US Vice President used private email account for sensitive info and got hacked

[-TesseracT-]

5 minutes ago, Memories4K said:

How do i better tell someone their behavior leads me to believe they have a developmental disorder where there is a deficiency in communication and social understanding on their end without being a meanie.

You said it yourself: "there is a deficiency in communication and social understanding". 

 

The thing is, that if autistic people hear "autistic" being used as an insult, they will associate that word, and therefore themselves, as something bad. Autistic people haven't chosen their syndrome, it is very low to be demeaning towards people who haven't really done anything wrong. Many autistic people have enought of a low self esteem, no need to make it worse.

[Memories4K]

Just now, stconquest said:

Being austistic is not necessarily a bad thing, using it as an insult is disingenuous. 

You could be right there, developmental disorders are probably not disorders that are characterized by deficiencies at all.

In that case, i wasn't asking to use it as an insult but as an innocent inferred description ?

[Memories4K]

6 minutes ago, -TesseracT- said:

You said it yourself: "there is a deficiency in communication and social understanding". 

 

The thing is, that if autistic people hear "autistic" being used as an insult, they will associate that word, and therefore themselves, as something bad. Autistic people haven't chosen their syndrome, it is very low to be demeaning towards people who haven't really done anything wrong. Many autistic people have enought of a low self esteem, no need to make it worse.

You're right, i'll say "You sound like you have autism" instead of "You're an autist" from now on, in order to differentiate the disorder from the person.

I will note that the negative connotation still stays because, again, autism is a developmental disorder characterized by my description that you responded to.

[-TesseracT-]

Just now, Memories4K said:

You're right, i'll say "You sound like you have autism" instead of "You're an autist" from now on, in order to differentiate the disorder from the person.

I will note that the negative connotation still stays because, again, autism is a developmental disorder characterized by my description that you responded to.

I would literally say: "You seem to lack communication skills".

[ace_cheaply]

39 minutes ago, stconquest said:

So the Obama Admin. seriously over-reached to try and punish a reporter that tried to coerce a state official into giving up some information.

 

Let's see how this relates to what the Trump admin does... it doesn't.  I trust what comes out of the MSM way more than what comes out of Trump's mouth... I do so because I try to be objective, not because I trust the major news outlets to a fault.

Yeah, quite totalitarianist, is it not?

 

It relates to your claim that trumps administrstion is totalitarian.  And that is your problem.  Trusting the main stream media, when they do obviously have a huge bias and an agenda against the administration.  Notice I have only posted left wing sources to corroborate the fact that things the media crucify trump for they gave a pass to Obama for.  Attacking journalists( real attacks, not just mean words), talking to foreign governments before taking office, discussing the possibility of policy change with ambassadors, et cetera, that outlets like CNN, CBS and their ilk have no desire to put forward because it destroys their narratives.  They have no desire to be impartial or unbiased. Whenever challenged on the issues, they deflect or change the subject.  That should bother you, but it doesn't because of confirmation bias.

 

I don't trust Trump to speak literal truth.  I do trust the media though.  I trust that they will convey his comments in the worst possible light without regards to any precedence or hypocrisy on their part. I trust that they will take anything they can out of context and present any damning information without reguards to veracity.  The piss docier, for example.

 

 

 I can provide you with hours and hours of breakdowns of their lies in video form if you like.  In fact, if you are interested I suggest starting at the small YouTube channel Hard Bastard. He does daily breakdowns on their nonsense, especially CNN.  If you have any desire to have your narratives challenged, I would skip the Young Turks Video and head there.   But in no way do I take his word as gospel either, which is why it's nice he provides all the sources for his commentary so I can do all my own research and come to my interpretation.  

 

Stories from CNN and Breitbart must be taken with equal grains of salt, as the truth usually exists somewhere in the middle.

[Memories4K]

Just now, -TesseracT- said:

I would literally say: "You seem to lack communication skills".

But it goes beyond that:
It's also lacking the intuition to understand many social concepts.

If you want, i would love to keep talking about this via PMs (i don't want this thread to go too far off the rails)
Because i hope you're understanding that i have not called anyone autistic yet, but am being insincere in my position to agree that i should use anything other than the word autism when describing characteristics of autism. I could just as easily save the conversation and use literally any other word/description but i want to have this conversation now on why not to use what words means for what they mean.

The negative connotation comes from what autism is characterized by, not from a social made-up urban myth like how those with schizophrenia (another developmental disorder) have multiple personalities (which is DID). Fully willing to talk about it in the PMs.

[stconquest]

12 minutes ago, ace_cheaply said:

Yeah, quite totalitarianist, is it not?

