ADVERTISEMENT

Top secret documents

I only see twit stuff when it's linked here. I have no use for it.
Just so you know...AND this isn't an attack its an explanation of how Twitter works. When you join, you select who you want to follow. So I selected news sources that I'm familiar with, then sports, like Indiana football and basketball, people, and yada yada. In the morning rather than got to all those news sources and sports pages separate, I open Twitter and its all there in one spot. I can go through and read news stories that all my favorite sources have linked to their Twitter post. There are a lot of interesting comments too from both sides just like this board. Its a convenience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stollcpa
Look why argue with me??? Haven't you learned. Your'e gonna believe your sources, and I'm gonna believe mine. I don't believe anything your sources print and you don't believe mine. Yours have been there for years and are bought and paid for by every Davos attendee and mine are independent truth seekers.

Did you not see the Klaus Schwab attempted interview at Davos. Journalist..."Can I ask you a question" Schwab..."Sure what paper are you from". Journalist "Independent News". Schwab runs away. If it ain't part of the propaganda agenda they are not gonna get trapped with legit questions about what they are pushing.

Did you see the Pfizer CEO when a news source (Not Part Of the Propaganda Agenda) started asking him about side effects from the vaccine including death?????? They banned the video from every social media platform on the planet EXCEPT.....wait for it.....Twitter. Thank you ELON for not backing down from the truth!!!

So you continue on and if it gets out of line again I will back my fellow posters who haven't been swallowed by the systematic propaganda machine. Peace!
You don't get it. You guys don't have to believe the MSM. If you think they are bought and paid for by the left, go for it. But at least understand what it is you don't believe. In other words, know what they actually said. There were no mainstream claims that Trump had nuclear codes. DANC tried to provide one example, and even that was a failure. You can find lots of people claiming the media made these claims. But you won't find examples of the media actually doing it, because they didn't.
 
You don't get it. You guys don't have to believe the MSM. If you think they are bought and paid for by the left, go for it. But at least understand what it is you don't believe. In other words, know what they actually said. There were no mainstream claims that Trump had nuclear codes. DANC tried to provide one example, and even that was a failure. You can find lots of people claiming the media made these claims. But you won't find examples of the media actually doing it, because they didn't.

It appears some people have never played the game telephone where people try to relay what was whispered to them to the next person and gets portions of it wrong.

Of course, I'm sure some get things wrong on purpose for the sole reason of making the "enemy" look bad, whether the media or opposing politician.
 
There are a lot of great follows on twitter that do deliver credible news. Mostly people affiliated with major news organizations. Maggie Haberman, for example, is allowed to tweet summaries of all her reports at the time the NYT publishes them, with links to the full report requiring a subscription. I bet her work gets 100x the exposure, faster, based on the tweets as opposed to people reading the NYT content without being guided by her tweets.

Yeah, I know, NYT, what a biased source. But you can get more immediate coverage by following people from whatever you favorite news outlets might be, Fox, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, the Hill, Reuters, etc.

You can get tons of crap on your feed too, by following anti-science quacks and goofballs.
 
As so often happens on this board in a thread of this length, ridiculous claims surface early on and are trumpeted by gullible people who rely on people like some of the morons on twitter to provide them with political insight. And some people willingly choose to ignore the fact that the cited media doesn't even say what it's purported to say...

Of course when GOAT points out that little inconsistency the same people respond to his factual comments with the refuge of the lame the smiley face. Only in this case the smiley should probably signify "you got me and even though it makes me look stupid I'll cling to my point- facts be damned". The fact that certain people answer posts more often with a smiley than they do with any sort of reasoned argument probably hasn't escaped most of the intelligent posters here...

Of course it's hard for us to expect posters to display intelligence when the types of politicos many of them admire, or at least support are just as wrong. And when MAGA politicians put their ignorance on display they do it publicly. And as we've seen, gullible people follow them over the cliff...

