patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,194,245 comments by 13,886 users - askmeaboutthesaltporkcure, Ceffer online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 13 - 52 of 66 Next » Last » Search these comments
curious2
2017 May 18, 11:47am
You have countless others?
Yes. For example, when candidate Trump said he could eliminate the national debt at a discount by doing essentially what Warren Buffett and others have pointed out (monetizing it), MSM headlines screamed that he planned to refuse unconstitutionally to pay the public debt. Personally, I don't even support monetization, which would be inflationary and destabilizing, but he said what he said, and MSM said something completely different.
If you "can only think of" some locker room talk, then that shows you aren't paying attention to policy.
Notwithstanding that one doesn't equal countless, I'm not sure you are accurately characterizing what happened. Trump initially said that he would continue to borrow knowing that he could make a deal with the US's creditors if the shit hit the fan in the future and make them take a haircut on what is owed. He then clarified his remarks and walked them back to what you posted.
"If you "can only think of" some locker room talk, then that shows you aren't paying attention to policy."
I'm paying attention--that's why I asked if you could elaborate on your claim. Which is does not appear that you can. As usual.
curious2
2017 May 18, 11:57am
As usual.
If you want to slide in the direction of ad hominem, I think the record is very clear as to which of us posts verifiable facts and which of us is merely a partisan troll. I've sided with and against candidates from at least four different parties, depending on evidence. I add source links after commenting. Time limits how many links I find and post in the context of a discussion, but I have seen countless examples and could keep adding more if I thought you were sincere. Instead, you tend merely to troll, so I'll stop now and leave you to your usual.
Patrick
2017 May 18, 11:59am
Great Summary. I also think that this is the case and going forward most of the Americans will realize the same.
* No evidence of collusion with Russia will ever be produced, because there isn't any.
* Comey's own sworn testimony that he was never pressured will be used against him and the whole Comey thing will be dropped.
* The media will continue fabricating a new anti-Trump story every couple of days for the rest of Trump's presidency.
* More and more of the public will come to the realization that the press really is on a witch hunt, motivated by intergalactic levels of coastal elite butt-hurt.
* Trump will turn out to be nearly as bad as Obama in serving the plutocracy.
* And yet Trump will in fact accomplish some of the things he promised, such as actual enforcement of immigration law and replacement of Obamacare.Of course I could be wrong, but those are my expectations at the moment.
"If you want to slide in the direction of ad hominem"
No that was you with this post: "If you "can only think of" some locker room talk, then that shows you aren't paying attention to policy."
I think the record of who is a troll is clear as well. So, please go.
Tenpoundbass
2017 May 18, 12:26pm
Something tells me anything the Democrats thinks they've got Trump gave it to them, to lead up a great reveal.
Feeding the Democrats their own excavation tools to help drain the swamp. Pick up that shovel and DIG deep.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/thomasbasile/2017/05/18/more-fake-news-about-trump-and-russia/
https://www.lifezette.com/popzette/rosie-odonnell-spreads-fake-news-trump/
Patrick--I'm assuming this was in response to my post? The first link uses "fake news" in the headline as click bait, but doesn't dispute anything that the MSM was reporting. It corroborates it. The 2nd is Rosie O'Donnell. Does anyone think she is MSM? And the third is twitter users repeating fake news--I think it's safe to say that conservatives do this a LOT more than Dems.
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
2017 May 18, 12:29pm
Trump initially said that he would continue to borrow knowing that he could make a deal with the US's creditors if the shit hit the fan in the future and make them take a haircut on what is owed.
Yep, and that doesn't mean monetizing. Everyone who buys a treasury bond knows that we are borrowing in a currency that we control. They know that they have inflation risk, but they buy anyway. Arguing that we should buy while people give us a low rate, and knowing that we cannot get ourselves into trouble the way that Greece or so many other countries have done (borrowing in someone else's currency). But nobody in the US has suggested that we just stop paying people what we promised (in dollars). Trump often says something and tries to redefine it later. It's a joke.
curious2
2017 May 18, 12:39pm
Yep, and that doesn't mean monetizing.
Nope, shucks, y'all go back and watch what he said actually, and compare it to the headlines. The "joke" is that MSM keep distorting what he said originally, and when he reiterates what he said originally, they accuse him of dissembling.
Sometimes he does change positions, expressly, for example during the campaign he refined his initial suggestion of a Muslim ban to allow for dual citizens etc and thus make it Constitutional. Alas that proposal got lost due to VP Pence, they switched to territories, and now they're litigating (absurdly) the narrow question of whether the President's statements are admissible (duh) instead of litigating the real issue, the President has the authority to defend the Constitution and the republic against people who advocate a totalitarian doctrine that commands the violent overthrow of our Constitution and government.
