Trump's AI Action Plan
In a speech late yesterday at an AI summit in Washington, President Trump called for doing "whatever it takes" to win the AI race. He then unveiled his 23-page Action Plan which gives a green light to the tech industry, focusing on accelerating AI innovation rather than addressing concerns such as model safety, environmental risks and the potential for job loss.
The plan also contains a little limitation for tech companies: It dictates how chatbots deal with contentious political issues. The restriction is there to prevent Woke AI in the Federal Government. Trump insists that any AI model procured by a federal agency must promote "ideological neutrality."
The President went on to say that winning the A.I. race will demand a new spirit of patriotism and national loyalty in Silicon Valley. "We need U.S. technology companies to be all-in for America. America is the country that started the A.I. race. And as President of the United States, I'm here today to declare that America is going to win it."
The Trump administration's plan, which includes more than 90 federal policy actions, broadly will:
- Support the buildout of data centers, semiconductor fabrication plants and the nation's electric grid;
- Create rules for government contractors in an attempt to eliminate "ideological bias" in chatbots;
- Withhold funding from states that have "burdensome" AI regulations;
- Compel federal agencies to review their rules and repeal any that obstruct AI development;
- Establish a program to deliver AI export packages — including hardware, large language models, software, applications and standards — to U.S. allies.
Mr. Trump said "a lot of very brilliant people" tell him AI will dominate virtually every industry, although he said he doesn't know if that's true. The president said AI brings the possibility of peril, as well as progress.
White House unveils U.S. strategic plan on AI. Here's what it includes. - CBS News
In other news:
Yesterday the Director of National Intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard released further information on the alleged plot hatched under the Obama administration to manufacture intelligence information that made it appear that Russia was meddling in the US election with the intent of making Trump the winner. Actually intelligence reports from the time indicate that the Russians believed (like most of us) that Hillary Clinton would inevitably win and that Putin deliberately withheld negative information on Hillary Clinton's health until after the election, when it might be better to use it against her administration.
Around the same time, the new journalists at the Wall Street Journal released a report that Pam Bondi, the attorney general, informed President Trump months ago that his name appeared in the Epstein files.
A judge sentenced Bryan Kohberger to four consecutive life sentences for the murders of four University of Idaho students. Family and friends of the victims spoke with fury and devastation at the hearing; Kohberger said nothing about his motives.
Columbia University agreed to pay a $200 million fine for its dispute with the President over antisemitism at the university. Earlier this week, Columbia suspended and expelled dozens of students who were involved in a pro-Palestinian demonstration that shut down a library in May.
The Supreme Court allowed Trump to fire the three democratic members of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which monitors the safety of products like cribs and electronics.
The State Department opened an investigation into Harvard University's compliance with a visa program for international students and professors. A judge had previously blocked the government’s previous attempt to bar Harvard from the visa program.
A federal judge in Florida denied the Justice Department's request to unseal grand jury transcripts from an investigation into Epstein.
Tags
Who is online
90 visitors
Good morning and welcome to the news.
The following is a snippet from the documents that the Director of National Intelligence released yesterday:
DNI Tulsi Gabbard (@DNIGabbard) / X
You guys are hilarious. Please do link when that DNI document was written just to confirm it was AFTER Reuters reporter Jeff Mason asked Putin in July of 2018, “President Putin, did you want President Trump to win the election and did you direct any of your officials to help him do that? ” to which Putin replied “ Yes, I did. Yes, I did. Because he talked about bringing the U.S.–Russia relationship back to normal.” Putin Said in Helsinki He Wanted Trump to Win - The Atlantic
Would be pretty funny if our intelligence community had no "direct confirmation" after Putin admitted it himself publicly. Of course, I understand that at the time this memo was likely written that statement hadn't been made so they were erring on the side of caution by not including that later verified fact out of their assessment.
Really cool that so many on the left are willing to take Putins word for something when the intelligence community said his goal was to disrupt the US elections
What's hilarious is that those on the right refuse to take him at his word while they also ignore the mountain of evidence contained in the:
I'm curious why every conservative I've replied to with this link never responds, they just move on as if they didn't even read it. It's likely because it completely destroys their entire premise that the Russia investigation was a "hoax" which is all they and their disgusting criminal bigot-in-chief have left to whine and cry about how unfair their diaper Don has been treated. Fucking cowards.
Because they didnt.
I even put the key findings in bold so they're easy to read and yet still no conservative response from their own Republican parties Senate investigation conclusions.