So now that the facts have been revealed on the whole "Hunter paid Joe unclaimed rent nonsense", I fully expect some to refuse to accept the reality and hang on to that lie as steadfastly as they hung on to the "pelosi was attacked by a jilted lover" fantasy. I imagine down deep Elon still believes that- don't recall him ever apologizing for his ridiculous tweet. Might even be some on this board who'll persist as well- "It's a deep state coverup". Keep an eye out- Sweden is about to be pulled in as a member of the deep state cabal.

It just amazes me that an actual reporter was able to get to the facts rather quickly, while an idiot like that Wendell Husebo (who Dakich chose to inexplicably retweet) didn't bother to even check into the matter in an even rudimentary basis.

"Some claimed money laundering was in play. Others, piggybacking off another anonymous Twitter account, suggested the form implicated Joe Biden in tax fraud.

"Hunter Biden paid his dad $50,000 a MONTH in rent for the home that housed classified documents. During the same time frame, @JoeBiden only claimed less than $20,000 in rent payments PER YEAR," said Newsmax host Carl Higbie in one such post, referencing the president's publicly available tax returns.

But the document shared online does not show Hunter Biden paid his father to stay at their Delaware home. The $49,910 listed under "monthly rent" matches quarterly payments he made to the House of Sweden in Washington DC, which -- in addition to housing the Swedish and Icelandic embassies -- provides office space.

"I can confirm that Hunter Biden paid $49,910 in quarterly rent for an office space in House of Sweden," Maria Uggla, a press officer for Sweden's National Property Board, told AFP in an email."


Apparently Tucker went with this (thoroughly debunked) story on his show last night or the night before, and Newsmax has been promoting it as well. When was the LAST election when either Tucker or Newsmax were on the side getting the most votes?
Facts? We talkin’ ‘bout FACTS?

You must be new here, but if you like your facts, you can keep them.
 
There are a lot of great follows on twitter that do deliver credible news. Mostly people affiliated with major news organizations. Maggie Haberman, for example, is allowed to tweet summaries of all her reports at the time the NYT publishes them, with links to the full report requiring a subscription. I bet her work gets 100x the exposure, faster, based on the tweets as opposed to people reading the NYT content without being guided by her tweets.

Yeah, I know, NYT, what a biased source. But you can get more immediate coverage by following people from whatever you favorite news outlets might be, Fox, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, the Hill, Reuters, etc.

You can get tons of crap on your feed too, by following anti-science quacks and goofballs.
So if the lion’s share of media presents a left bias and that bias gets 100x the play on social media as musk relates there’s an issue
 
First off, 2 wrongs shouldn't cancel each other out. This isn't the 2 wrongs make a right situation.

You can argue purposely taking documents and being careless with documents are somewhat comparable (although I think it could be argued that purposely taking is worse) given that both end up with documents being taken/stolen from where they were supposed to be.

However, the part about not cooperating with returning said documents is not at all comparable and where things are very different.

There needs to be repercussions and there needs to be better safeguards to prevent it from happening in the future.
Why can’t you ever post anything interesting?
 
You don't get it. You guys don't have to believe the MSM. If you think they are bought and paid for by the left, go for it. But at least understand what it is you don't believe. In other words, know what they actually said. There were no mainstream claims that Trump had nuclear codes. DANC tried to provide one example, and even that was a failure. You can find lots of people claiming the media made these claims. But you won't find examples of the media actually doing it, because they didn't.
Here ya go...One link...An MSM source msn. Citing WAPO, CNN and FOX...

 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
So if the lion’s share of media presents a left bias and that bias gets 100x the play on social media as musk relates there’s an issue
Read my post 961 Murt. You pick and choose who you want to follow. Sometimes you will pick up links to other sources from comments. Its a great grab bag source to get everything you LIKE from one place.

As musk relates there’s an issue

The issue with Twitter before Musk had it is he has found highly sensitive documents from the FBI, and other government agencies that told Twitter to suppress or cancel stories that were true. Those stories swayed viewers opinions...ESPECIALLY during elections. Musk is releasing all that sh!t and the government is pissed as hell about it. Thats why the rumors were swirling about him getting protection. Peel back that outer onion skin baby slowly but surely! :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Read my post 961 Murt. You pick and choose who you want to follow. Sometimes you will pick up links to other sources from comments. Its a great grab bag source to get everything you LIKE from one place.