"Nope, shucks, y'all go back and watch what he said actually, and compare it to the headlines. The "joke" is that MSM keep distorting what he said originally, and when he reiterates what he said originally, they accuse him of dissembling."
Which time? He said one thing, was called on it, then backtracked. You're pretending he never said the first bit and that the MSM are making it up.
"the President has the authority to defend the Constitution and the republic against people who advocate a totalitarian doctrine that commands the violent overthrow of our Constitution and government."
And if he proposed a ban on people who advocate a totalitarian doctrine that commands the violent overthrow of our Constitution and government--he would have no problem in the courts. Unfortunately, he didn't.
curious2
2017 May 18, 1:24pm
And if he proposed a ban on people who advocate a totalitarian doctrine that commands the violent overthrow of our Constitution and government--he would have no problem in the courts. Unfortunately, he didn't.
He did propose one, pre-Pence, but then compromised with Pence. Neither Executive Order reflected what candidate Donald Trump had proposed during his solo campaign.
lostand confused
2017 May 18, 1:27pm
No evidence of collusion with Russia will ever be produced, because there isn't any.
Yup and it may uncover Podesta and Hilalry's Russian connections. methinks Trump knows soemthing and he wante dit to come out through the special prosecutor and not him. me also thinks the dems are desperately trying to cover some nasty stuff -survellience and Russian connections.
* Comey's own sworn testimony that he was never pressured will be used against him and the whole Comey thing will be dropped.
memo is not sworn testimony-it could be memory and now the senate wants to see all the memos-even from Hilalry-that should be fun.
* The media will continue fabricating a new anti-Trump story every couple of days for the rest of Trump's presidency.
Yeah but they are already looking like rabid dogs.
* More and more of the public will come to the realization that the press really is on a witch hunt, motivated by intergalactic levels of coastal elite butt-hurt.
Yup-Rosie O'Donnell screaming nyet on the streets is what the dems have come to.* Trump will turn out to be nearly as bad as Obama in serving the plutocracy.
Well, I am ambvivalent on that one-lets see.* And yet Trump will in fact accomplish some of the things he promised, such as actual enforcement of immigration law and replacement of Obamacare.
Which is why the dems are pushing the Russian stuff-to throw him off his game.
Of course I could be wrong, but those are my expectations at the moment.
Pretty clsoe to mine
curious2
2017 May 18, 1:38pm
Which time?
We had been discussing the debt example. Hey, here's an idea, provide some evidence that you're not merely a partisan troll: this time, you go dig up the link to what candidate Trump said originally. The "bizarre" WaPo distortion that I linked contained a link supposedly to it, but conveniently their own link didn't even work anymore, so you wouldn't find his original statement that way. I remember it though, and not liking the idea, and then seeing the absurd MSM distortion of it. Do some homework for once instead of asking everyone else to play fetch for you.
* No evidence of collusion with Russia will ever be produced, because there isn't any.
* Comey's own sworn testimony that he was never pressured will be used against him and the whole Comey thing will be dropped.
* The media will continue fabricating a new anti-Trump story every couple of days for the rest of Trump's presidency.
* More and more of the public will come to the realization that the press really is on a witch hunt, motivated by intergalactic levels of coastal elite butt-hurt.
* Trump will turn out to be nearly as bad as Obama in serving the plutocracy.
* And yet Trump will in fact accomplish some of the things he promised, such as actual enforcement of immigration law and replacement of Obamacare.
You left off the most important thing. He has already been in the Trenches, traveling to firms that are outsourcing jobs. If he only save 100,000 jobs, those people will love him.
I love his complete lack of political decorum. LOVE IT!
"He did propose one, pre-Pence"
I don't think so. He proposed a ban on Muslims.
curious2
2017 May 18, 1:55pm
Sure-this took 5 seconds.
A) That is not a link to what he said originally. It is a subsequent interview.
B) Most of that is about his record of what he did in the private sector. None of it says he would default on Treasury debt. Monetizing is a way of paying back at a discount, as many countries have done.
Again, I don't even support the idea, but your partisan distortions put me in the odd position of defending him. That was one of the Democrats' biggest problems throughout the campaign, and it backfired terribly: Democrats and their partisan MSM kept distorting candidate Trump, and ended up campaigning against a fiction that existed only in their own echo chamber. Outside the echo chambers, people saw a campaign between two partisan patronage networks, each reciting its own fictions.
Instead of claiming credit for finding a link to something other than what he said originally, go back and find what he said originally.
"A) That is not a link to what he said originally. It is a subsequent interview."
Nope--it lists both his original statement and his follow-up walking back.
It's even got a link to the video of it.
CBOEtrader
2017 May 18, 1:58pm
Sure-this took 5 seconds.
This is accurate. Its also a poor negotiating tactic to admit publicly.
curious2
2017 May 18, 2:00pm
--it lists both his original statement and his follow-up walking back.
