Trump - Russian connections....FAR DEEPER than anyone ever imagined

a reply to: UKTruth

Unproven allegations do not equal fake news. Quit playing dumb.

www.politifact.com...

Then there’s fake news, the phenomenon that is now sweeping, well, the news. Fake news is made-up stuff, masterfully manipulated to look like credible journalistic reports that are easily spread online to large audiences willing to believe the fictions and spread the word.

No one is making up the existence of a report, and the author believed to be Christopher Steele. As far as the content of the report, all major news media are accurately reporting that no one knows how much of the report is true. The fact that Steele runs a reputable intelligence firm and has people who know him in the intelligence community vouching for him is a compelling part of the story. Legit news.

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: UKTruth
I can legitimately take a position that it is fake until evidence is provided to support the allegations.

Holy s*** you said something intelligent for a change! Yes, that means you believe it's FAKE INTEL not FAKE NEWS.

And, guess what, shocker, I might actually agree with you on that one!

Hmmm. I will say once again that you do not get to decide the definition of fake news.
If I want to call the reporting of a fake intel document, fake news, then I will. There is no agreed definition to make me right or wrong.
Regardless, Buzzfeed published what I term as fake intel, and as such distributed fake news.
CNN linked and referenced this fake news.

Regardless of what you want to call it, it is not TRUE until proven to be so.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: UKTruth

Unproven allegations do not equal fake news. Quit playing dumb.

www.politifact.com...

Then there’s fake news, the phenomenon that is now sweeping, well, the news. Fake news is made-up stuff, masterfully manipulated to look like credible journalistic reports that are easily spread online to large audiences willing to believe the fictions and spread the word.

No one is making up the existence of a report, and the author believed to be Christopher Steele. As far as the content of the report, all major news media are accurately reporting that no one knows how much of the report is true. The fact that Steele runs a reputable intelligence firm and has people who know him in the intelligence community vouching for him is a compelling part of the story. Legit news.

The very definition you posted would classify the document as fake news.

Fake news is made-up stuff, masterfully manipulated to look like credible journalistic reports that are easily spread online to large audiences willing to believe the fictions and spread the word

As it happens I would term it slightly differently to Politico, who also are not the arbiter of what fake news constitutes.
Like I said much earlier, it is all quite irrelevant anyway. I am not required to prove something is fake.
The onus is on you to prove the allegations true if you want to position them as such.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: UKTruth
I can legitimately take a position that it is fake until evidence is provided to support the allegations.

Holy s*** you said something intelligent for a change! Yes, that means you believe it's FAKE INTEL not FAKE NEWS.

And, guess what, shocker, I might actually agree with you on that one!

Hmmm. I will say once again that you do not get to decide the definition of fake news.

I would hate to try to explain what a derivative is to you, but if by some stroke of luck you know what a derivative is then you can understand how the details or intelligence a news report is based upon isn't the same as the intelligence itself. Then you can begin to understand how you can distinguish between the two items.

Other than that all I can say is, sorry the English language is pretty well laid out. Fake means "False". News means "Reporting." You can wish you were unicorn, but without a lot of plastic surgery, you're just a regular old crotchety human.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: UKTruth
I can legitimately take a position that it is fake until evidence is provided to support the allegations.

Holy s*** you said something intelligent for a change! Yes, that means you believe it's FAKE INTEL not FAKE NEWS.

And, guess what, shocker, I might actually agree with you on that one!

If I want to call the reporting of a fake intel document, fake news, then I will.

Apparently you think you can redefine terms as you see fit? You can misuse any term you like, it only makes you wrong.

Donald Trump dossier: intelligence sources vouch for author's credibility
www.theguardian.com...

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: UKTruth
I can legitimately take a position that it is fake until evidence is provided to support the allegations.

Holy s*** you said something intelligent for a change! Yes, that means you believe it's FAKE INTEL not FAKE NEWS.

And, guess what, shocker, I might actually agree with you on that one!

Hmmm. I will say once again that you do not get to decide the definition of fake news.

I would hate to try to explain what a derivative is to you, but if by some stroke of luck you know what a derivative is then you can understand how the details or intelligence a news report is based upon isn't the same as the intelligence itself. Then you can begin to understand how you can distinguish between the two items. Other than that all I can say is, sorry the English language is pretty well laid out. Fake means "False". News means "Reporting." You can wish you were unicorn, but without a lot of plastic surgery, you're just a regular old crotchety human.

Given the thread so far, I would also hate for you to try to explain derivatives.

You are right about the English language. Very well laid out. I already used your own post to adequately describe the report as fake news.

I will continue to wait patiently for the evidence to prove that the report is not fake.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: UKTruth
I can legitimately take a position that it is fake until evidence is provided to support the allegations.

Holy s*** you said something intelligent for a change! Yes, that means you believe it's FAKE INTEL not FAKE NEWS.

And, guess what, shocker, I might actually agree with you on that one!

If I want to call the reporting of a fake intel document, fake news, then I will.

Apparently you think you can redefine terms as you see fit? You can misuse any term you like, it only makes you wrong.

