't know what non-sequitur means, do you?

 

[VanPastorMan]

You don't know what non-sequitur means, do you?

Yes, I do but I wasn't sure how you were applying it.

 

[UncleMark]

Yes, I do but I wasn't sure how you were applying it.

There was nothing ambiguous about what I was referring to.

 

[VanPastorMan]

There was nothing ambiguous about what I was referring to.

Mark, I simply was asking which you were referring to. Why you being like this? You could be saying the woman was speaking about something that had nothing to do with the situation. Or you could be saying that what this situation was about has nothing to do with you. So there are a couple of ways you can see it and I was just asking for you to clarify. If you don't know which one applies to you, then think on it and get back with me.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Are you commenting on the moderator or on the situation? I ask this because I am trying to put myself in the place of a Bernie supporter. The Democrats screwed Bernie in 16 and now CNN is picking sides. If I was a Bernie guy then I would be like, "Crap!".

CNN and MSNBC were both heavily involved in defeating Bernie in 16, and will be again this go around.

as will all the media.

you'll notice all the media characterized the after debate ambush as an "exchange of words", rather than Warren deliberately ambushing him afterwards, with Bernie doing nothing but try to defend himself, and all this after she slandered Bernie as sexist.

she deliberately put him in the impossible situation of his either saying he was a sexist or she was untruthful, he tried to handle it with class and not shoot back, and she wasn't going to let that happen..

and note all this happened after her numbers were dropping, and she felt the way to pick them up was to sabotage Bernie, as her whole campaign is basically Bernie's campaign word for word.

her and Bernie are occupying the same land.

after Bernie tirelessly cleared and renovated the previously politically totally uninhabitable land in 16, she decided to move in and occupy it. (as did half the field to some degree).

sad to watch.. she's unfortunately become more about the candidate than the cause, as two people occupying the exact same space is going to kill off both by splitting the vote, and always was going to..

don't think the DNC and their corp media arms aren't also just as determined to sabotage Bernie now as in 16.

i've been stating here for well over a yr that the 2020 Dem primaries would be about the DNC and their corp owned and funded media, vs the Dem working class voter.

the better Bernie does, the more they'll turn up the heat on him.

and don't forget, MSNBC's ownership personally took charge of funding Biden's campaign from day one, and CNN's ownership couldn't have anymore the exact same agenda as NBC's. (just as in 16).

what will be interesting, is if the DNC totally caves on witness's testifying, if Pubs calling either Biden to testify is a condition of allowing Dems to call witnesses.

no way is the DNC going to let either Biden testify, and CNN and MSNBC have done all they can to bury the entire Biden thing from day one.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

Sanders should have slammed his palm on his podium and interrupted at that point in the strongest tone he could muster. The debate moderators have gotten away with too much for too long. Too much attention is paid to the rules for candidates and not enough for the rules for moderators. I think the debates would be more informative if we used more unknowns as moderators in stead of celebrity newsies.

good points, but it's not the moderators themselves calling the shots, it's their corp bosses.

don't think for a second the moderators are in charge of the questions.

and do you not find it strange that neither CNN nor NBC/MSNBC have ever had Hunter Biden on, or ever pressed Joe on something that they would be all over like flies on sht if it were anyone else.

does anyone find it strange that Hunter is literally no where to be found during this campaign.

is he in witness protection??

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Yes, I do but I wasn't sure how you were applying it.

Seemed pretty obvious to me.

 

[Bill4411]

CNN and MSNBC were both heavily involved in defeating Bernie in 16, and will be again this go around.

as will all the media.

you'll notice all the media characterized the after debate ambush as an "exchange of words", rather than Warren deliberately ambushing him afterwards, with Bernie doing nothing but try to defend himself, and all this after she slandered Bernie as sexist.

she deliberately put him in the impossible situation of his either saying he was a sexist or she was untruthful, he tried to handle it with class and not shoot back, and she wasn't going to let that happen..

and note all this happened after her numbers were dropping, and she felt the way to pick them up was to sabotage Bernie, as her whole campaign is basically Bernie's campaign word for word.

her and Bernie are occupying the same land.

after Bernie tirelessly cleared and renovated the previously politically totally uninhabitable land in 16, she decided to move in and occupy it. (as did half the field to some degree).

sad to watch.. she's unfortunately become more about the candidate than the cause, as two people occupying the exact same space is going to kill off both by splitting the vote, and always was going to..

don't think the DNC and their corp media arms aren't also just as determined to sabotage Bernie now as in 16.

i've been stating here for well over a yr that the 2020 Dem primaries would be about the DNC and their corp owned and funded media, vs the Dem working class voter.

the better Bernie does, the more they'll turn up the heat on him.

and don't forget, MSNBC's ownership personally took charge of funding Biden's campaign from day one, and CNN's ownership couldn't have anymore the exact same agenda as NBC's. (just as in 16).

what will be interesting, is if the DNC totally caves on witness's testifying, if Pubs calling either Biden to testify is a condition of allowing Dems to call witnesses.

no way is the DNC going to let either Biden testify, and CNN and MSNBC have done all they can to bury the entire Biden thing from day one.

