The Trump Card...
- Thread starter muttly
- Start date
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
WHOA !!! (IF TRUE)
Fun With FISA; The Trump Russia Treason Timeline
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
Fun With FISA; The Trump Russia Treason Timeline
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Not really, not about such a well defined term as "treason." US Code 2381 defines treason quite clearly, as does the US Constitution. And in order to qualify as an "enemy" they must to be someone we are at war with. It's not a question of "you're either with us or you're against us," or "you're either an ally or an enemy." Treason is straight-up a wartime crime. People can use all kinds of definitions to be able to say someone committed treason, but no one has every been charged, nor with they every be charged, for the act of treason unless they've acted on behalf of or in support of someone with whom we are at war.
FactCheck.org just called. They want to hire you.
Shades of "creating context" !!!
While what you say is true in a legal sense, at least in terms of the law, it is not necessarily true in terms of the general meaning of the word.
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
RLENT
Veteran Expediter
Doesn't really address my observation in my last post ... but ok
Consider that espionage - spying for a foreign power and/or feeding them classified info - isn't necessarily treason per se ... but could be considered treasonous
Sent from my iPhone using EO Forums
Last edited:
Of course it did. My comment didn't create any shades of context, it was the actual context of the legal term from which this country operates. You created the new context of "well, most people don't really understand what treason means in this country, and even though you're right, you're wrong when using the general meaning of the word that everyone mistakenly thinks it means, so there."Doesn't really address my observation in my last post ... but ok
I suppose it could. Espionage on behalf of a foreign power is indeed treasonous, a betrayal of one's country. But it ain't treason absent a declaration of war. But now we're no longer talking about the use of the word "treason" in a headline as an indicator of whether the author of the piece's conclusion of treason is true. We're talking about what is and is not "treasonous," which is a whole nuther context.
On Sept 24 of this year (yesterday morning), Trump Tweeted:
"NFL attendance and ratings are WAY DOWN. Boring games yes, but many stay away because they love our country. League should back U.S."
He also Tweeted:
"If NFL fans refuse to go to games until players stop disrespecting our Flag & Country, you will see change take place fast. Fire or suspend!"
The TV ratings for the NFL through last night's game are down 18 percent over last year, which was down 8 percent over 2015. The ratings drop last year coincided precisely with Colin Kaepernick's protests. Coincidence? The protests have widened and the ratings continue to drop. Week 1 was down 10% over 2016, Week 2 was down 8% from Week 1, and Week 3 was down an additional 8% from Week 2. Doesn't look like coincidence. Three separate polls show that it's not at all coincidence, but a direct cause and effect.
The highest rated game yesterday was, of all games, the Bengals and Packers. Surprising considering the Bengals are usually the lowest ratings producing team in the NFL (for good reason, they suck, but I digress). But the Bengals put out a pregame press release stating that they would not kneel, and would instead link arms. The only Bengals players who did not link arms are the ones who traditionally stand and place their hand over their heart and bow their head during the anthem. The Packers players also stood and linked arms, save for 3 players who remained seated on the bench during the anthem. Was the ratings and what the players did during the anthem a coincidence. I dunno, but it's interesting.
The pregame shows all had very high ratings, likely because everyone tuned in to hear what the has-beens all had to say about this mess. The broadcast of the game initially had high ratings, too, but people turned the channels to something else in droves as soon as the National Anthem was complete, according to Nielsen. The Lions had the largest ratings drop between the National Anthem and kickoff. I wonder if that was because the guy who sang the anthem took a knee on the last note and then raised a Black Power fist at the end. No, probably not. Not at all.
It's very clear the NFL's ratings are down, way down, and it's equally clear why. And Trump's Tweets were spot on.
But never fear, it's PolitiFact.org to the rescue!
When Trump had previously tweeted about the NFL's dwindling ratings, despite that tweet also being 100% true, PolitiFact went ahead and rating the tweet a straight-up Pants on Fire liar, liar falsehood. Yesterday they updated their rating after Trump's most recent tweets, and had to tie themselves in inextricable granny knots to come up with a way to not give a True ratings. (they also have a neat trick where they give Trump a false rating, then rate the same statement again in a later article, and then count that as 2 false statements in their overall tally of true versus false statements. In one case they rated him False on the same statement 9 times, and in another 12 times, for a total of two statements that magically became 21 false statements, that weren't even false to begin with, but hey, it adds up.). They laughably went with Mostly False, even though Trump is 100% true.