It's even got a link to the video of it.
Ah, I see what you did there. Your selective screen grab omitted most of what he said in the interview that you linked:
Trump: "No, I think this. I think there are times for us to refinance. We refinance debt with longer term. Because you know, we owe so much money. … I could see long-term renegotiations, where we borrow long-term at very low rates." ...
Quick: "But let's be clear. I mean, you're not talking about renegotiating sovereign bonds that the U.S. has already issued?"
Trump: "No. I don't want to renegotiate the bonds. But I think you can do discounting, I think, you know, depending on where interest rates are, I think you can buy back. You can -- I'm not talking about with a renegotiation, but you can buy back at discounts, you can do things with discounts. … I would refinance debt. I think we should refinance longer-term debt."
Open market operations happen all the time, including via the Federal Reserve. That's been going on for more than a century, buying and selling Treasury bonds via open market operations. The Fed has a whole committee expressly for this purpose, the "open market committee." Printing money to buy bonds is called monetizing, and buying some bonds while selling others is a long established tool to manage the yield curve.
Shaman
2017 May 18, 2:01pm
I think the record of who is a troll is clear as well. So, please go.
Yes, that would be you, our MSM-controlled hall monitor tasked with disrupting and casting aspersions upon truthful and thoughtful conversations at Patnet. Always asking for proof or examples that are readily available to anyone with an internet connection, only to discount it when faithfully presented. Building numerous straw men to justify insane logic, and accusing everyone else of doing the same. Faithfully championing the unceasing stream of blatantly false and highly spun propaganda that comes from the MSM.
These are your hallmarks.
Curious2 is a thoughtful and intelligent poster who has a decade of posting here under his belt. To have a trollish upstart confront him about being a troll is the epitome of ridiculousness.
curious2
2017 May 18, 3:35pm
Thanks, @Quigley, that was very kind of you.
I've also tracked down an earlier WaPo interview transcript, Bob Woodward (BW) interviewing Donald Trump (DT):
BW: How long would that take?
DT: I think I could do it fairly quickly, because of the fact the numbers . . . .
BW: What’s fairly quickly?
DT: Well, I would say over a period of eight years. And I’ll tell you why... I’m renegotiating all of our deals, Bob. The big trade deals that we’re doing so badly on. With China, $505 billion this year in trade. We’re losing with everybody. And a lot of those deals — a lot of people say, how could the politicians be so stupid? It’s not that they’re stupid. It’s that they’re controlled by lobbyists and special interests who want those deals to be made."
So, describing a context in which we pay to protect trade partners with whom we run trade deficits, and we borrow money from them to finance protecting them, he said he could negotiate better deals. He didn't say default, nor anything of the sort. In another interview he said "discounts", referring to long established tools to monetize and manage the yield curve by refinancing. There is nothing "bizarre" nor "nonsensical" about what he said actually, but WaPo misled readers by using both of those words in headlines to distort what he said.
And, again, I don't even support monetizing the debt. Democrats could have argued persuasively that we should not monetize, but instead they chose to distort what the Republican nominee said and then to campaign against a strawman of their own imaginations. They sacrificed credibility and then failed to fool enough voters to win.
I've also tracked down an earlier WaPo interview transcript, Bob Woodward (BW) interviewing Donald Trump (DT):
I'm sure you could track down a lot of Trump interviews where he doesn't talk about renegotiating the US debt. Not sure how it relates to the topic at hand though.
And I'm not really interested in whether you support monetizing the debt. We're talking about how the MSM does or does not mischaracterize Trump's statements.
Always asking for proof or examples that are readily available to anyone with an internet connection, only to discount it when faithfully presented
lol--I ask because the Trump crowd continually makes factually incorrect statements, but I want to give them the benefit of the doubt and ask if they have any examples. Generally none are given, or if they are, they show something completely different than what was stated. I'm sorry you can't see that.
Patrick
2017 May 18, 5:59pm
Yes, joeyjojojunior simply discounted the three links I presented, apparently without even reading them.
They are all very clear examples of how the press continually lies through omission and distortion.
Ah, I see what you did there. Your selective screen grab omitted most of what he said in the interview that you linked:
Not really. I cut the first question which was what the NYT article was referencing. curious2 says
Open market operations happen all the time, including via the Federal Reserve. That's been going on for more than a century, buying and selling Treasury bonds via open market operations. The Fed has a whole committee expressly for this purpose, the "open market committee." Printing money to buy bonds is called monetizing, and buying some bonds while selling others is a long established tool to manage the yield curve.
Of course. Nobody would have written anything if Trump had stated that he'd like to increase the percentage of US debt in longer maturity bonds. But that's not what he said.
