The Right Side of the News

Because you and Faith are talking about parties changing views and people changing parties, I can't tell if you're saying this or repeating something Faith said before proceeding on to rebut it, but this doesn't sound familiar.Thinking back, I recall that Carter sold wheat to the Soviet Union, but then boycotted the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow because the Soviet Union had invaded Afghanistan, so I don't know what in Carter's administration is being seen as "defending Russia." The collapse of the Soviet Union caused Clinton to shift toward a closer relationship with Russia while helping them toward a market economy and more representative government, so that doesn't sound like "defending Russia," either. That leaves Obama, and again I can't guess what he did to "defend Russie."So I'm lost what this is about.--Percy

Only non-fans of Saturday Night Live will have to ask, "Who is Dan Crenshaw?" He is a Republican representative-elect from Texas. On the November 3rd show SNL's Pete Davidson mocked Crenshaw's appearance (he wears an eyepatch because while operating as a SEAL in Afghanistgan his right eye was obliterated by an IED). SNL realized that they had crossed a line and invited Crenshaw to appear on the November 10th show: Crenshaw wrote an opinion piece for today's Washington Post (SNL mocked my appearance. Here’s why I didn’t demand an apology.) that includes the following:

quote:

---

How, then, do we live together in this world of differing ideas? For starters, let’s agree that the ideas are fair game. If you think my idea is awful, you should say as much. But there is a difference between attacking an idea and attacking the person behind that idea. Labeling someone as an -ist who believes in an -ism because of the person’s policy preference is just a shortcut to playground-style name-calling, cloaked in political terminology. It’s also generally a good indication that the attacker doesn’t have a solid argument and needs a way to end debate before it has even begun.

​

Similarly, people too often attack not just an idea but also the supposed intent behind an idea. That raises the emotional level of the debate and might seem like it strengthens the attacker’s side, but it’s a terrible way to make a point. Assuming the worst about your opponents’ intentions has the effect of demonizing their ideas, removing the need for sound counter-reasoning and fact-based argument. That’s not a good environment for the exchange of ideas.

---

--Percy

Nationalism is bad for more than one reason, but the most important is that it subordinates other country's interests to one's own. That's what Hitler did. Germany's interests were greater than Austria's, so he annexed it. Germany's interests were greater than the Czechoslovakia's, so he annexed Sudetenland. That wasn't enough, so he later took the rest of Czechoslovakia by marching his troops in. That wasn't enough either, so he next took a chunk out of Lithuania. All this in the name of nationalism, often supported by the German expression lebensraum, loosely translated as a need for living space.This brought an end to territory Hitler could acquire by relatively peaceful means. The next step was the invasion of Poland which brought about, because of Polish mutual defense treaties with Great Britain and France (among others), the beginning of World War II.Trump's brand of nationalism isn't leading to war, at least not yet, but it is leading to isolation. Trump's rallying cries of "America First" and "Nationalism" actually translate to America Alone. European powers are can see how Trump is implementing his nationalism, that it means acting self-interestedly and unilaterally without regard to the rest of the world community, and they're coming to understand that America is no longer a reliable ally. A popular proposal at the recent Paris summit was for a European army outside NATO so that Europe could have a defense force they could depend upon.Here are a few excepts from Trump refuses to acknowledge the fraught history of nationalism:

quote:

---

Macron called nationalism a dangerous trap and the opposite of patriotism while invoking the bloodiest episodes of 20th-century European history.
...
The taunts on Twitter showed again that Trump refuses to entertain arguments about the baggage that nationalism carries or show any signs that he is troubled by the historical antecedents to the rise of Nazism in Europe and its overlap with modern racists who call themselves white nationalists.
...
In fact, in his tweetstorm against Macron, Trump invoked the Nazi march across Europe the very event the French president had warned of when he spoke about nationalism.

​

Emmanuel Macron suggests building its own army to protect Europe against the U.S., China and Russia. But it was Germany in World Wars One & Two - How did that work out for France? They were starting to learn German in Paris before the U.S. came along. Pay for NATO or not! Trump wrote.

---

That last paragraph illustrates Trump's profound ignorance of history as he invokes Nazi nationalism as a reason that France should adopt the same attitudes, while at the same time misunderstanding Macron's own comments which definitely had not suggested that Europe needing protection against the US.This next excerpt shows the link white nationalists are making to Trump's advocacy of nationalism:

quote:

---

They have a word, it sort of became old-fashioned, it’s called a nationalist, he said. And I say, ‘Really, we’re not supposed to use that word.’ You know what I am? I’m a nationalist, okay? I’m a nationalist. Nothing wrong. Use that word. Use that word.

​

Trump’s use of the term was cheered by former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke, who tweeted that Trump was really referring to white nationalism.

