Things that be all racist n' sheit

[89Hen]

http://www.fox25boston.com/news/boston- ... /698298236

Honoring a white man on Black History Months (!)

So we rightfully expose racist owners and coaches that wouldn't hire/play black players, but when one does we're supposed to pretend that wasn't a big moment in black history? Whatever.

[AZGrizFan]

http://www.fox25boston.com/news/boston- ... /698298236

Honoring a white man on Black History Months (!)

So we rightfully expose racist owners and coaches that wouldn't hire/play black players, but when one does we're supposed to pretend that wasn't a big moment in black history? Whatever.

yeah, the hypocrisy is strong in this one....

[Ivytalk]

So we rightfully expose racist owners and coaches that wouldn't hire/play black players, but when one does we're supposed to pretend that wasn't a big moment in black history? Whatever.

yeah, the hypocrisy is strong in this one....

Stephen A. Smith got all pissed off about that one. Which proves your point.

[JohnStOnge]

I finally got around to reading the Nunes memo and saw two grossly misleading lines of argument that we can tell are grossly misleading based on public reporting and discourse.

The first one is one I was looking for. I wanted to see what they had to say about the FBI not telling the FISA judge about the source of the Steel dossier. And what they said is this:

Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.

That makes it sound like the FBI hid the fact that the memo had political origins. It did not. Both sides now agree that the FBI did disclose the fact that the Steel dossier had political origins.

Republican leaders are acknowledging that the FBI disclosed the political origins of a private dossier the bureau cited in an application to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, undermining a controversial GOP memo released Friday and fueling Democratic demands to declassify more information about the bureau’s actions.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/ ... ant-390795

Also, in the aftermath of the memo I saw a number of Republicans conceding that the FBI did that during television interviews. It's just that they insisted that it wasn't the same as specifically saying it was Clinton and the DNC (as though a judge couldn't figure that out).

Notably, the Nunes memo does NOT provide any hint at all of the truth in that regard. It makes it look like the FBI failed to let the judge know the dossier had a political association.

The second misleading statement really surprised me because it is so obviously misleading. It's something Republicans have done on TV and in print. It's this:

Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was—according to his June 2017 testimony—“salacious and unverified.”

Comey's testimony is a matter of public record and he did NOT say that the memo is entirely salacious and unverified. He said on several occasions that he briefed Trump on some material that is salacious and unverified. But he never said that the memo as a whole is salacious and unverified. Republicans have taken that "salacious and unverified" quote out of context on numerous occasions in television interviews. But I can't believe they actually did that in the Nunes memo.

After reading the Nunes memo I think that the FBI statement that the memo is characterized "...material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo's accuracy" has even more credibility. That's because I can readily see material omissions of fact just through having access to the public record.

Fellow conservatives who don't like me, this is serious. You need to let the scales fall from your eyes with respect to what the Republican Party is doing right now. This is very serious, very obvious corruption.

[Skjellyfetti]

Wrong thread?

[Ivytalk]

Wrong thread?

Definitely. I agree with you on this — but on nothing else.

[Grizalltheway]

Winter Olympics?

[BDKJMU]

I finally got around to reading the Nunes memo and saw two grossly misleading lines of argument that we can tell are grossly misleading based on public reporting and discourse.

The first one is one I was looking for. I wanted to see what they had to say about the FBI not telling the FISA judge about the source of the Steel dossier. And what they said is this:

Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior DOJ and FBI officials.

That makes it sound like the FBI hid the fact that the memo had political origins. It did not. Both sides now agree that the FBI did disclose the fact that the Steel dossier had political origins.

Republican leaders are acknowledging that the FBI disclosed the political origins of a private dossier the bureau cited in an application to surveil former Trump campaign adviser Carter Page, undermining a controversial GOP memo released Friday and fueling Democratic demands to declassify more information about the bureau’s actions.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/ ... ant-390795

Also, in the aftermath of the memo I saw a number of Republicans conceding that the FBI did that during television interviews. It's just that they insisted that it wasn't the same as specifically saying it was Clinton and the DNC (as though a judge couldn't figure that out).

Notably, the Nunes memo does NOT provide any hint at all of the truth in that regard. It makes it look like the FBI failed to let the judge know the dossier had a political association.

The second misleading statement really surprised me because it is so obviously misleading. It's something Republicans have done on TV and in print. It's this:

Yet, in early January 2017, Director Comey briefed President-elect Trump on a summary of the Steele dossier, even though it was—according to his June 2017 testimony—“salacious and unverified.”

Comey's testimony is a matter of public record and he did NOT say that the memo is entirely salacious and unverified. He said on several occasions that he briefed Trump on some material that is salacious and unverified. But he never said that the memo as a whole is salacious and unverified. Republicans have taken that "salacious and unverified" quote out of context on numerous occasions in television interviews. But I can't believe they actually did that in the Nunes memo.

After reading the Nunes memo I think that the FBI statement that the memo is characterized "...material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo's accuracy" has even more credibility. That's because I can readily see material omissions of fact just through having access to the public record.

Fellow conservatives who don't like me, this is serious. You need to let the scales fall from your eyes with respect to what the Republican Party is doing right now. This is very serious, very obvious corruption.

Ok, but but please explain (in 10,000 words or less) how is the Nunes memo all racist n’ scheit?

[Ibanez]

I finally got around to reading the Nunes memo and saw two grossly misleading lines of argument that we can tell are grossly misleading based on public reporting and discourse.