(As you know) that is how confirmation bias works—if content appears to challenge someone's position, it tends to be dismissed. No learning takes place ... no influence on the unwavering position that is appealing and comfortable regardless of whether or not it is true.
Well, here is a copy of the facts for you too:
DIG Declassified HPSCI Report Manufactured Russia Hoax July2025 | PDF
But they didn't have all the facts.
Here is your copy:
DIG Declassified HPSCI Report Manufactured Russia Hoax July2025 | PDF
I'm curious why nobody has disputed the documentation:
DIG Declassified HPSCI Report Manufactured Russia Hoax July2025 | PDF
Well Putin is the ultimate bad guy.
Know why?
Because Hillary Clinton wanted to make Russia a democracy and he said no way!
The bottom line is you expect everyone to believe Tulsi Gabbard more than the 2020 Senate Intelligence Committee Report.
Aint gonna happen dawg.
I simply present the FACTS.
They are telling you to read the actual documents (they've been linked multiple times on this article). But instead you would rather believe something somebody heard from somebody who heard from somebody.
Thank you for your attention to this matter!
Amid the hypocrisy of wanting to win the artificial intelligence race? How ironic.
Alternate facts, alternate intelligence = alternate reality.
What a bunch of dumb assed clowns this Administration is.
Feel free to go though it:
DIG Declassified HPSCI Report Manufactured Russia Hoax July2025 | PDF
I trust the Senate, that in the previous Trump Administration claimed Extreme interference in the elections by the Russians, (again). That report was chaired by Marc Rubio in 2020 and championed by the Washington Examiner. Senators stand by 2016 Russia election meddling report despite Gabbard’s claims
In fact those same Senators from both parties think Gabbards claims and interpretations are just nuts.
Credibility demands consistency. Gabbard is out of step with reality and seems to be just performing for Trump alone. What did he say after she started this furor? "she's the hottest one in the room"?
Instead of releasing the promised Epstein material they deflect in all sorts of strange ways, jingling the keys, via JFK, Lee Harvey Oswald, Martin Luther King and James Earl Ray. Who next, John Wilkes Booth?
They are getting pretty desperate.
Please, don't be foolish enough to take the bait.
There was no direct information that Putin wanted Trump to win.
So why push such a narrative?
That's a bald-faced lie.
Well, for starters it's the truth.
There are also Putin's own words:
Did perhaps that brain worm that was gorging on the little gray matter RFK had left give birth to millions of brain eating offspring and infect all the Trumplodyte sycophant brains? It would explain their continued refusal to accept facts and reality.
The reports we now have from the CIA and Dutch intelligence show that is not true.
"The U.S. intelligence community had no direct evidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin wanted to help then-candidate Donald Trump during the 2016 election but advanced that claim anyway under the direction of then-President Barack Obama , according to a newly declassified House Intelligence Committee report.
The report, kept classified since it was finalized on Sept. 18, 2020, under the leadership of then-California Rep. Devin Nunes , was made public this week by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard . It concludes that the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, which claimed Putin sought to help elect Trump, was based on scant, cherry-picked, and, in some cases, dubious intelligence.
Only five CIA analysts and a principal drafter produced the final assessment, with little input or oversight from other agencies. The House report says the team was “rushed” and operated under “unusual directives” from Obama and then-CIA Director John Brennan , who personally pushed to include unverified material in the ICA despite objections from other officials in the CIA.
The newly declassified document “exposes how the Obama Administration manufactured the January 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment that they knew was false, promoting the LIE that Vladimir Putin and the Russian government helped President Trump win the 2016 election,” Gabbard wrote in a post to X on Wednesday.
One vague, unverifiable line in a substandard intelligence report formed the sole classified basis for the ICA’s claim that Putin “aspired” to help Trump, the report found. Meanwhile, other analysts warned Brennan that no direct evidence supported the conclusion that Putin had a preference.
The ICA went on to underpin years of partisan Democratic talking points about Putin’s support of Trump, as well as the yearslong criminal investigation of Trump for alleged collusion with Russia.
Evidence contradicting the Russia collusion narrative was suppressed
The report says the ICA overlooked key intelligence, including from a longtime Putin confidant, who told U.S. officials the Russian leader “did not care who won” and “often outlined the weaknesses of both major candidates.” Other suppressed intelligence suggested Russia expected a Hillary Clinton victory and believed it could work with her more effectively.
The ICA also failed to explain why Russia didn’t release additional damaging information on Clinton in the closing weeks of the race, the House Intelligence Committee report said. According to the committee, that omission further undercut the idea that Putin wanted to tip the election in Trump’s favor, because if Putin’s main goal was to elect Trump, he would have released the most damaging material during the race, when it could have been most helpful.