 

It relates to your claim that trumps administrstion is totalitarian.  And that is your problem.  Trusting the main stream media, when they do obviously have a huge bias and an agenda against the administration.  Notice I have only posted left wing sources to corroborate the fact that things the media crucify trump for they gave a pass to Obama for.  Attacking journalists( real attacks, not just mean words), talking to foreign governments before taking office, discussing the possibility of policy change with ambassadors, et cetera, that outlets like CNN, CBS and their ilk have no desire to put forward because it destroys their narratives.  They have no desire to be impartial or unbiased. Whenever challenged on the issues, they deflect or change the subject.  That should bother you, but it doesn't because of confirmation bias.

A totalitarian move is claiming the major news outlets are "Fake News" with absolutely no nuance involved in the critique (more ad-hominem than critique), and proceeding to claim that I (Trump) will always tell the american people the truth.

 

Please stop telling me what you think of me.

Quote

I don't trust Trump to speak literal truth.  I do trust the media though.  I trust that they will convey his comments in the worst possible light without regards to any precedence or hypocrisy on their part. I trust that they will take anything they can out of context and present any damning information without reguards to veracity.  The piss docier, for example.

 

 I can provide you with hours and hours of breakdowns of their lies in video form if you like.  In fact, if you are interested I suggest starting at the small YouTube channel Hard Bastard. He does daily breakdowns on their nonsense, especially CNN.  If you have any desire to have your narratives challenged, I would skip the Young Turks Video and head there.   But in no way do I take his word as gospel either, which is why it's nice he provides all the sources for his commentary so I can do all my own research and come to my interpretation.  

You don't trust the President of the United States of America to tell the truth.  Okay, totes okay.

 

No, I am not interested in your choice of propaganda.

 

Quote

Stories from CNN and Breitbart must be taken with equal grains of salt, as the truth usually exists somewhere in the middle.

You have just equated Breitbart with CNN without a reason attached... we are done.

[ace_cheaply]

13 minutes ago, stconquest said:

A totalitarian move is claiming the major news outlets are "Fake News" with absolutely no nuance involved, and proceeding to claim that I (Trump) will always tell the american people to truth.

 

Please stop telling me what you think of me.

You don't trust the President of the United States of America to tell the truth.  Okay, totes okay.

 

No, I am not interested in your choice of propaganda.

 

You have just equated Breitbart with CNN... we are done.

No, i don't.  I've never been alive when there was a politiician that didn't spin the truth.

 

Of course you aren't.  Then you might have to consider your bias.

 

Yes. I did.  Although it's not really fair to breitbart, since CNN is probably the worst outlet in news.  Buzzfeed or huffpo would take that crown if they were actually news outlets.  

 

I would be done too if I had no case for argument and refused to view evidence contrary to my position.  Careful, you'll get sand in your eyes with your head buried so deep.

 

Also note the fact that I said he provides all his sources, as well as shows them during the videos, so it's not so much propoganda as the utter destruction of false narratives.

[ace_cheaply]

7 minutes ago, stconquest said:

A totalitarian move is claiming the major news outlets are "Fake News" with absolutely no nuance involved, and proceeding to claim that I (Trump) will always tell the american people to truth.

Regarding this...

 

 

What you said has nothing to do with totalitarianism.  You're allowed to call organizations fake news. Even if you're the president.  Maybe if he said "you are fake news, you'll all be prosecuted,"  you might have a point.

[Guest Kloaked]

Aaand ten pages later this thread is still up, even though political threads were banned.

[Seamonster420]

1 minute ago, ace_cheaply said:

Yes. I did.  Although it's not really fair to breitbart, since CNN is probably the worst outlet in news.  Buzzfeed or huffpo would take that crown if they were actually news outlets. 

At worst CNN has been a stenographer to those in power. Their idea of reporting on the White House is to send someone to the White House Press briefing and report everything the Press Secretary says as gospel and never do any actual analysis. It was true under Bush when they failed to question the "evidence" that was presented by the Bush administration as justification for invading Iraq, it was true under Obama too. CNN is neither left nor right nor center it is a mouth piece for the establishment and corporations. Buzzfeed and Huffpo are lefty tabloids. Breitbart is a mouth-piece for white supremacist hate speech and propaganda. All of these things are bad but one is much much worse. If you're seriously saying that Breitbart and CNN are the same thing on opposite ends of the spectrum then you expose your own bias and lack of critical thinking skills and thus any argument you make can be rejected out of hand.