I think that is a Fox News type of story. Why would any legitimate network want to add credibility to Trump’s false narrative.

 

[i'vegotwinners]

I think that is a Fox News type of story. Why would any legitimate network want to add credibility to Trump’s false narrative.

the post had nothing to do with Trump, or the GOP, and let me know when you find find one thing false in it.

 

[twenty02]

CNN and MSNBC were both heavily involved in defeating Bernie in 16, and will be again this go around.

as will all the media.

you'll notice all the media characterized the after debate ambush as an "exchange of words", rather than Warren deliberately ambushing him afterwards, with Bernie doing nothing but try to defend himself, and all this after she slandered Bernie as sexist.

she deliberately put him in the impossible situation of his either saying he was a sexist or she was untruthful, he tried to handle it with class and not shoot back, and she wasn't going to let that happen..

and note all this happened after her numbers were dropping, and she felt the way to pick them up was to sabotage Bernie, as her whole campaign is basically Bernie's campaign word for word.

her and Bernie are occupying the same land.

after Bernie tirelessly cleared and renovated the previously politically totally uninhabitable land in 16, she decided to move in and occupy it. (as did half the field to some degree).

sad to watch.. she's unfortunately become more about the candidate than the cause, as two people occupying the exact same space is going to kill off both by splitting the vote, and always was going to..

don't think the DNC and their corp media arms aren't also just as determined to sabotage Bernie now as in 16.

i've been stating here for well over a yr that the 2020 Dem primaries would be about the DNC and their corp owned and funded media, vs the Dem working class voter.

the better Bernie does, the more they'll turn up the heat on him.

and don't forget, MSNBC's ownership personally took charge of funding Biden's campaign from day one, and CNN's ownership couldn't have anymore the exact same agenda as NBC's. (just as in 16).

what will be interesting, is if the DNC totally caves on witness's testifying, if Pubs calling either Biden to testify is a condition of allowing Dems to call witnesses.

no way is the DNC going to let either Biden testify, and CNN and MSNBC have done all they can to bury the entire Biden thing from day one.

Bernie's support base isn't with working class people.... it's young and totally deluded people who like to troll on Twitter. It's the Trump crowd of the left....

 

[Bill4411]

the post had nothing to do with Trump, or the GOP, and let me know when you find find one thing false in it.

Why would anyone that was a legitimate news source want to pursue the Biden’s, if our government isn’t? The Biden’s may have gotten a kick back but what politician doesn’t in some way anymore. The Biden narrative is being pushed by Russia and butthurt Oligarchs from Ukraine.

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/605188/

 

[UncleMark]

Sanders should have slammed his palm on his podium and interrupted at that point in the strongest tone he could muster. The debate moderators have gotten away with too much for too long.

Setting VPM's false characterization of the exchange aside, I'd be fine with the candidates pushing back on the cutesy gotchya questions and the attempts to foment conflict and generate sound bites.

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

Setting VPM's false characterization of the exchange aside, I'd be fine with the candidates pushing back on the cutesy gotchya questions and the attempts to foment conflict and generate sound bites.

I watched it. We don’t know what Sanders and Warren said to each other, but following up with Warren as if Sanders was lying was unprofessional.

 

[UncleMark]

I watched it. We don’t know what Sanders and Warren said to each other, but following up with Warren as if Sanders was lying was unprofessional.

Just trying to stir up shit. I have no doubt Bernie said he didn't think a woman could win. That's a far cry from saying a woman shouldn't win, which is what we now see idiots like VPM claiming was said.

 

[zeke4ahs]

Back to the original topic, the Archives apologized and said they would change it back.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/natio...itical-of-donald-trump-from-2017-womens-march

 

[UncleMark]

I got a question. You are probably a liberal Democrat and I truly want to know what your thoughts are concerning what CNN did to Bernie Sanders? They were saying that Bernie Sanders was against a woman becoming President ie Elizabeth Warren

The above is a bald faced lie. Why do my posts pointing this out keep getting deleted?

 

[Sope Creek]

The above is a bald faced lie. Why do my posts pointing this out keep getting deleted?