As musk relates there’s an issue

The issue with Twitter before Musk had it is he has found highly sensitive documents from the FBI, and other government agencies that told Twitter to suppress or cancel stories that were true. Those stories swayed viewers opinions...ESPECIALLY during elections. Musk is releasing all that sh!t and the government is pissed as hell about it. Thats why the rumors were swirling about him getting protection. Peel back that outer onion skin baby slowly but surely! :)
Yeah I’m good with all that in your post for sports etc. When it comes to real issues, Covid hospitalizations, crime, etc I go straight to the source. State. Hospital. Police department. Whatever
 
There are a lot of great follows on twitter that do deliver credible news. Mostly people affiliated with major news organizations. Maggie Haberman, for example, is allowed to tweet summaries of all her reports at the time the NYT publishes them, with links to the full report requiring a subscription. I bet her work gets 100x the exposure, faster, based on the tweets as opposed to people reading the NYT content without being guided by her tweets.

Yeah, I know, NYT, what a biased source. But you can get more immediate coverage by following people from whatever you favorite news outlets might be, Fox, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, the Hill, Reuters, etc.

You can get tons of crap on your feed too, by following anti-science quacks and goofballs.
Going to a primary source is always the best option. For example, go to a medical journal (e.g. JAMA or The Lancet) if it's a medical issue. If there's a question about a law, read the statute. Read a report instead of relying on someone's interpretation of it. Same with comments by public figures - - - listen to the speech or read a transcript of it. If it was in writing, read what they wrote. It's all online.

Unfortunately most people are too lazy or stupid to take these extra steps in acquiring credible, reliable information.
 
There were no mainstream claims that Trump had nuclear codes. DANC tried to provide one example, and even that was a failure. You can find lots of people claiming the media made these claims. But you won't find examples of the media actually doing it, because they didn't.
Here ya go...One link...An MSM source msn. Citing WAPO, CNN and FOX...

"Nuclear codes" is not the same as "nuclear secrets".
Yes, the codes are secret, but the words codes and secrets are not interchangeable.
And I assume any codes DJT possessed were changed the moment Biden was inaugurated.
 
There are a lot of great follows on twitter that do deliver credible news. Mostly people affiliated with major news organizations. Maggie Haberman, for example, is allowed to tweet summaries of all her reports at the time the NYT publishes them, with links to the full report requiring a subscription. I bet her work gets 100x the exposure, faster, based on the tweets as opposed to people reading the NYT content without being guided by her tweets.

Yeah, I know, NYT, what a biased source. But you can get more immediate coverage by following people from whatever you favorite news outlets might be, Fox, CBS, MSNBC, CNN, the Hill, Reuters, etc.

You can get tons of crap on your feed too, by following anti-science quacks and goofballs.
Yeah, there are legit posters on Twitter. The problem is that Twitter often censors or prohibits posts that might disagree with those posts. Twitter chooses sides. I don’t care how credible a Maggie Haberman might be, if I’m not allowed to disagree with her, or question her, she becomes less credible. Allowing challenges and criticisms of any point strengthens the point, not weakens it. This kind of exchange is the guts of critical thinking and Twitter often didn't allow it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC and mcmurtry66
"Nuclear codes" is not the same as "nuclear secrets".
Yes, the codes are secret, but the words codes and secrets are not interchangeable.
And I assume any codes DJT possessed were changed the moment Biden was inaugurated.
Codes is mentioned in the article...Bottom Line, everyone freaked out and assumed it had to be, something to do with nuclear, because of the search warrant. Just another in the long line of "we got him now moments".
 
Going to a primary source is always the best option. For example, go to a medical journal (e.g. JAMA or The Lancet) if it's a medical issue. If there's a question about a law, read the statute. Read a report instead of relying on someone's interpretation of it. Same with comments by public figures - - - listen to the speech or read a transcript of it. If it was in writing, read what they wrote. It's all online.