Donald Trump dossier: intelligence sources vouch for author's credibility
www.theguardian.com...

There is no agreed definition for fake news, so it does not need redefining.
Unfortunately for you, you don't get to be the arbiter.

As for posting links, we can all do that.
Intel Vets Say Trump ‘Dossier’ Is A ‘Complete Fraud’

There is conflicting information in the news and no evidence at all to prove the document is true.

originally posted by: fencesitter85

originally posted by: visitedbythem
Pretty flakey triggered snowflake news.
NSA sees all, and has all . This is all fake news.
You believe because you have itching ears, and a sad broken heart.
We will let you get over it...... LMAO
You can believe what you want to believe,
But you don't have to live like a refugee.

Im so sorry for you. I know you are sad. But understand this. Its over. Hillary lost Trump won. Yes President Trump will be your President. And he will do you good. He is not a globalist. Use a little discernment, and you will be ok

This is literally like you've copied and pasted clichés from the little book of republican memes. Desperate attempt at trolling. Sad!

Not even. Those are my words to the broken hearted you. You should be grreatefuI even addressed you.

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: UKTruth
I can legitimately take a position that it is fake until evidence is provided to support the allegations.

Holy s*** you said something intelligent for a change! Yes, that means you believe it's FAKE INTEL not FAKE NEWS.

And, guess what, shocker, I might actually agree with you on that one!

If the Intel is fake and the news reports it, that makes it fake news. It means the news didn't do their job. Similar to the driver in a drive by murder...didn't pull the trigger, but was definitely part of the action.

Unless your interpretation of a real journalist is to regurgitate what they receive without vetting.

If you're not of that opinion, then please explain why these journalists still work in reporting...

originally posted by: UKTruth
I will continue to wait patiently for the evidence to prove that the report is not fake.

There you go again. The news reporting and the leaked document aren't the same thing.

The beautiful thing is you're intentionally muddying the two because you want to call it fake news.

Frankly I lean towards the intel being suspicious as all hell, but the reporting has been perfectly honest about what the intelligence agencies are sharing.

You're a politician alright, the worst kind.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: UKTruth
I can legitimately take a position that it is fake until evidence is provided to support the allegations.

Holy s*** you said something intelligent for a change! Yes, that means you believe it's FAKE INTEL not FAKE NEWS.

And, guess what, shocker, I might actually agree with you on that one!

If I want to call the reporting of a fake intel document, fake news, then I will.

Apparently you think you can redefine terms as you see fit? You can misuse any term you like, it only makes you wrong.

Donald Trump dossier: intelligence sources vouch for author's credibility
www.theguardian.com...

Neat story...and still the only reference to anyone saying he is credible in it is an "official source".

Gotta laugh at these silly credibility "backups".

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: UKTruth
I will continue to wait patiently for the evidence to prove that the report is not fake.

There you go again. The news reporting and the leaked document aren't the same thing.

The beautiful thing is you're intentionally muddying the two because you want to call it fake news.

Frankly I lean towards the intel being suspicious as all hell, but the reporting has been perfectly honest about what the intelligence agencies are sharing.

You're a politician alright, the worst kind.

Nope. The news reporting has not been honest. I have already stated that CNN and NBC have two totally different stories and Buzzfeed as a news source published the report as news for their readers.
CNN later back tracked on their original report when it was revealed no briefing took place.

Fake report and fake news.

originally posted by: UKTruth
Nope. The news reporting has not been honest. I have already stated that CNN and NBC have two totally different stories and Buzzfeed as a news source published the report as news for their readers. CNN later back tracked on their original report when it was revealed no briefing took place.

I'd be happy to check those claims.

Links?

a reply to: UKTruth

While the report could be false, the existence of the report is not, and THAT'S what major news media has been reporting on. The existence of the document and the person believed to be the author. Nice link from... the dailycaller. lol.

British ex-spy behind Trump dossier seen as a cool operator
www.cbsnews.com...

Christopher Steele, the one-time British spy who has compiled an explosive dossier on President-elect Donald Trump, is a well-regarded operative who wouldn’t make up stories to satisfy his clients, according to diplomatic and intelligence experts who know him.

“I know him as a very competent, professional operator who left the secret service and is now operating his own private company,” Andrew Wood, Britain’s ambassador to Russia from 1995 to 2000, told the BBC on Friday. “I do not think he would make things up. I don’t think he would, necessarily, always draw correct judgment, but that’s not the same thing.”

Oh it gets deeper. It gets far deeper then you could ever imagine.

www.farrightwatch.org...

originally posted by: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

originally posted by: UKTruth
Nope. The news reporting has not been honest. I have already stated that CNN and NBC have two totally different stories and Buzzfeed as a news source published the report as news for their readers. CNN later back tracked on their original report when it was revealed no briefing took place.

I'd be happy to check those claims.

Links?

According to a report from NBC News, president-elect Donald Trump was not actually briefed on the unsubstantiated memo alleging links between the Trump campaign and Russia, and officials brought the two-page summary of the memo to his briefing to serve as an example of “disinformation.” “Intel and law enforcement officials agree that none of the investigations have found any conclusive or direct link between Trump and the Russian government period,” a senior official told NBC News. The reason they brought the memo, the official told them, was to provide examples for Trump of the difference between “analyzed intelligence and unvetted ‘disinformation.'” According to the official, they never had to use it. The NBC report appears to contradict the Tuesday CNN report, which broke news of the memo’s existence. CNN reported that the memo was “presented” to Trump, and the reason for its inclusion was to “was to make the President-elect aware that such allegations involving him are circulating among intelligence agencies.” The NBC report would appear to jibe however with assertions from Trump and Kellyanne Conway that Tuesday night was the first time they heard about the document. According to NBC, intelligence chiefs also brought along examples of “disinformation” about Hilllary Clinton to present if they had to, but never did.

www.mediaite.com...

You can also find the video of the NBC report (on this site) should you wish to expand your knowledge of the various reporting. I am surprised you have not researched all sources. Perhaps you should be prepared with information from all sides before debating.

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: UKTruth

While the report could be false, the existence of the report is not, and THAT'S what major news media has been reporting on. The existence of the document and the person believed to be the author. Nice link from... the dailycaller. lol.

British ex-spy behind Trump dossier seen as a cool operator
www.cbsnews.com...

Christopher Steele, the one-time British spy who has compiled an explosive dossier on President-elect Donald Trump, is a well-regarded operative who wouldn’t make up stories to satisfy his clients, according to diplomatic and intelligence experts who know him.

“I know him as a very competent, professional operator who left the secret service and is now operating his own private company,” Andrew Wood, Britain’s ambassador to Russia from 1995 to 2000, told the BBC on Friday. “I do not think he would make things up. I don’t think he would, necessarily, always draw correct judgment, but that’s not the same thing.”

Incorrect. The media have reported on the content itself. Buzzfeed, who have a seat in the Whitehouse press pool, published the entire report unvetted. CNN linked (to Buzzfeeds Twitter) and referenced Buzzfeed directly.

a reply to: UKTruth

Go ahead and quote the false part of the article from any of the links I posted.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: spiritualzombie
a reply to: UKTruth

While the report could be false, the existence of the report is not, and THAT'S what major news media has been reporting on. The existence of the document and the person believed to be the author. Nice link from... the dailycaller. lol.

British ex-spy behind Trump dossier seen as a cool operator
www.cbsnews.com...

Christopher Steele, the one-time British spy who has compiled an explosive dossier on President-elect Donald Trump, is a well-regarded operative who wouldn’t make up stories to satisfy his clients, according to diplomatic and intelligence experts who know him.

“I know him as a very competent, professional operator who left the secret service and is now operating his own private company,” Andrew Wood, Britain’s ambassador to Russia from 1995 to 2000, told the BBC on Friday. “I do not think he would make things up. I don’t think he would, necessarily, always draw correct judgment, but that’s not the same thing.”

Incorrect. The media have reported on the content itself. Buzzfeed, who have a seat in the Whitehouse press pool, published the entire report unvetted. CNN linked (to Buzzfeeds Twitter) and referenced Buzzfeed directly.

And they all accurately reported that it's unknown how much of the content is true. So how is it fake news?

originally posted by: Kettu
a reply to: ThingsThatDontMakeSense

Fake = not real. People don't seem to understand this.

There is a difference between "unverified" and "currently being investigated" and "fake".

Calling something that is still being looked into "fake" is a knee-jerk reaction by scared people.

It's a convenient way to dismiss an argument by people who have nothing themselves to argue with. It's a way to minimize, dismiss, and marginalize something.

"FAKE" should mean HOAX.

Something merely not being true can be untrue, whereas FAKE is a fabrication. FALSE. A false allegation. Made up. A deliberate fiction meant to smear.

"False" can come about by various means. Such as somebody took the meaning of something out of context. This can happen unintentionally, and then somebody else takes that and runs wit it perhaps because it serves their ends. Like when Trump called Rosie a fat disgusting pis and for everyday from then on Hillary and the MSM (and many around here) constantly DELIBERATELY said "Trump calls WMOEN (thats plural, as in ALL women) yada yada yada". Now if someone takes the soundbyte and repeats it it us a false allegation. But for the sources who know they deliberately twisted the logic, the claim is FAKE because they're deliberately manufacturing such smear campaign fodder (also known as Black Propaganda).

Now that is all daily grind stuff, taking into account when everyday people repeat the stuff they hear.

I think I first heard the "fake news" term this election in reference to those Macedonian based blog sites that were posting up "news" stories that were total fabrications. Such stories that were total fabrications regardless of motives were HOAXES. Now fast forward to this BuzzFeed/CNN "dossier" story: When there is a FAKE report (a HOAX report) being propped up by smear campaign propaganda "news" outlets to deliberately cause political damage to a specific politician, its as good as a FAKE (aka HOAX) "news" story being posted in the Macedonian blog accounts or whatever. Now if some regular person that merely hears and repeats the story, this brings the claims back into 'false allegation' territory on such a specific account, unless that it someone debunks it and then they still go on repeating the claim because its damaging then they themselves become part of the smear campaign thus making their efforts also properly FAKE.