The damaging information about Clinton included serious private concerns among Democratic National Committee officials about her mental and physical health, which at the time was a campaign issue.
Latest report compiles atop last week’s DNI release
Last week, Gabbard also declassified records showing that Obama’s national security team set the stage for the Trump-Russia collusion investigation without clear evidence to support the narrative.
Transcripts of closed-door House interviews from 2017 and 2018 show Obama-era officials —including James Clapper , Susan Rice , Loretta Lynch , and Samantha Power — admitted under oath they had no empirical evidence of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia .
“I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting or conspiring with the Russians,” Clapper testified. Rice and Lynch likewise said they didn’t recall seeing or being briefed on any such intelligence.
These admissions aligned with the findings of special counsel Robert Mueller , who concluded in 2019 that there was no evidence of criminal coordination between Trump and Russia.
Criminal referrals and investigations
The disclosures have prompted new scrutiny of the intelligence community’s role in advancing the Trump-Russia theory. Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey have been under criminal investigation by the FBI, and Gabbard has since made referrals to the Justice Department to bring possible charges, though it is unclear who could be subject to prosecution beyond the former CIA and FBI heads.
Previously declassified notes show Brennan briefed Obama in July 2016 on a Clinton campaign plan to “vilify Donald Trump” by tying him to Russia. That briefing included references to intelligence suggesting the effort was personally approved by Clinton and meant to stir up a scandal around alleged foreign interference.
The Steele dossier , which was later discredited, was funded by Clinton’s campaign and funneled through the law firm Perkins Coie. Brennan and Comey were both aware of the dossier’s limitations at the time the opposition research was used to brief Trump and open investigations.
Despite that, the now-declassified ICA omitted that context and instead helped justify years of criminal and congressional investigations that found no conspiracy.
Obama has largely avoided commenting on the revelations, but a spokesman issued a rare public statement this week denouncing the latest claims.
“These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction,” Obama’s spokesman Patrick Rodenbush said. He insisted the findings did not undermine the consensus that Russia tried to interfere in 2016 and pointed to a 2020 Senate Intelligence Committee report led by then-Chairman Marco Rubio as confirmation.
But with mounting evidence that key conclusions in the ICA were shaped by politicized intelligence, the credibility of those findings, and the officials who endorsed them, continues to erode."
Declassified House intelligence report shows CIA had almost no evidence Putin wanted to help Trump in 2016
Countered by mounting evidence that the party in power is trying to rewrite history in it's own image and this week's preferred conclusions are that Barack Obama is the Commie devil incarnate in a tan suit who dared to put his feet up on that desk. Hang the traitor.
Whatever happened to SCOTUS' immunity for Presidents performing their core duties in office?
Trump, or any future POTUS, can't have it both ways without the whispers about fascist autocrats starting again.
Meanwhile, Trump lost a second time in a different court for trying to kill a Congressional appropriated program known as the Job Corps. Guess they are headed to SCOTUS Too?
I can't be the only one that sees a defamation lawsuit against the WSJ coming.
Just the WSJ? Just about the entire 5th Estate followed suit.
No, just leftist media. Btw he's won those lawsuits.
That's the current LW blogger rag. So far they've all had to pay up.
The only reason anyone has "paid up" is because they are all being extorted.
No, it is because we used to abide by the "Sullivan Law" which allowed the media to say just about anything they wanted about a public figure.
Then a lawsuit was filed & won over something Tucker Carlson said. That was the precedent for all the lawsuits that Trump now gets to file.
We owe it to the left!
The left sure starts alot of things that end up biting them in the ass.
They set all the precedents:
It was the first time anyone tried to take a Presidential candidate off the ballot in 25 states.
It was the first time a President's home was raided (and Joe Biden was guilty of the same thing)
It was the first time a President was hit with 93 criminal indictments (and we now know that Willis, Bragg and Smith coordinated with the WH)
It was the first time a President was impeached twice.
These are all precedents can be used by others to destroy a Presidency.
What they did is unforgivable.
These are all reminiscent of things you see from fascists. The world has seen the very same things come from Russia, N. Korea and Venezuela for a very long time. Yet they yammer on about how it's the opposition that are "fascists".
A few things to point out on this.
The impeachments weren't for what 90% of them think they were for. Neither was for "Russia Collusion" or "Incitement".
Given the recently released documents from Pam Bondi's office. The 1st impeachment, could probably be thrown out. If it weren't for the actions of Obama and the Democrats it would have never been an issue.