It's because NPT and Cajun moderate this place in accordance with their own ideological preferences, not because you've done anything wrong.

 

[Spartans9312]

CNN and MSNBC were both heavily involved in defeating Bernie in 16, and will be again this go around.

as will all the media.

you'll notice all the media characterized the after debate ambush as an "exchange of words", rather than Warren deliberately ambushing him afterwards, with Bernie doing nothing but try to defend himself, and all this after she slandered Bernie as sexist.

she deliberately put him in the impossible situation of his either saying he was a sexist or she was untruthful, he tried to handle it with class and not shoot back, and she wasn't going to let that happen..

and note all this happened after her numbers were dropping, and she felt the way to pick them up was to sabotage Bernie, as her whole campaign is basically Bernie's campaign word for word.

her and Bernie are occupying the same land.

after Bernie tirelessly cleared and renovated the previously politically totally uninhabitable land in 16, she decided to move in and occupy it. (as did half the field to some degree).

sad to watch.. she's unfortunately become more about the candidate than the cause, as two people occupying the exact same space is going to kill off both by splitting the vote, and always was going to..

don't think the DNC and their corp media arms aren't also just as determined to sabotage Bernie now as in 16.

i've been stating here for well over a yr that the 2020 Dem primaries would be about the DNC and their corp owned and funded media, vs the Dem working class voter.

the better Bernie does, the more they'll turn up the heat on him.

and don't forget, MSNBC's ownership personally took charge of funding Biden's campaign from day one, and CNN's ownership couldn't have anymore the exact same agenda as NBC's. (just as in 16).

what will be interesting, is if the DNC totally caves on witness's testifying, if Pubs calling either Biden to testify is a condition of allowing Dems to call witnesses.

no way is the DNC going to let either Biden testify, and CNN and MSNBC have done all they can to bury the entire Biden thing from day one.

CNN is lead propagandist for the DNC.
McSally's comment about Raju extends to almost the entirety of CNN.

 

[Sope Creek]

CNN and MSNBC were both heavily involved in defeating Bernie in 16, and will be again this go around.

as will all the media.

you'll notice all the media characterized the after debate ambush as an "exchange of words", rather than Warren deliberately ambushing him afterwards, with Bernie doing nothing but try to defend himself, and all this after she slandered Bernie as sexist.

she deliberately put him in the impossible situation of his either saying he was a sexist or she was untruthful, he tried to handle it with class and not shoot back, and she wasn't going to let that happen..

and note all this happened after her numbers were dropping, and she felt the way to pick them up was to sabotage Bernie, as her whole campaign is basically Bernie's campaign word for word.

her and Bernie are occupying the same land.

after Bernie tirelessly cleared and renovated the previously politically totally uninhabitable land in 16, she decided to move in and occupy it. (as did half the field to some degree).

sad to watch.. she's unfortunately become more about the candidate than the cause, as two people occupying the exact same space is going to kill off both by splitting the vote, and always was going to..

don't think the DNC and their corp media arms aren't also just as determined to sabotage Bernie now as in 16.

i've been stating here for well over a yr that the 2020 Dem primaries would be about the DNC and their corp owned and funded media, vs the Dem working class voter.

the better Bernie does, the more they'll turn up the heat on him.

and don't forget, MSNBC's ownership personally took charge of funding Biden's campaign from day one, and CNN's ownership couldn't have anymore the exact same agenda as NBC's. (just as in 16).

what will be interesting, is if the DNC totally caves on witness's testifying, if Pubs calling either Biden to testify is a condition of allowing Dems to call witnesses.

no way is the DNC going to let either Biden testify, and CNN and MSNBC have done all they can to bury the entire Biden thing from day one.

Even if all that is true, I don't like Bernie and won't vote for him anyway. He's been off my list since I listened to him closely in 2016.

 

[UncleMark]

It's because NPT and Cajun moderate this place in accordance with their own ideological preferences, not because you've done anything wrong.

No, I think it's more specific than that. VPM gets special consideration.

 

[Sope Creek]

No, I think it's more specific than that. VPM gets special consideration.

And that's inconsistent with what I said . . . how?

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

VPM special

There you go.

 

[UncleMark]

And that's inconsistent with what I said . . . how?

Posts addressing VPM nonsense get greater scrutiny and are deleted more often than posts addressing COH or Hilz nonsense, for example.

 

[mrhighlife]

Mark, I simply was asking which you were referring to. Why you being like this? You could be saying the woman was speaking about something that had nothing to do with the situation. Or you could be saying that what this situation was about has nothing to do with you. So there are a couple of ways you can see it and I was just asking for you to clarify. If you don't know which one applies to you, then think on it and get back with me.