They went so far as to completely ignore the 3 polls (Rasmussen, Seton Hall, and Yahoo/yougov) where former NFL watchers gave the protests as the primary or sole reason for no longer watching, to the clip of better than 75%, and went with the one poll (JD Powers) that showed 56% of those in the poll gave that reason. And then created a brand new metric by which to calculate the percentage - they lumped those who no longer watch the NFL with those who never and rarely watch sports of any kind to make the percentage of everyone who doesn't watch the NFL a very low percentage, implying that the people who have tuned out the NFL is a really small number of people compared to everyone in the known universe. They also link to a ridiculous WaPo story that claims NFL viewership is actually up by 30%, and that for every viewer who tunes out because of the protests ten more begin watching the NFL.
The WaPo article states: "Six-in-10 football fans said they were watching about the same amount of football, while 30 percent said they were watching more." While WaPo and other media (you know, like PolitiFact.or) use this assertion to de-emphasize the survey's findings, it is flat-out wrong. A lie. And they know it. The question was about ALL sports, NOT football.
It was actually six-in-10 sports fans said they were watching the same amount of sports overall, and 30 percent said they were watching more sports (but not the NFL).
The actual finding on the question - that people watched less of the NFL but more sports overall - also points to the protests as the primary cause. MLB ratings spiked up in September right after the protest stories broke, and NBA and NHL ratings also rose. More notably, college football ratings increased, undercutting the notion that people stopped watching the NFL due to market saturation, slow games, referee flag-fests, concussions, domestic abuse, arrests, etc.
Trump's Mostly False claim that NFL ratings are 'way down'
At this point, I think if Trump tweeted tomorrow that he's changed his mind and that he now thinks kneeling during the National Anthem is an excellent way to peacefully protest, not a single player would be taking a knee next Sunday. <snort>
"NFL attendance and ratings are WAY DOWN. Boring games yes, but many stay away because they love our country. League should back U.S."
He also Tweeted:
"If NFL fans refuse to go to games until players stop disrespecting our Flag & Country, you will see change take place fast. Fire or suspend!"
The TV ratings for the NFL through last night's game are down 18 percent over last year, which was down 8 percent over 2015. The ratings drop last year coincided precisely with Colin Kaepernick's protests. Coincidence? The protests have widened and the ratings continue to drop. Week 1 was down 10% over 2016, Week 2 was down 8% from Week 1, and Week 3 was down an additional 8% from Week 2. Doesn't look like coincidence. Three separate polls show that it's not at all coincidence, but a direct cause and effect.
The highest rated game yesterday was, of all games, the Bengals and Packers. Surprising considering the Bengals are usually the lowest ratings producing team in the NFL (for good reason, they suck, but I digress). But the Bengals put out a pregame press release stating that they would not kneel, and would instead link arms. The only Bengals players who did not link arms are the ones who traditionally stand and place their hand over their heart and bow their head during the anthem. The Packers players also stood and linked arms, save for 3 players who remained seated on the bench during the anthem. Was the ratings and what the players did during the anthem a coincidence. I dunno, but it's interesting.
The pregame shows all had very high ratings, likely because everyone tuned in to hear what the has-beens all had to say about this mess. The broadcast of the game initially had high ratings, too, but people turned the channels to something else in droves as soon as the National Anthem was complete, according to Nielsen. The Lions had the largest ratings drop between the National Anthem and kickoff. I wonder if that was because the guy who sang the anthem took a knee on the last note and then raised a Black Power fist at the end. No, probably not. Not at all.
It's very clear the NFL's ratings are down, way down, and it's equally clear why. And Trump's Tweets were spot on.
But never fear, it's PolitiFact.org to the rescue!
When Trump had previously tweeted about the NFL's dwindling ratings, despite that tweet also being 100% true, PolitiFact went ahead and rating the tweet a straight-up Pants on Fire liar, liar falsehood. Yesterday they updated their rating after Trump's most recent tweets, and had to tie themselves in inextricable granny knots to come up with a way to not give a True ratings. (they also have a neat trick where they give Trump a false rating, then rate the same statement again in a later article, and then count that as 2 false statements in their overall tally of true versus false statements. In one case they rated him False on the same statement 9 times, and in another 12 times, for a total of two statements that magically became 21 false statements, that weren't even false to begin with, but hey, it adds up.). They laughably went with Mostly False, even though Trump is 100% true.