Yes, joeyjojojunior simply discounted the three links I presented, apparently without even reading them.
They are all very clear examples of how the press continually lies through omission and distortion.
Patrick--you've got to be kidding me!! What the fuck. Did you read them?? I read them and explained why they are not relevant.
How are any of them showing how MSM mischaracterizes what Trump says??? One was about Rosie ODonnell being punked by a fake video. One was about twitter users responses to a fake story. One was a news story that confirmed everything the MSM said, but opined that it wasn't a big deal because the President has the power to declassify information.
None had anything about MSM mischaracterizing Trump.
Patrick
2017 May 18, 6:16pm
These are three examples of the press deliberately distorting the facts because it helps their witch hunt.
Patrick
2017 May 18, 6:53pm
Trump was not my choice.
But I'm sure glad that we did not get Hillary.
Smoke & mirrors,misdirection,red herrings, anything to distract while the D & R 1% laugh at the simpleton voters.
Trump's playing the part they all agreed on.
George Carlin:
"The big wealthy business interests that control things and make all the important decisions."
"They own everything. They own all the important land. They own and control the corporations. They’ve long since bought, and paid for the Senate, the Congress, the state houses, the city halls, they got the judges in their back pockets and they own all the big media companies, so they control just about all of the news and information you get to hear. They got you by the balls."
Squeeze 'em harder!
Enjoying your life of denial?
curious2
2017 May 18, 6:58pm
Nobody would have written anything if Trump had stated that he'd like to increase the percentage of US debt in longer maturity bonds. But that's not what he said.
Again, from your link, already copied and pasted above onto the screen in front of you:
I saw what he said, on video, at the time. The reason you don't believe he said what he said is because you've been hypnotized by partisan headlines, which you repeat. By denying the obvious, and inventing or distorting allegations unsupported by facts, you alienate people and put reasonable observers in the position of defending Donald Trump. It's very odd. I saw interviews during the campaign: voters said they had seen scary MSM stories about him and had then seen with their own eyes that those stories were false. Many of them stopped believing the MSM, and decided to vote for him.
FNWGMOBDVZXDNW
2017 May 19, 2:34am
Curious2, my interpretation of that is that he would use the threat of not paying back in full to renegotiate. The goal of the renegotiation would be to force the other party to offer us a good deal on (below market) on long term rates. Otherwise, no need to negotiate. Trump is expert on getting paid without getting paid.
Anyway, after reviewing this, I can see your point about the media exaggerating. That explains why it never became a bigger story.
marcus
2017 May 19, 3:27am
We're being trained.
No matter what Trump does, however bad, one third of the country (including Patrick) and the right wing media will always label it liberal hysteria.
If he steps out on fifth avenue and shoots someone, it will be, "oh there the liberals go again with their hysteria"
This is guaranteed. IF he accidentally starts world war 3, it will be, "oh there the liberals go again with their hysteria"
I guess this was predictable back in 2016. I don't believe it will ever be a majority view though. Thankfully Brietbart and Fox don't have that much power.
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2017 May 19, 7:22am
We're being trained.
No matter what Trump does, however bad, one third of the country (including Patrick) and the right wing media will always label it liberal hysteria.
If he steps out on fifth avenue and shoots someone, it will be, "oh there the liberals go again with their hysteria"
This is guaranteed. IF he accidentally starts world war 3, it will be, "oh there the liberals go again with their hysteria"
I guess this was predictable back in 2016. I don't believe it will ever be a majority view though. Thankfully Brietbart and Fox don't have that much power.
Bzzzzz! Wrong!
It's labeled hysteria because all caps cries for impeachment when no defined crime has taken place are the very definition of hysteria.
Which is why I keep linking the wiki entry:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hysteria
You're a math teacher. Surely you understand fact and logic....tee hee.
Patrick
2017 May 19, 9:10am
no defined crime has taken place
This is the important point.
Smoke & mirrors,misdirection,red herrings, anything to distract while the D & R 1% laugh at the simpleton voters.
@"HEY YOU" OK, so what is your solution? I'm listening, but looking for realistic practical answers.
« First « Previous Comments 13 - 52 of 66 Next » Last » Search these comments
* No evidence of collusion with Russia will ever be produced, because there isn't any.
* Comey's own sworn testimony that he was never pressured will be used against him and the whole Comey thing will be dropped.
* The media will continue fabricating a new anti-Trump story every couple of days for the rest of Trump's presidency.
* More and more of the public will come to the realization that the press really is on a witch hunt, motivated by intergalactic levels of coastal elite butt-hurt.
* Trump will turn out to be nearly as bad as Obama in serving the plutocracy.
* And yet Trump will in fact accomplish some of the things he promised, such as actual enforcement of immigration law and replacement of Obamacare.
Of course I could be wrong, but those are my expectations at the moment.