Unfortunately most people are too lazy or stupid to take these extra steps in acquiring credible, reliable information.
OMG cmon man. They link the articles or the video clips of the news report!!! Click it and you are at the primary source. Good Grief. Is it that hard to understand.

 
  • Like
Reactions: DANC
Going to a primary source is always the best option. For example, go to a medical journal (e.g. JAMA or The Lancet) if it's a medical issue. If there's a question about a law, read the statute. Read a report instead of relying on someone's interpretation of it. Same with comments by public figures - - - listen to the speech or read a transcript of it. If it was in writing, read what they wrote. It's all online.

Unfortunately most people are too lazy or stupid to take these extra steps in acquiring credible, reliable information.
Exactly
 
Codes is mentioned in the article...Bottom Line, everyone freaked out and assumed it had to be, something to do with nuclear, because of the search warrant. Just another in the long line of "we got him now moments".
The left always freaks out when Trump is mentioned - he is their vote-getter - they fear his flying monkeys and spinning houses

"Trump cures cancer - riots spread"

I don't like him - he's a dick - but I don't plan my day around Trump-related tweets, and - truth - he never does anything that has not been done before. He just insults people more than the average politician.

The race-baiters are far more dangerous to our democracy than a Richie Rich like Donald Trump.
 
You don't get it. You guys don't have to believe the MSM. If you think they are bought and paid for by the left, go for it. But at least understand what it is you don't believe. In other words, know what they actually said. There were no mainstream claims that Trump had nuclear codes. DANC tried to provide one example, and even that was a failure. You can find lots of people claiming the media made these claims. But you won't find examples of the media actually doing it, because they didn't.
*sigh*


Oh, I know - it doesn't 'claim' he has nuclear codes. It just raises the possibility. Just like they did when they found Biden's docs...... ooops!

Do you know how to google?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Crayfish57
*sigh*


Oh, I know - it doesn't 'claim' he has nuclear codes. It just raises the possibility. Just like they did when they found Biden's docs...... ooops!

Do you know how to google?
It doesn't even raise the possibility.
 
"Nuclear codes" is not the same as "nuclear secrets".
Yes, the codes are secret, but the words codes and secrets are not interchangeable.
And I assume any codes DJT possessed were changed the moment Biden was inaugurated.
As you said, the codes are secret. What else is there about 'nuclear' that's a secret anymore?
 
As you said, the codes are secret. What else is there about 'nuclear' that's a secret anymore?

If someone knew, they probably wouldn't be allowed to tell you lol. Maybe exact locations of our nuclear arsenals, capabilities, etc.
 
As you said, the codes are secret. What else is there about 'nuclear' that's a secret anymore?
I believe that what the US knows of other nation's nuclear capabilities and just how we determined/learned of those capabilities is the secret in question.
 
I believe that what the US knows of other nation's nuclear capabilities and just how we determined/learned of those capabilities is the secret in question.
We couldn't figure it out by monitoring their tests? Which we do.

I think other nations realize this. And they know ours, too. And hell, i"ve seen the number of Russian nukes in the media!
 
I believe that what the US knows of other nation's nuclear capabilities and just how we determined/learned of those capabilities is the secret in question.
The reason you believe that is because that's what was widely reported at the time. Meanwhile, nobody reported that the secrets involved the nuclear codes.
 
We couldn't figure it out by monitoring their tests? Which we do.

I think other nations realize this. And they know ours, too. And hell, i"ve seen the number of Russian nukes in the media!

So the hill you're dying on is that the only possible nuclear secret is nuclear codes? that there is no other possibility of anything else being a classified nuclear secret?
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: MrBing and Zizkov
I read it; it doesn't even mention nuclear codes.
That's why I posted this:

"Oh, I know - it doesn't 'claim' he has nuclear codes. It just raises the possibility. Just like they did when they found Biden's docs...... ooops!"

You might want to start responding to what I actually wrote.
 
So the hill you're dying on is that the only possible nuclear secret is nuclear codes? that there is no other possibility of anything else being a classified nuclear secret?
WTF are you babbling about?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT