7 ms·

“Facts” conveniently dropped right before election whose veracity cannot be proven and which were clearly placed to affect the election outcome should be treate

by ivalm 6y ago

“Facts” conveniently dropped right before election whose veracity cannot be proven and which were clearly placed to affect the election outcome should be treated as fake and not promulgated in public discourse. Otherwise it encourages release of outrageous lies right before election and degrades the whole process.

meowface 6y ago
Will you change your stance on this, in a general sense, if it's all later confirmed to be real? And isn't it true that someone wishing to affect an election, and in possession of real information, would take the exact same action? You can't judge truth solely based on motive. That motive and action is consistent with the carefully timed release of either fake or real information. The same was probably true of the person who leaked Trump's tax returns before the election. Of course they were initially treated with caution, but the media worked to confirm their veracity. Here they won't even ask the question. I don't think the emails contain anything very damaging to Biden, as far as I can tell. I think the cover-up, lack of care about truth, and blind zealotry is way worse than anything in the emails. I do happen to think the emails are > 50% likely real, but the absolute refusal to consider them impartially is the actual problem, not the emails. It just shows neither pro-Trump nor anti-Trump give a single shit about truth. They just care about winning. Ideology trumps epistemology.
- ivalm 6y ago
  I want to discourage anyone trying to “time dropping facts”, real or not. If you have real evidence then publish it when you get it. I disliked the NYT Trump taxes expose timing as well, although at least they put a bigger lead time to election. The problem with these timed attacks is that they fundamentally encourage lying to affect elections.
  - meowface 6y ago
    I don't agree that they encourage lying. "October Surprises" have been a thing for a very long time. It's just politics; the whole point of politics is to try to get your person to win and the other person to lose. I think the NYT with the tax returns and the NY Post with the emails both acted properly, personally. (Though I strongly distrust both of them in general. NY Post much more so, but NYT gets worse and worse by the month, in my eyes.) It's also unclear if either of them hoarded anything; they both may have published their pieces as quickly as they could, given the circumstances and when they received the information. I might be missing some evidence of hoarding; apologies if so.
  - kolanos 6y ago
    The FBI, according to reports, received this laptop at the same time Trump was being impeached for asking Ukraine to investigate the matter. It appears the FBI sat on this evidence for 9 months. > Meanwhile, additional documents obtained by Fox News include FBI paperwork that details the bureau’s interactions with John Paul Mac Isaac, the owner of “The Mac Shop” who reported the laptop’s contents to authorities, as first reported by the New York Post. > Isaac received a subpoena to testify before U.S. District Court in Delaware on Dec. 9, 2019, the documents show. One page shows what appears to be serial numbers for a laptop and hard drive taken into possession. [0]: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbi-purported-hunter-biden-laptop-sources https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbi-purported-hunter-biden-...
  - rat87 6y ago
    Trump probably illegally cheated on his taxes what's wrong with Nytimes reporting that Oh you meant the more recent taxes expose.
- tzs 6y ago
  > I don't think the emails contain anything very damaging to Biden, as far as I can tell. This is the weirdest part about Republican attacks on Biden's ethics or integrity. All that I have seen have been accusing Biden or his family of things that Trump and his family do much more often than the Biden's are alleged to have done them. In a rational world, that kind of attack would totally backfire. But it's pretty clear people aren't rational. I've had people tell me that Trump must be trustworthy because he's a billionaire, and had the same people tell me that Gates, Soros, Buffett, and Bezos cannot be trusted because they are billionaires. Huh!?
  - meowface 6y ago
    I fully agree with you. That's why I think the cover-up is way, way worse than the actual original thing. It was a nothingburger, and now the media's unintentionally turned it into one of the biggest controversies of the year, by refusing to treat it in a reasonable and balanced way. It's the epitome of the Streisand effect. This is why I keep posting about this. It's all just unwittingly helping Trump, all because they somehow think being journalists is the thing that'd actually help him or will cause accusations of helping him if he wins. There's a middleground here. Of course the media having a front page headline about the emails every day would be irresponsible. But refusing to talk about it or look at it inquisitively, at all, ever, is just as irresponsible. As is Twitter censoring links to it.
    - zzleeper 6y ago
      > the media's unintentionally turned it into one if the biggest controversies of the year Maybe in the Republican bubble. Outside of it, no one really cares and sees it as a weird and poorly executed complot
      - meowface 6y ago
        I think you're very wrong. I'm the opposite of a Republican, and I think this scandal (the media's and Twitter's behavior, not the emails) is big. Matt Taibbi, a very definitely not-Republican journalist, agrees: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/with-the-hunter-biden-expose-suppression-136 https://taibbi.substack.com/p/with-the-hunter-biden-expose-s... I think the main reason it's not a big controversy elsewhere is due to exactly what you mention - both bubbles absolutely reject anything negative about their side and absolutely accept anything negative about the opposing side. So of course one bubble won't care, or even be aware of what's going on.
- teclordphrack2 6y ago
  Do you think Obama was told that Hilary was going to claim russia was helping trump?
starkd 6y ago
Biden could have addressed this months ago. the fact that he hasn't is very telling. Before he got the nomination, major publications were running stories about it, like Politico and Bloomberg, etc.
- meowface 6y ago
  Absolutely, and there're several other indicators as well. I think it's still unclear if all of it's real, and the acquisition story seems sketchy (and very unethical if true), but it seems more likely than not to be legit. I think staying silent about it is absolutely the smartest move on Joe's part. Trying to defend the contents will only draw more attention to them. It's the media's refusal to be actual journalists that's the dumb thing.
  - starkd 6y ago
    The fact that he's not addressing this properly is the scandalous part. Don't we deserve answers. Even if he's elected, this is not going away and will only hobble his administration. He needs to clear it up and get it out of the way. There's a troubling trend among democrat nominees to suppress. Like him or hate him, you have to admit Trump holds press conferences and answers questions.
    - meowface 6y ago
      Eh, any politician would probably do the same. I strongly disagree about Trump. That's basically been Trump's exact MO since forever; any real story concerning him just gets instantly dismissed. "It's locker room talk", "it's fake news", etc. Trump and his White House have held far fewer press conferences than past presidents. And at his press conferences, he refuses many questions and dismisses others with either non-answers or just his typical bullshit salesman-speak. I do think this is probably the "Trumpiest" Biden has acted so far, but I think I'd probably do the same thing if I were in his position, honestly. At least until the election is over. It's politics. He doesn't want to throw too much gasoline on the fire. It's just the media's and Twitter's behavior that I just mind-boggling and gross, and the irrational way so much of the left is treating it.