[ace_cheaply]

10 minutes ago, Seamonster420 said:

At worst CNN has been a stenographer to those in power. Their idea of reporting on the White House is to send someone to the White House Press briefing and report everything the Press Secretary says as gospel and never do any actual analysis. It was true under Bush when they failed to question the "evidence" that was presented by the Bush administration as justification for invading Iraq, it was true under Obama too. CNN is neither left nor right nor center it is a mouth piece for the establishment and corporations. Buzzfeed and Huffpo are lefty tabloids. Breitbart is a mouth-piece for white supremacist hate speech and propaganda. All of these things are bad but one is much much worse. If you're seriously saying that Breitbart and CNN are the same thing on opposite ends of the spectrum then you expose your own bias and lack of critical thinking skills and thus any argument you make can be rejected out of hand.

That's intellectually honest of you, claiming that any argument can be summarily rejected as long as you disagree with a part of it.   Good to know.  I completely disagree with the idea the CNN is not on the left, and therefore reject your comment entirely.  Have a great day ?!

[Sakkura]

2 hours ago, ace_cheaply said:

And you do?  I know I provided examples of President elects using surrogates and talking to foreign governments before taking office and your only response is that it's not the same because those guys were on your side.

No, I told you what the difference was - there wasn't a conflict with those countries at the time, so the Logan act could not apply. You chose to ignore that fact because it didn't fit with your world view.

[ace_cheaply]

Just now, Sakkura said:

No, I told you what the difference was - there wasn't a conflict with those countries at the time, so the Logan act could not apply. You chose to ignore that fact because it didn't fit with your world view.

And I have repeated many, many times that the fbi has concluded there was nothing illegal, meaning it is exactly the same.  But you chose to ignore that fact because it didn't fit with your world view.

[Sakkura]

1 minute ago, ace_cheaply said:

And I have repeated many, many times that the fbi has concluded there was nothing illegal, meaning it is exactly the same.  But you chose to ignore that fact because it didn't fit with your world view.

 

That FBI investigation before the story broke about his lies? GG.

[ace_cheaply]

14 minutes ago, Sakkura said:

 

That FBI investigation before the story broke about his lies? GG.

From the article @ivan134 posted which has been updated in in February.

 

"Several officials emphasized that while sanctions were discussed, they did not see evidence that Flynn had an intent to convey an explicit promise to take action after the inauguration."

 

 

Meaning,  GG, Logan act not violated.

Beside that, all the conversations took place in december.  Unless you are claiming the transcripts magically changed between now and then, the evidence is the same, and so is the conclusion.  Your claim of being a flynn puppet of Russia is ridiculous and unfounded, equally as much as your claim about the (unconstitutional) Logan Act violation.

[Seamonster420]

19 minutes ago, ace_cheaply said:

That's intellectually honest of you, claiming that any argument can be summarily rejected as long as you disagree with a part of it.   Good to know.  I completely disagree with the idea the CNN is not on the left, and therefore reject your comment entirely.  Have a great day ?!

No, I was simply pointing out that your bullshit detector is defective and your opinion is just that. It's an opinion, well good for you. Either you really cannot distinguish the two or your being extremely disingenuous. Could you perhaps provide evidence of a lefty bias in CNN reporting? Because I'd be more than happy to go on Breitbart and find some examples of hate speech and blatant propaganda. I really would be willing to do that if it'd make you feel better, it really wasn't my intention to hurt your little feelings. I would also like to point out that when Trump comes out and calls CNN and the New York Times fake news for reporting on his ties to Russia or they dig up and old clip of him admitting to sexually assaulting women that does not make CNN or the New York Times infact fake news. Is he trying to say that that clip was a hoax? I find that extremely improbably and hence highly probably that Trump is a liar with his pants on fire, and any website or news source that defends Trump's lies and upholds his fake news narrative is most likely a propaganda site. I chose that example specifically because the lie is obvious and it's in your face and if you can't recognize it for what it is then what's the point of even arguing with you about it?

[ace_cheaply]

34 minutes ago, Seamonster420 said:

No, I was simply pointing out that your bullshit detector is defective and your opinion is just that. It's an opinion, well good for you. Either you really cannot distinguish the two or your being extremely disingenuous. Could you perhaps provide evidence of a lefty bias in CNN reporting? Because I'd be more than happy to go on Breitbart and find some examples of hate speech and blatant propaganda. I really would be willing to do that if it'd make you feel better, it really wasn't my intention to hurt your little feelings. I would also like to point out that when Trump comes out and calls CNN and the New York Times fake news for reporting on his ties to Russia or they dig up and old clip of him admitting to sexually assaulting women that does not make CNN or the New York Times infact fake news. Is he trying to say that that clip was a hoax? I find that extremely improbably and hence highly probably that Trump is a liar with his pants on fire, and any website or news source that defends Trump's lies and upholds his fake news narrative is most likely a propaganda site. I chose that example specifically because the lie is obvious and it's in your face and if you can't recognize it for what it is then what's the point of even arguing with you about it?

