Not enough Whisky for this Tango Foxtrot

[Alatar]

I find the following video staggering

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez Proves Just How Easily Corporate PAC Money Can Influence Politics
‘We have a system that is fundamentally broken.

(Same as video which elengil posted)

*slow clap* Well done.

Sorry, I don’t get your meaning.

[elengil]

I find the following video staggering

Rep. Ocasio-Cortez Proves Just How Easily Corporate PAC Money Can Influence Politics
‘We have a system that is fundamentally broken.

(Same as video which elengil posted)

*slow clap* Well done.

Oh whoops!! I did not see your original posting, apologies Alatar!

[RoseMorninStar]

Alatar.. my meaning was.. *WOW* that was very well played by Rep. Ocasio-Cortez. Brilliant. Simple. Straight-forward. She got to the point while (kinda) seeming like, "I'm a naive newbie Freshman who knows nothing... can you all please fill me in on how this works?' and *BOOM* she made her point. She may be 'green' but that girl's got some skillz.

[Faramond]

Imagine there is a criminal trial. Someone edits together a video of the prosecutor asking yes/no questions that taken together form a narrative that makes it seem like the defendant sure is guilty. ( Let's hope the video editor doesn't add terrible and distracting music to the video. ) This video is widely shared and most people who view it agree -- yep, that sure shows the defendant is guilty -- yep, that prosecutor sure is shining a light on the truth there.

Would *either* of these conclusions be warranted, just from watching this edited video? A video, remember, that contains nothing of the defense case, contains no substantive answers from the witnesses -- a video that is in essence an uninterrupted monologue by the prosecutor.

What would you think of someone who showed you that video and insisted that by itself it proved that the defendant was guilty?

[yovargas]

[Túrin Turambar]

I’ve been more of a critic than a defender of AOC, but this conflict of interest proposal is a great one. A director of a corporation would be required by law to excuse himself or herself from voting on any board resolution where he or she had a personal interest, and I don’t see why Congress shouldn’t have the same rule. If it’s good enough for shareholder money then it’s good enough for taxpayer money.

[Frelga]

IAWTT

Back to Bezos.
https://twitter.com/RexHuppke/status/10 ... 8941378561

Pause a moment and consider the way Jeff Bezos was being threatened. Now envision what Trump’s pal at the National Enquirer has on Ted Cruz, and ask yourself why Cruz went from hating Trump to loving him. Now do the same thing for Lindsey Graham. And all those Evangelicals.

[Voronwë the Faithful]

I never can understand why tweets are always quoted twice. As if we can't read the text in the actual tweet so it has to be repeated.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

[River]

If it's proof that Graham is gay, I'm gonna laff.

[RoseMorninStar]

IAWTT

Back to Bezos.
https://twitter.com/RexHuppke/status/10 ... 8941378561

Pause a moment and consider the way Jeff Bezos was being threatened. Now envision what Trump’s pal at the National Enquirer has on Ted Cruz, and ask yourself why Cruz went from hating Trump to loving him. Now do the same thing for Lindsey Graham. And all those Evangelicals.

oh.. OH...
That sure would explain an awful lot.

[Frelga]

I never can understand why tweets are always quoted twice. As if we can't read the text in the actual tweet so it has to be repeated.

Sent from my LG G6 using Tapatalk

But only on Tapatalk so I can't just post a link. I guess I can, and people can click, but Twitter can be annoying if you are not logged in.

[Inanna]

Rose, gazillion people who disliked Trump professed to love him once they saw his stranglehold on his base. That does not *need* to imply anything beyond their spinelessness. That tweet is just suppositions; I would ignore it.

[RoseMorninStar]

There are a couple of things that seemed to click: What is AMI known for? Catch & Kill articles blackmailing the rich, famous &/or influential. What did AMI want from Bezos? Money? No, a statement. Why is such a statement (#2 in the quote at the bottom of this post) so important to a supermarket tabloid? Doesn't that seem a tad odd? Additionally, David Pecker/AMI has an agreement with Mueller/the Special Council, in exchange for their cooperation they are absolved of any crimes/wrong-doing in the 'catch & kill' /crimes cover-up-in-exchange-for-money dirt they have in their vault. Not only did they have to 'come clean' in exchange for immunity, they can not be involved in any other crimes for a period of 3 years or the crimes they have admitted to become fully prosecutable. Michael Cohen was set to go before the intelligence committee TODAY to discuss the Stormy Daniels case--which also involves AMI, but after this story broke, it has been delayed by 3 weeks.
From CNBC:

But Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam Schiff, D-Calif., in a terse, one-sentence statement said that Cohen's appearance would be delayed until Feb. 28 "in the interests of the investigation."

Schiff did not elaborate.

This might mean that AMI's 'journalistic practices' and all that dirt in their vault (blackmail material) may more fully come to light.



(partial) correspondence from AMI to Jeff Bezos' lawyer:

Here are our proposed terms:

1. A full and complete mutual release of all claims that American Media, on the one hand, and Jeff Bezos and Gavin de Becker (the “Bezos Parties”), on the other, may have against each other.

2. A public, mutually-agreed upon acknowledgment from the Bezos Parties, released through a mutually-agreeable news outlet, affirming that they have no knowledge or basis for suggesting that AM’s coverage was politically motivated or influenced by political forces, and an agreement that they will cease referring to such a possibility.

3. AM agrees not to publish, distribute, share, or describe unpublished texts and photos (the “Unpublished Materials”).

4. AM affirms that it undertook no electronic eavesdropping in connection with its reporting and has no knowledge of such conduct.

5. The agreement is completely confidential.

6. In the case of a breach of the agreement by one or more of the Bezos Parties, AM is released from its obligations under the agreement, and may publish the Unpublished Materials.

7. Any other disputes arising out of this agreement shall first be submitted to JAMS mediation in California

[Frelga]

Inanna, I almost feel that it is giving Cruz and Co. too much credit to speculate that they are acting under duress of some sort. However, I do recall (but of course now can't find) an article from a few years ago, pre-campaign, in which not-yet-candidate Trump boasted that very powerful people stayed in his hotel and that he knew so much about them. So, who knows.

[Inanna]

I recall that, Frelga (shudders).

It still does not mean that that twitter post is anything but suppositions and rumors. At this point. So, it should be ignored.

Rose, the stuff between Bezos & National Enquirer are facts. Using those facts to build suppositions about specific other people - that’s just rumors.

[RoseMorninStar]

IAWTT

Back to Bezos.
https://twitter.com/RexHuppke/status/10 ... 8941378561

Pause a moment and consider the way Jeff Bezos was being threatened. Now envision what Trump’s pal at the National Enquirer has on Ted Cruz, and ask yourself why Cruz went from hating Trump to loving him. Now do the same thing for Lindsey Graham. And all those Evangelicals.

oh.. OH...
That sure would explain an awful lot.

I'm puzzled why I am specifically being addressed in your response Inanna, as I was responding to something Frelga had posted. And I do believe Frelga has a point. While insinuations & rumors are indeed not facts, it IS a fact that AMI has been actively threatening/blackmailing people... and not just for money.. but for political speech. To silence people. It doesn't take a huge leap to think that pressure may have been applied to others.

*edited for grammar

[Faramond]

It's pizzagate level garbage is what it is. Most of what I see in this thread is propaganda and salacious rumors with no supporting evidence.

[River]

So you walked into the WTF thread and expected what, exactly?

I'm still giggling over the NY Post headline: "Bezos Exposes Pecker". It's just multiple levels of perfect.

[RoseMorninStar]

Pizzagate level garbage? Were children victims of human trafficking by the Democratic party utilizing Washington, DC restaurants? No. Some believe Hillary's stolen e-mails contained code words for this child-sex-ring activity. It's just garbage.

On the other hand..

Was AMI part of a 'catch & kill' scheme to cover up Trump's affairs? Yes. Did they help pay off porn stars for Trump? Yes.
Have they published (factual) dirt on Jeff Bezos, arguably the richest man in the world? Yes. In exchange for money? No. What do they want? To take away his freedom of speech. Not only to silence him but to get him to 'play along' with what appears to be a political agenda. That this MAY not be the first time they've done this and seems to be part of their Modus Operandi, does not take a great leap into conspiracy theory land to wonder if there are not others who have been blackmailed/silenced.

It is not the same thing as Pizzagate at all.

[Inanna]

oh.. OH...
That sure would explain an awful lot.

I'm puzzled why I am specifically being addressed in your response Inanna, as I was responding to something Frelga had posted. And I do believe Frelga has a point. While insinuations & rumors are indeed not facts, it IS a fact that AMI has been actively threatening/blackmailing people... and not just for money.. but for political speech. To silence people. It doesn't take a huge leap to think that pressure may have been applied to others.

*edited for grammar[/quote]

Rose, I am sorry - I did not mean to single you out. But I was responding specifically to your comment about "That sure would explain an awful lot". So, would the fact that those two are spineless idiots - that would also explain why they went from hating him to loving him. And maybe several other things - their voting base, the money being funneled to their campaigns. A LOT of things could explain why Ted Cruz and Graham went from hating Trump to loving Trump.

To make the jump from "Likely AMI has done this to several people" (which I do *not* doubt at all) TO "AMI has done this to Ted Cruz and Graham" is A BIG Jump and a rumor.