​

There is no ethnic or racial group in America more Nationalist than White Americans, Duke wrote.
...
I generally see a progression on the part of the president to becoming more reckless, to really articulate controversial, outlandish things without regard to the consequences, Lichtman said. The more outlandish things he says, the more cheers he gets at his rallies and that’s what he cares about.

---

--Percy

There's some problem with your YouTube link, can you check the URL?--Percy

After hearing over and over again that the migrant caravan is hundreds of miles away, after reading they were still in Mexico City, today's New York Times reports that the migrant caravan has reached the US border in Tijuana. The caravan must be stretched out over an enormous distance, like about a thousand miles. The article places the number that has arrived at 800. Some excerpts:

quote:

---

Mr. Trump has labeled the caravan an invasion, deployed American soldiers to the border and made changes to asylum rules in efforts to confront it.

​

A few of the migrants who have made it to Tijuana were already trying to figure out how to get appointments with American border officials to present their cases for sanctuary, migrants’ advocates said. Most, however, appear to be biding their time and considering their options, including seeking sanctuary in the United States, trying to cross illegally or remaining in Mexico.

​

About 800 migrants associated with the caravan have made it to Tijuana so far, according to local officials and advocates, with thousands more still crossing Mexico and expected to arrive in the next several days.

---

If reports about the migrant caravan only recently leaving Mexico City were true, then that last paragraph about thousands arriving in the next several days could not possibly be true.

quote:

---

Mr. Trump has come under fire from critics who accuse him of stoking fears about the migrant caravan as a threat to get Republicans to the polls for the midterm elections. He has not tweeted about the caravan since the elections on Nov. 6.

---

Not only has Trump not mentioned the migrant caravan since the midterms, he hasn't mentioned that tax cut, either. He is such a liar.

quote:

---

Another 2,400 migrants associated with two other separate caravans were in Mexico City on Wednesday, according to Nashieli Ramrez, the president of the city’s human rights commission. That group was staying in a vast temporary shelter set up in a sports stadium.

---

Oh, I see, the migrant caravan is actually three separate caravans. That explains why some are in Mexico City and some in Tijuana. Notice how compassionately Mexico is behaving toward people fleeing death and destitution, housing them in a sports stadium. What do we do? We call out the troops and change our rules to make it even more difficult for them to enter legally.--Percy

On the contrary, nationalism is precisely the right word for what Trump means. We know this because of his tariffs, his dropping out of the Paris Climate Agreement, his unilateral abandonment of the Iran treaty, his treatment of allies, his disparagement of NATO, his "America First" slogan, and his constant rhetoric. All nations have strong interests. Where Trump's leadership differs from that of other western nations is that he subordinates their interests to those of the US, failing to recognize that America is part of a global community. We know this because of everything I said before. And when he states that he's an anti-globalist he means he's against working with other countries for the benefit of all. That's why his cries of "I'm a nationalist" and "America First" are leading to America Alone. Trump's not a detail kind of guy, and so he is ignorant of anything detailed, like the history of nationalism, or the history of anything, including the US. It is not within him. He accepts only his own counsel. He accepts no blame, only credit (which he usually has to bestow upon himself, bragging inappropriately the way a young child brags), and he never blames himself. There is no "The buck stops here" with Trump - it's all someone else's fault. That's why Priebus, Tillerson, Bannon, Spicer, Omarosa, and Sessions lost their jobs, and it's why Nielsen and Kelly are about to lose theirs. He's not a supporter of Nazism, but he is a supporter of white nationalism - there's some very fine people there. The white nationalists sure think he's a supporter.--Percy

You posted a video without comment. We already know the allegations of Diamond and Silk. They've been debunked. They're using claimed victimhood as a form of promotion, which maybe they need, I don't know, but I've never heard of them.--Percy

Christopher Blair runs a political satire Facebook page where he plumbs the depths of what the right will believe. Shirley Chapian believes every word Christopher Blair writes. Enjoy: ‘Nothing on this page is real’: How lies become truth in online America--Percy

See Message 2624 of the The Trump Presidency thread.--Percy

It is currently being reported that Ecuadorian president Lenin Moreno says that Wikileaks founder Julian Assange can leave the Ecuadorian embassy in London where he has been holed up for the past six years to avoid extradition to Sweden on sexual assault charges and to the United States on charges of publishing diplomatic and classified military information:

• Ecuador's president: 'The road is clear' for Assange to leave embassy
  
• Ecuador's Moreno says Wikileaks' Assange can leave embassy if he wants

According to the articles, the Swedish charges have been dropped, and the UK has agreed not to extradite Assange, who would still have to face charges for skipping bail in the UK where jail time is estimated to be less than six months.I'm not sure I believe this. Why would the UK agree not to extradite Assange to the US? Why wouldn't it cause a major diplomatic row between the two allies if they did, especially since, unbeknownst publicly until an accidental reveal a few weeks ago, the Justice Department intends to indict Assange on various matters, including related to Russian interference in the 2016 election.--Percy