They went so far as to completely ignore the 3 polls (Rasmussen, Seton Hall, and Yahoo/yougov) where former NFL watchers gave the protests as the primary or sole reason for no longer watching, to the clip of better than 75%, and went with the one poll (JD Powers) that showed 56% of those in the poll gave that reason. And then created a brand new metric by which to calculate the percentage - they lumped those who no longer watch the NFL with those who never and rarely watch sports of any kind to make the percentage of everyone who doesn't watch the NFL a very low percentage, implying that the people who have tuned out the NFL is a really small number of people compared to everyone in the known universe. They also link to a ridiculous WaPo story that claims NFL viewership is actually up by 30%, and that for every viewer who tunes out because of the protests ten more begin watching the NFL.
The WaPo article states: "Six-in-10 football fans said they were watching about the same amount of football, while 30 percent said they were watching more." While WaPo and other media (you know, like PolitiFact.or) use this assertion to de-emphasize the survey's findings, it is flat-out wrong. A lie. And they know it. The question was about ALL sports, NOT football.
It was actually six-in-10 sports fans said they were watching the same amount of sports overall, and 30 percent said they were watching more sports (but not the NFL).
The actual finding on the question - that people watched less of the NFL but more sports overall - also points to the protests as the primary cause. MLB ratings spiked up in September right after the protest stories broke, and NBA and NHL ratings also rose. More notably, college football ratings increased, undercutting the notion that people stopped watching the NFL due to market saturation, slow games, referee flag-fests, concussions, domestic abuse, arrests, etc.
Trump's Mostly False claim that NFL ratings are 'way down'
At this point, I think if Trump tweeted tomorrow that he's changed his mind and that he now thinks kneeling during the National Anthem is an excellent way to peacefully protest, not a single player would be taking a knee next Sunday. <snort>
I am sorry but these players are on the clock....on the owners property...the owners should have shown unity against these tactics to bring politics on the field....just how much of a pity party do these blacks want anyhow?>>gee whiz get over yourselves....lets take down the Pyramids of Giza while we are at it...or the colisuem in Rome....all built by slaves...if anyone has a case its the Jews....they learned to deal with it...and move on....poor black guys so hard done by....while these players pad thier over paid wallets
Ken, your point may be valid but the owners only see $$$ and I don't think they really give a krap, so why is everyone fussing.
Sent from my XT1710-02 using EO Forums mobile app
Sent from my XT1710-02 using EO Forums mobile app
I agree.. the whole issue is a non issue really...,
I posted a reply on another thread about standing & kneeling.
As far as Mr Trump is concerned, it's another game of misdirection .. 3 Card Monte! Afterall he is from NYC ...
Healthcare? Deficit? Budget? Trade imbalance? Immigration?
Sent from my VS987 using EO Forums mobile app
American Bridge, an opposition research liberal Super PAC (that the media laughingly calls "left-leaning") founded by David Brock and is closely associated with Media Matters, described by the NYT as an organization which "aims to record every handshake, every utterance by Republican candidates...looking for gotcha moments that could derail political ambitions or provide fodder for television advertisements by liberal groups," has discovered that Jared Kushner is registered to vote in New York as a woman.
“Kushner can't even fill out the most basic paperwork without screwing it up, so it’s a mystery why anyone thinks he’s somehow going to bring peace to the Middle East,” American Bridge spokesman Brad Bainum said.
Hey, hey, hey, Mr Bainum! Why would you assume that Kushner screwed up his voter registration?!? Maybe he identifies as a woman. Didja ever think of that, Skippy? Didja, didja, didja? Huh!
“Kushner can't even fill out the most basic paperwork without screwing it up, so it’s a mystery why anyone thinks he’s somehow going to bring peace to the Middle East,” American Bridge spokesman Brad Bainum said.
Hey, hey, hey, Mr Bainum! Why would you assume that Kushner screwed up his voter registration?!? Maybe he identifies as a woman. Didja ever think of that, Skippy? Didja, didja, didja? Huh!
Reuters is both shocked and confused about how Trump's travel ban is supposed to work. Clearly, they thought nothing would change and the number of people obtaining visas from the affected countries was supposed to remain the same as before the ban.
U.S. visas to six Muslim nations drop after Supreme Court backs travel ban
U.S. visas to six Muslim nations drop after Supreme Court backs travel ban