Ok, let's unpack this a little bit.  Forgive me any formatting errors because I'm typing on a phone.  In a few hours I will be off work and in a much better position to organize.

 

 

I will be happy to provide you with examples of you will forgive the need to do so in multiple posts, as often times when I switch tabs on my phone my comment is deleted.  Look for my examples in a minute or two after this posts.  For a quick example, you have the piss dossier.  I would like your breitbart examples as well, should you be kind enough to provide them.

 

 

The two are extreme examples of the right and left.  Brietbart may be more right than CNN is left, but if that's the case the difference is miniscule and has no practical difference.

 

My little feelings are just fine thank you, but your leftist argumentation style of condescension is noted and appreciated. It truly does fit one with frail arguments, which is why it works so well with CNN and its audience.

 

His ties to Russia are fake news, as has been argued as naseum in this thread, but I'd be happy to dispell any myths or notions not already covered in the previous 10 pages.

About sexual assault, I have to hope that one day you'll get the chance to experience this, but it's not sexual assault when they let you do it, which is exactly what Trump said.

 

 

[ace_cheaply]

1 hour ago, Seamonster420 said:

No, I was simply pointing out that your bullshit detector is defective and your opinion is just that. It's an opinion, well good for you. Either you really cannot distinguish the two or your being extremely disingenuous. Could you perhaps provide evidence of a lefty bias in CNN reporting? Because I'd be more than happy to go on Breitbart and find some examples of hate speech and blatant propaganda. I really would be willing to do that if it'd make you feel better, it really wasn't my intention to hurt your little feelings. I would also like to point out that when Trump comes out and calls CNN and the New York Times fake news for reporting on his ties to Russia or they dig up and old clip of him admitting to sexually assaulting women that does not make CNN or the New York Times infact fake news. Is he trying to say that that clip was a hoax? I find that extremely improbably and hence highly probably that Trump is a liar with his pants on fire, and any website or news source that defends Trump's lies and upholds his fake news narrative is most likely a propaganda site. I chose that example specifically because the lie is obvious and it's in your face and if you can't recognize it for what it is then what's the point of even arguing with you about it?

Those are just the most easily accessible from one person exposing the bias of CNN.  This isn't even talking about mischaracterizations of his comments, like saying last night in Sweden means there is a terrorist attack.  Sweden is just adapting wonderfully to the migrant incursion if you listen to CNN and their ilk. Yeah, trump believes Frederick Douglas is still alive right, CNN?    And you have the audacity to claim my bullshit meter is broken?

 

Id be happy to provide dozens of similar responses from separate people if you like, but you'll have to wait 3 hours for them, and spend a few hours watching/listening.

[Prysin]

2 hours ago, Kloaked said:

Aaand ten pages later this thread is still up, even though political threads were banned.

it's easier to keep the shit contained in one thread. then shuffle 50 shitty threads into the bin

[SansVarnic]

IMO I personally do not see this as news worthy [no matter which politician was involved] there is no new technology involved here and is all politically driven nonsense.

 

This is an off topic sort of thing.

 

OT: If pence did do this and if he did send sensitive material then he is in the same boat as SHillary and needs to be indicted. Fairly simple and straight forward. Government officials need to be held to the letter of law even though they help create these laws. We have no royalty or elite [no matter what they may think of themselves] in the US and government officials are not above anyone else they are servants of the people.

 

@Blade of Grass

@Ryan_Vickers

@colonel_mortis

[Seamonster420]

1 hour ago, ace_cheaply said:

Id be happy to provide dozens of similar responses from separate people if you like, but you'll have to wait 3 hours for them, and spend a few hours watching/listening.

Please god no, these videos are super long but I will watch these videos and post some articles from Breitbart to outline my point as agreed. It might take me a little while though because I have to watch them. I just wanted to post something so you don't think I bitched out just in case this thread gets locked. I would also like to clarify a few points. I would also like to clarify I am NOT a regular CNN viewer because I think they do garbage journalism just for different reasons which I outlined before. As for formatting it's all good bro, as you can tell punctuation isn't exactly my strong suit so I'm not going to judge.

[Blade of Grass]

Due to people's inability to have constructive discussions and tendency to attack dissenters, political discussions are no longer allowed on the forum. 

 

Locked.