Because you're thread jacking.

 

[Bulk VanderHuge]

Posts addressing VPM nonsense get greater scrutiny and are deleted more often than posts addressing COH or Hilz nonsense, for example.

According to a mod who deleted one of my posts on the basketball forum, they only take action when a post is reported. Could be that a certain "man of the cloth" has some thin skin.
Just a theory.

 

[UncleMark]

According to a mod who deleted one of my posts on the basketball forum, they only take action when a post is reported. Could be that a certain "man of the cloth" has some thin skin.
Just a theory.

BBall forum is modded by different people with different standards. I'd be surprised if this forum is modded similarly, BICBW.

I've been told that I sometimes cross the (arbitrary) line when replying to VPM, but it seems the line is drawn differently for him than for others.

 

[hoot1]

How can we say we don't take The Pastor seriously in one post and then get upset by him in the next post?

 

[UncleMark]

How can we say we don't take The Pastor seriously in one post and then get upset by him in the next post?

I don't take his thoughts or opinions seriously, but still think his lies need to be called out.

 

[cosmickid]

Why would anyone that was a legitimate news source want to pursue the Biden’s, if our government isn’t? The Biden’s may have gotten a kick back but what politician doesn’t in some way anymore. The Biden narrative is being pushed by Russia and butthurt Oligarchs from Ukraine.

https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/605188/

The Ukrainian Oligarchs aren't just "butthurt". They had millions invested in various schemes and money laundering operations as partners of their buddy Yanukovych. When his government collapsed and he and Manafort were forced to flee (to Russia and the US respectively) the Oligarchs ended up having their funds confiscated and some (like Kislin) were branded as "economic criminals" and banned from Ukraine.

The whole campaign to discredit Biden and rehab Shokin is part of a larger effort to discredit the reform elements (who confiscated their funds) and set the stage for trying to get those funds back. Not sure how Fruman and Parnas figured into all of this, whether they were just flunkies getting paid to work on getting AMB Yovanovitch out of the way, or if they actually have skin in the game and are working to recoup money they lost as well.

One thing is for certain... For someone "nobody knows", Parnas sure shows up in lots of pics and videos with EVERYBODY...

https://www.cnn.com/shows/cuomo-prime-time

Click on video that says "Cuomo shares photos of Lev Parnas" for a revealing montage of pics of Lev with ALL of Trump world- sorry couldn't figure out how to direct link...

 

[UncleMark]

The whole campaign to discredit Biden and rehab Shokin is part of a larger effort to discredit the reform elements (who confiscated their funds) and set the stage for trying to get those funds back.

And they're playing Trump like a fiddle toward those ends.

 

[meridian]

The above is a bald faced lie. Why do my posts pointing this out keep getting deleted?

He’s never read the Ten Commandments?

 

[outside shooter]

From what I have seen since the debate, CNN hasn't been all pro-Warren and anti-Sanders since their dust-up. Granted, they should have criticized their own moderator for the one-sided follow-up, and haven't.

But the overwhelming "take" on the rift from CNN talking heads seems to be

1) the only people who know what was said would be Warren and Sanders
2) It sounds like something Sanders would not have believed or said, based upon his history
3) It's curious that Warren brought up this issue at a time when she was falling in the polls- is it a desperate strategy on her part?
4) Many of Bernie's supporters have an online presence that is overwhelming negative toward his female opponents
5) Bernie maybe ought to try to reign in his more rapid supporters in their negativity on social media
6) A logical explanation is that Sanders may have said that sexism exists in this country and that it is one obstacle that a woman candidate has to overcome that a male candidate would not. Meaning, that this is a bad thing, that it shouldn't be true, but that is has some basis in reality.

 

[T.M.P.]

4) Many of Bernie's supporters have an online presence that is overwhelming negative toward his female opponents

Those are Russian bots .. not all of them, but enough.

 

[meridian]

How can we say we don't take The Pastor seriously in one post and then get upset by him in the next post?

Say:
“I don’t take Pastor Van seriously!”

 

[cosmickid]

Are you commenting on the moderator or on the situation? I ask this because I am trying to put myself in the place of a Bernie supporter. The Democrats screwed Bernie in 16 and now CNN is picking sides. If I was a Bernie guy then I would be like, "Crap!".

Nobody screwed Bernie in '16. Democrat voters preferred a Democrat over Independent Bernie. And if it's true that Bernie voters will vote for Trump if Bernie is not the nominee, then they have abandoned any pretense of being Democrats. And not being racist, homophobic, misogynist Trumpsters...