You're right, the US currently has no extradition request to the UK for Assange. Here's an article that explains a lot of details: If Assange Leaves the Ecuadorian Embassy, What Next?The accidental reveal by the DoJ a few weeks ago indicated criminal charges against Assange are coming. If/when Assange leaves the Ecuadorian embassy he will face bail-jumping charges in the UK and be prohibited from leaving the country until those are settled, which would take months. There would be ample time for the US to file an extradition request with the UK. The UK would only honor it if the death penalty was ruled out, and if there were no competing extradition request from Sweden, which has the option of reinstituting the sexaul assault charges it dropped when it appeared Assange was safely ensconced in the Ecuadorian embassy, in which case the UK's home secretary would decide which request takes priority. Assange is convinced that if he were extradited to Sweden that it would just be a preliminary step to his extradition to the US.--Percy

This is the Faith Fact Checker. I'll use the Washington Post Pinocchio system. Faith is describing how she feels, so I'll rate this true.

---

Accusation with no substantiation.

---

---

Unsubstantiated allegation.

---

Trump's legal jeopardy is not due to moral failures but to paying (in the form of illegal campaign contributions) to keep information from the American people in order to fraudulently gain the presidency. The claim is false.

---

Here's Trump lying about knowing about the Storm Daniels payoff: This claim is false.

---

There is no publicly available evidence thus far that Trump colluded with the Russians to interfere in the 2016 presidential election, so no one is inventing collusion out of thin air. But there is a great deal of smoke. The claim is false.

---

Given that Mueller hasn't yet released his report, whether the evidence for collusion exists or not is not yet publicly known. The claim is false.

---

Many people think it likely that with all the smoke there is very likely fire. This claim this true.

---

Unsubstantiated allegation. Again, everyone knows that Mueller hasn't yet released his report, so the public does not yet know if any such evidence of collusion exists, and no one is claiming that the public does know it exists. This claim is false.

---

See previous comment. The claim is false.

---

Here are the "unrelated small crimes" Mueller has either charged people with or already obtained guilty pleas so far:

• George Papadopoulos: False statements to the FBI
• Paul Manafort: Convicted on eight counts of financial crimes, struck plea deal with Mueller for remaining charges, but then broke plea deal. Also, obstruction of justice related to witness tampering.
• Rick Gates: One false statements charge and one conspiracy charge.
• Michael Flynn: False statements to the FBI.
• Michael Cohen: Pled guilt to tax and bank charges, campaign finance violations related to hush money payments, lying to Congress.
• Richard Pinedo: Pled guilty to identity theft.
• Alex van der Zwaan: False statements to the FBI.
• Konstantin Kilimnik: Charged with attempted obstruction of justice by tampering with witnesses in Manafort’s case.
• 12 Russian GRU officers: Charged with hacking and leaking of Democrats’ emails.
• 13 Russian nationals and three Russian companies: Indicted on conspiracy charges and identity theft related to interference with the 2016 campaign.

These are actual and significant crimes, nothing "pretend" about them. This claim is completely untrue.

---

Some of the crimes are unrelated to the Trump campaign, such as Manafort's financial crimes. This is partly true so we'll give it only two Pinocchios.

---

Faith already said this once. It is still false.

---

It has been said over and over again both here and in the press that no amount of evidence will sway Trump supporters. The claim is false.

---

It is true that lies can be powerful, especially when repeated over and over again from the highest pulpit in the world.

---

The dossier is not fake. Its allegations are largely unsubstantiated but are still under investigation. This claim is false.

---

This implies that the Clinton campaign paid Daniel Steele to make up allegations. Steele is a respected investigator, and there is no evidence of this claim. Also, the dossier was never made public by the Clinton campaign and so could never have been expected to "destroy Trump." Likely the Clinton campaign understood that unsubstantiated allegations were worthless. This claim is false.

---

Unsubstantiated and unspecific allegation. What evidence is referred to? People sent and received each email, so other people have copies of the deleted emails, yet no evidence of anything suspicious has ever come to light. But the emails *were* deleted, so we'll give this only two Pinocchios.

---

Unsubstantiated and unspecific allegation. If Clinton committed actual crimes then we would hear evidence instead of innuendo. America is a country of laws, and anyone suspected of crimes should face justice, regardless of political affiliation. If there are any actual Clinton crimes then so far no one knows what they are, so this is completely false.

---

No one is out to get Trump, but everyone should respect the rule of law and expect our justice system to investigate and if necessary prosecute anyone suspected of a crime. This claim is false.