by ivalm 6y ago

meowface 6y ago

Will you change your stance on this, in a general sense, if it's all later confirmed to be real? And isn't it true that someone wishing to affect an election, and in possession of real information, would take the exact same action? You can't judge truth solely based on motive. That motive and action is consistent with the carefully timed release of either fake or real information. The same was probably true of the person who leaked Trump's tax returns before the election. Of course they were initially treated with caution, but the media worked to confirm their veracity. Here they won't even ask the question. I don't think the emails contain anything very damaging to Biden, as far as I can tell. I think the cover-up, lack of care about truth, and blind zealotry is way worse than anything in the emails. I do happen to think the emails are > 50% likely real, but the absolute refusal to consider them impartially is the actual problem, not the emails. It just shows neither pro-Trump nor anti-Trump give a single shit about truth. They just care about winning. Ideology trumps epistemology.

ivalm 6y ago
I want to discourage anyone trying to “time dropping facts”, real or not. If you have real evidence then publish it when you get it. I disliked the NYT Trump taxes expose timing as well, although at least they put a bigger lead time to election. The problem with these timed attacks is that they fundamentally encourage lying to affect elections.
- meowface 6y ago
  I don't agree that they encourage lying. "October Surprises" have been a thing for a very long time. It's just politics; the whole point of politics is to try to get your person to win and the other person to lose. I think the NYT with the tax returns and the NY Post with the emails both acted properly, personally. (Though I strongly distrust both of them in general. NY Post much more so, but NYT gets worse and worse by the month, in my eyes.) It's also unclear if either of them hoarded anything; they both may have published their pieces as quickly as they could, given the circumstances and when they received the information. I might be missing some evidence of hoarding; apologies if so.
- kolanos 6y ago
  The FBI, according to reports, received this laptop at the same time Trump was being impeached for asking Ukraine to investigate the matter. It appears the FBI sat on this evidence for 9 months. > Meanwhile, additional documents obtained by Fox News include FBI paperwork that details the bureau’s interactions with John Paul Mac Isaac, the owner of “The Mac Shop” who reported the laptop’s contents to authorities, as first reported by the New York Post. > Isaac received a subpoena to testify before U.S. District Court in Delaware on Dec. 9, 2019, the documents show. One page shows what appears to be serial numbers for a laptop and hard drive taken into possession. [0]: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbi-purported-hunter-biden-laptop-sources https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fbi-purported-hunter-biden-...
- rat87 6y ago
  Trump probably illegally cheated on his taxes what's wrong with Nytimes reporting that Oh you meant the more recent taxes expose.
tzs 6y ago
> I don't think the emails contain anything very damaging to Biden, as far as I can tell. This is the weirdest part about Republican attacks on Biden's ethics or integrity. All that I have seen have been accusing Biden or his family of things that Trump and his family do much more often than the Biden's are alleged to have done them. In a rational world, that kind of attack would totally backfire. But it's pretty clear people aren't rational. I've had people tell me that Trump must be trustworthy because he's a billionaire, and had the same people tell me that Gates, Soros, Buffett, and Bezos cannot be trusted because they are billionaires. Huh!?
- meowface 6y ago
  I fully agree with you. That's why I think the cover-up is way, way worse than the actual original thing. It was a nothingburger, and now the media's unintentionally turned it into one of the biggest controversies of the year, by refusing to treat it in a reasonable and balanced way. It's the epitome of the Streisand effect. This is why I keep posting about this. It's all just unwittingly helping Trump, all because they somehow think being journalists is the thing that'd actually help him or will cause accusations of helping him if he wins. There's a middleground here. Of course the media having a front page headline about the emails every day would be irresponsible. But refusing to talk about it or look at it inquisitively, at all, ever, is just as irresponsible. As is Twitter censoring links to it.
  - zzleeper 6y ago
    > the media's unintentionally turned it into one if the biggest controversies of the year Maybe in the Republican bubble. Outside of it, no one really cares and sees it as a weird and poorly executed complot
    - meowface 6y ago
      I think you're very wrong. I'm the opposite of a Republican, and I think this scandal (the media's and Twitter's behavior, not the emails) is big. Matt Taibbi, a very definitely not-Republican journalist, agrees: https://taibbi.substack.com/p/with-the-hunter-biden-expose-suppression-136 https://taibbi.substack.com/p/with-the-hunter-biden-expose-s... I think the main reason it's not a big controversy elsewhere is due to exactly what you mention - both bubbles absolutely reject anything negative about their side and absolutely accept anything negative about the opposing side. So of course one bubble won't care, or even be aware of what's going on.
teclordphrack2 6y ago
Do you think Obama was told that Hilary was going to claim russia was helping trump?

starkd 6y ago

Biden could have addressed this months ago. the fact that he hasn't is very telling. Before he got the nomination, major publications were running stories about it, like Politico and Bloomberg, etc.

meowface 6y ago
Absolutely, and there're several other indicators as well. I think it's still unclear if all of it's real, and the acquisition story seems sketchy (and very unethical if true), but it seems more likely than not to be legit. I think staying silent about it is absolutely the smartest move on Joe's part. Trying to defend the contents will only draw more attention to them. It's the media's refusal to be actual journalists that's the dumb thing.
- starkd 6y ago
  The fact that he's not addressing this properly is the scandalous part. Don't we deserve answers. Even if he's elected, this is not going away and will only hobble his administration. He needs to clear it up and get it out of the way. There's a troubling trend among democrat nominees to suppress. Like him or hate him, you have to admit Trump holds press conferences and answers questions.
  - meowface 6y ago
    Eh, any politician would probably do the same. I strongly disagree about Trump. That's basically been Trump's exact MO since forever; any real story concerning him just gets instantly dismissed. "It's locker room talk", "it's fake news", etc. Trump and his White House have held far fewer press conferences than past presidents. And at his press conferences, he refuses many questions and dismisses others with either non-answers or just his typical bullshit salesman-speak. I do think this is probably the "Trumpiest" Biden has acted so far, but I think I'd probably do the same thing if I were in his position, honestly. At least until the election is over. It's politics. He doesn't want to throw too much gasoline on the fire. It's just the media's and Twitter's behavior that I just mind-boggling and gross, and the irrational way so much of the left is treating it.