The first one is one I was looking for. I wanted to see what they had to say about the FBI not telling the FISA judge about the source of the Steel dossier. And what they said is this:



That makes it sound like the FBI hid the fact that the memo had political origins. It did not. Both sides now agree that the FBI did disclose the fact that the Steel dossier had political origins.



https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/ ... ant-390795

Also, in the aftermath of the memo I saw a number of Republicans conceding that the FBI did that during television interviews. It's just that they insisted that it wasn't the same as specifically saying it was Clinton and the DNC (as though a judge couldn't figure that out).

Notably, the Nunes memo does NOT provide any hint at all of the truth in that regard. It makes it look like the FBI failed to let the judge know the dossier had a political association.

The second misleading statement really surprised me because it is so obviously misleading. It's something Republicans have done on TV and in print. It's this:



Comey's testimony is a matter of public record and he did NOT say that the memo is entirely salacious and unverified. He said on several occasions that he briefed Trump on some material that is salacious and unverified. But he never said that the memo as a whole is salacious and unverified. Republicans have taken that "salacious and unverified" quote out of context on numerous occasions in television interviews. But I can't believe they actually did that in the Nunes memo.

After reading the Nunes memo I think that the FBI statement that the memo is characterized "...material omissions of fact that fundamentally impact the memo's accuracy" has even more credibility. That's because I can readily see material omissions of fact just through having access to the public record.

Fellow conservatives who don't like me, this is serious. You need to let the scales fall from your eyes with respect to what the Republican Party is doing right now. This is very serious, very obvious corruption.

Ok, but but please explain (in 10,000 words or less) how is the Nunes memo all racist n’ scheit?

It was printed with black ink.

[Pwns]

Showing up at the Black Panther premier with white women.

[JohnStOnge]

Wrong thread?

Yes, and I finally figured out what happened to that post.

[kalm]

Showing up at the Black Panther premier with white women.

That can’t be real.

[CAA Flagship]

Showing up at the Black Panther premier with white women.

That can’t be real.

Spandos, is that you?

[BDKJMU]

Apparently saying "shut up and dribble" is now racist..
https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/kevi ... re-racist/

[Ivytalk]

Apparently saying "shut up and dribble" is now racist..
https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/kevi ... re-racist/

It was a disrespectful statement by that crypto-Trumpie twit, Laura Ingraham.

[CID1990]

Wrong thread?

Yes, and I finally figured out what happened to that post.

Are you planning on showing us the results of your investigation?

[BDKJMU]

Apparently saying "shut up and dribble" is now racist..
https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/kevi ... re-racist/

It was a disrespectful statement by that crypto-Trumpie twit, Laura Ingraham.

Towards another twit who made disrespectful statements. But that doesn't make it racist..

[Pwns]

Apparently saying "shut up and dribble" is now racist..
https://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/kevi ... re-racist/

It was a disrespectful statement by that crypto-Trumpie twit, Laura Ingraham.

I agree, but it's stupid to call it racist.

That comment was an allusion to a book Ingram wrote called "Shut Up and Sing" about political activism of white celebrities.

[Ivytalk]

It was a disrespectful statement by that crypto-Trumpie twit, Laura Ingraham.

I agree, but it's stupid to call it racist.

That comment was an allusion to a book Ingram wrote called "Shut Up and Sing" about political activism of white celebrities.

Maybe it wasn’t racist, but she carelessly used racist stereotypes.

[kalm]

I agree, but it's stupid to call it racist.

That comment was an allusion to a book Ingram wrote called "Shut Up and Sing" about political activism of white celebrities.

Maybe it wasn’t racist, but she carelessly used racist stereotypes.

This.

Laura Ingraham...what a buffoon...

[Chizzang]

Maybe it wasn’t racist, but she carelessly used racist stereotypes.

This.

Laura Ingraham...what a buffoon...

Is there anybody that is confused about Laura Ingraham..?

She's about a phobic as a human can get - everything terrifies her
Anything that's not white Christian and far right of the middle = is bad

[houndawg]

Yes, and I finally figured out what happened to that post.

Are you planning on showing us the results of your investigation?

Goddamnit shut up

[CID1990]

Are you planning on showing us the results of your investigation?

Goddamnit shut up

I just thought it odd that this once he wasn't showing his work

(all 3 pages of it)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CID1990]

This.

Laura Ingraham...what a buffoon...

Is there anybody that is confused about Laura Ingraham..?

She's about a phobic as a human can get - everything terrifies her
Anything that's not white Christian and far right of the middle = is bad

I'm not terribly familiar with her - I generally don't read people who don't challenge me

I looked to see what all the "hoop"la was about -

She did exactly what lefties like to do - suggested that someone who left high school to join the NBA was maybe not qualified to comment on higher subjects

I'm pretty sure the word "elitist" escapes her mouth from time to time when she describes the left

all in all Im in favor of celebs speaking up - when they step over the line they wind up like that Griffin crone


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Chizzang]

Is there anybody that is confused about Laura Ingraham..?

She's about a phobic as a human can get - everything terrifies her
Anything that's not white Christian and far right of the middle = is bad

I'm not terribly familiar with her - I generally don't read people who don't challenge me

Just to give you a taste
She's a lawyer with a J.D. and loves to refer to herself as a doctor (insert eye roll here)
and believes the New Testament is a suitable replacement for science books in school whilst being considered one of the most powerful women in the conservative movement...