<image limit exceeded>

--Percy

I've been doing a horrible job of keeping up with Trump's misdeeds. They're like a runaway train - who can keep up? I've posted only six messages there in the past couple weeks. If you find anything untrue in The Trump Presidency thread then just post a note here and, assuming your feedback is fact based, it will be corrected. Doesn't the TV remote switch to Fox News just as easily as any other channel? Aren't the webpages of Breitbart and Infowars just as easy to visit as any other webpage? Aren't you, again, complaining about nothing?--Percy

Faith Fact Checker on patrol again. The left's deception is so good that Faith doesn't know how they're doing it, but she knows they're doing it nonetheless. We'll give this four Pinocchios for being utter nonsense.

---

Just what is it they are doing to Trump that is an abuse of power? Trump controls the White House and the Senate and the Republicans and the Republican party. The Democrats control the House and that's it, and they haven't even taken control yet - that won't happen until January. We'll give this four Pinocchios for being false and contrived.

---

Faith doesn't say how the left is pulling off a coup, but she must be referring to Trump's exposure to the possibility of impeachment. Conspiring with AMI (publisher of the National Enquirer) to quash reports of sexual dalliances to defraud the American people of a free and fair election is just the kind offense covered by the Constitution, one of America's time-honored institutions. Lying about it is another offense. Attempting to cover it up is another offense. Dangling the possibility of pardons in front of those who might testify against him is obstruction of justice, another offense. Campaign staff and/or representatives meeting with Russians on multiple occasions during the campaign is another offense. Lying about it is another offense. Attempting to consummate very lucrative business deals with Russia that require the approval of the Russian government while running for president is another offense. Lying about it is another offense. What Mueller knows about Trump's offenses is likely far more than what is publicly known at present. We'll have to give this four Pinocchios.

---

I think Faith means that the left is trying to turn American institutions against the right. The left has very little power at the federal level, so this couldn't possibly be true. What Faith really means is that the laws should only apply to those on the left and that people on the right should get a free pass. This view is in itself disgusting, and so I give this four Pinocchios:

---

This appears to be true.

---

That commentators like Mark Levin, Hannity Limbaugh and Michael Savage falsely accuse those on the left of being "politically motivated conspirators and manipulators" is likely true.

---

What came across clearly is that they don't like the idea of Americans paying for an ineffective wall. What Democrats want is effective border security provided by a combination of proper staffing, efficient use of resources, technology, cooperation with Mexican authorities, working constructively with the source countries of illegal immigrants to solve the problems causing emigration, and yes, where it makes sense, walls. I have to give this four Pinocchios.

---

Trump is mostly out for himself, and what he has left is for rich white Americans. This claim is false.

---

Calling the left traitors is extremely poor form. Putting it in British terms, the loyal opposition are not traitors. Traitors are people who promote their own personal interests to the detriment of their country, like by attempting to cut business deals with adversaries and cozying up to dictators. Or by fraudulently stealing an election through secret payoffs. This claim is false.

---

Faith doesn't say what specific smears have been made against Trump, but most of what's been said about Trump that wasn't known at the time later turned out to be true. They said Trump knew about the Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal payoffs, he denied it, and then it later turned out he lied and had known about it all along, had in fact directed it. They said Trump knew about the business negotiations with Russians during the campaign, Trump denied it repeatedly, and then it later turned out he lied and had known about it all along. This claim is false.

---

Illegals can't vote. Even Trump's own commission to investigate voter fraud came up empty. This claim is false.

---

A minority of Americans elected Trump. A minority of Americans want the wall. Democrats want border security that actually works. Democrats are opposed to illegal immigration. These claims are false.

---

The representatives of sanctuary cities were elected and are carrying out the will of the people who elected them. This claim is false.

---

The policies of sanctuary cities were legally implemented, driven by and prohibiting cooperation with the abusive practices stemming from Trump immigration policies. Family separation policies are one example. Putting DACA participants in limbo is another. Arresting legal immigrants when they arrive at their immigration meetings and finding excuses for deporting them is another. This claim is false. --Percy

Only after he took office did Trump back off his claims that Mexico would pay for the wall and begin allowing that it might be through reimbursement. But Mexico has been very clear that they are not paying for the wall, not directly, not through reimbursement, not by any means. If Trump manages to get the money for the wall from the American people then we will end up footing the bill, because Mexico is not paying for the wall. They have made that very clear. What Trump did, just on the affair coverups alone, is far worse than Bill Clinton. Clinton was legitimately president of the United States. What we're learning now is that Trump likely gained the presidency by fraudulent means. Trump paid to keep information about his affairs from the American people, committing fraud to steal an election. That is just the kind of thing the Constitution means by "high crimes and misdemeanors."--Percy