applegrove
applegrove's JournalAll news sources make mistakes. Let's hope the NYTimes learns from this and doesn't fall for the
Benghazi two step again. A headline, in this day and age of massive amounts of data out there, cannot be taken back. Nobody will ever hear the retraction. The GOP know this. So should the NY Times. Especially if it has anything to do with Benghazi. One thing all these leaks do tell us...if you add them all up, the GOP have got nothing on Hillary. But the GOP will stir the pot. And make it 'feel' like there is something she is hiding. And that feeling can feel surer than sure if psychopaths are involved in spreading the meme. You may feel more sure of the 'feeling that Hillary is hiding something' than you have ever felt about anything else in your life. That is how psychopaths get people to act on their behalf. That surer than ever sure feeling. In this day and age of the GOP using all the tools of the psychopath be wary of anything compelling.
That New York Times story on the Clinton emails has turned out to be a total crock
That New York Times story on the Clinton emails has turned out to be a total crock
by David Nir a the Daily Kos
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/07/24/1405399/-That-New-York-Times-story-on-the-Clinton-emails-has-turned-out-to-be-a-total-crock
"SNIP...............
And now, with Clinton eased out of the frame, a new statement from the Justice Department itself says that the other explosive prong of the Times' original reporting is also entirely wrong: the request they received did not seek a criminal investigation. No hedging, no weasel words, no passive voice: "It is not a criminal referral." Period.
So what on earth happened here? How could the Times screw this story up so utterly and royally? Rep. Elijah Cummings, who is the most senior Democrat on the House Select Committee on Benghazi, has a compelling theory:
"This is the latest example in a series of inaccurate leaks to generate false front-page headlines—only to be corrected later—and they have absolutely nothing to do with the attacks in Benghazi or protecting our diplomatic corps overseas."
It's not hard to believe that Rep. Trey Gowdy, the GOP's Inspector Javert of Benghazi, would do whatever he can to ignite this non-story that's failed to catch fire in the three years Republicans have desperately spent trying to kindle it. But for the paper of record to fall for this kind of garbage, well ... let's just say it gives even more fodder to those who think the Times has waged a two-decade campaign of hostility toward the Clinton family.
...............SNIP"
This GOP race is turning into a game of King On The Mountain with all players trying to take out
Trump and win the leadership that way. I played King on the mountain as a kid. I beat all the boys on that snowbound hill in 1977. But to be fair to the boys, we were all 11 and I was a full head taller than them being a girl at that age. I can't think of anyone "louder" than Trump at this juncture. Chris Christie is who I would expect to be the one but he seems very quiet these days. They all seem to be playing defence and trying to mitigate Trumps retaliation. The clue to winning when I was 11 was to run up that snow covered hill by grabbing onto one boy and pulling him down...leveraging your momentum off the boy now below while you reach the next boy and pull that boy down...leveraging off the new boy again, and the next. There were boys flying everywhere. All of a sudden you are at the top. Just an FYI to the GOP. Trump is the only one who is playing the "game" right.
Are the rich pissed off that education means people expect to be compensated for their own
productivity more completely? There was a time when you would start with a company, work your way up if you were good. But you would not be taking your experience and increased productivity to the open market. And the corporation would be the beneficiary of that lack of pay. Women too would be way overqualified for the jobs they were allowed to do. And they certainly didn't get the benefit in wages.
What did Jeb! Bush! mean by saying Americans need to work harder? The GOP love productivity but only
when that increase in productivity results in more money for the corporation. Say what you really mean Bush. You don't want people to profit from their own talents themselves.... you want the rich to profit off them 'working harder' for someone else. Otherwise you'd be for unions. There is no way American productivity can compete with china what with people working long hours for little pay and also where people are not educated to their maximum abilities because they started out in a poorer country. So they get compensated poorly for their value. I know that paying someone less than they are worth or getting them to work longer hours are the old fashioned way of growing an upper class. But get over it.
Paid GOP trolls to scare off independants from the DU, and thus the left. Plus they can post about
the 'lefts agenda for polygamy' on conservative boards and get the base to come here and see that it is in fact true: the left wants polygamy. It is what psychopaths do when they set up 'reality tests' for their cult followers.
Profile Information
Member since: Mon Feb 7, 2005, 03:14 AMNumber of posts: 118,600