The 2nd, was really for show. The Democrats had nothing but felt the need to "punish" Trump. So the 2nd impeachment was thrown out there.
In either impeachment, there are no convictions. Both times the Senate saw past the bullshit the Democrats were trying.
Sorry. I didn't mean for my eyes to roll so loudly.
I think the Senate already took care of that.
They were both for show.
Aha!
I see you're attempting to play the "nobody's ever seen anything like it before" card!
He shouldnt have crimed so much.
Then why are the prosecutors in such trouble. How is Willis doing?
That was a given. Especially when you look at the actual "charges".
If there was so much crime then why did they have to dig up old misdemeanors and inflate them?
Not long ago the WSJ went on a hiring spree. They began hiring people from legacy media like the Washington Post and New York Times. The result is President Trump is bad.
Trump is bad because he's bad. The media is just a reporter. [deleted][✘]
He is bad for the radical left
Can you name them? Kudos if you come up with 10 out of 2,000.
A left wing blogger rag hiring unemployed left wing bloggers. And they honestly think they are worth a damn.
10 years you all have been shrieking that and 10 years you all come up empty.
There are so many. That is why Trump put in the anti-left propaganda clause in the AI Action Plan.
... and nothing to do with MAGA-fied Rushmore wet dreams. @!@
LOL. I've been listing the VERY long list of Trumps criminal acts and crimes he's been accused of and his own words admitting he is a sexual predator, but none of that seems to phase his loyal base. Perhaps there are some horse blinders that are equipped to his sycophants before they ram their heads up their dear Leaders ass. Either way, they seem completely blind to the extensive list of his misdeeds. It sort of reminds me of Stockholm syndrome.
I don't think there is any doubt that Trump is holding the Republican party hostage, it's just sad to see so many of them basically forced into worshiping such a vile cult leader by their mindless drone constituents.
And that's all they are. Accusations. All those investigations into him and they turned up nothing. The best that the left and democrats could come up with were obscure misdemeanors that 1. were past their statute of limitations and 2. NOBODY has ever been charged with before.
Are you possibly referring to the "hiring spree" that . . . "nobody's ever seen anything like it before!" ???
Wrong. 34 felony convictions , a jury found Donald Trump liable Tuesday for sexually abusing advice columnist E. Jean Carroll in 1996, awarding her $5 million in a judgment, admitting on tape that he sexually assaults women , "You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful—I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait." "Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything", TWO impeachments , the Trump charity shut down and fined millions for misusing charitable funds for his own political gain , Trumps LIES about Covid claiming it was no worse than the flu while behind closed doors admitting it was a deadly airborne virus, and last but not least his incitement of the January 6th attack on the Capital and his complete dereliction of duty as he sat there and watched the destruction for hours without even attempting to stop his own supports from violently attacking capital police officers all in an attempt to stop the peaceful transfer of power and install him as Americas first dictator which is what would have happened had they been successful in getting Pence to accept the fake elector results instead of the actual State submitted results.
All of that is indisputable FACT, not accusations.
Nope, again they were 34 felonies. They were NOT past the statute of limitations and many other people have been charged with the same crimes before.
Perhaps you could try at least ONE sentence in your next reply that isn't a blatant lie, but I don't expect it. Sometimes it feels like trying to debate an inflatable tube man... they just keep smiling and waving their arms no matter how completely you crush their 'stock photo' arguments.
New York, NY –[January 6, 2025] – The Wall Street Journal announced today the hiring of four reporters to its Washington D.C. bureau, bolstering the newsroom with some of the industry’s top reporters covering the White House, Congress and trade. Josh Dawsey , Meridith McGraw , Olivia Beavers and Gavin Bade will join over the next month and will report to Washington Coverage Chief Damian Paletta.
“I am thrilled to have Josh, Meridith, Olivia and Gavin joining our incredible Washington bureau,” Paletta said. “These are outstanding journalists and outstanding colleagues. They will help bring our readers inside the way Washington changes the country and the way the country changes Washington.”
Josh Dawsey returns to the Journal and will join the bureau’s enterprise team as a political investigations reporter. Dawsey joins from The Washington Post where he spent the past seven years, most recently as an award-winning political investigations and enterprise reporter. He was previously a White House reporter for POLITICO and began his career with the Journal covering politics. Dawsey is a two-time Pulitzer Prize winner. He joins the Journal on February 3.
Meridith McGraw joins the Journal to cover the White House. Most recently, she was a national political correspondent for POLITICO where her coverage focused on the 2024 presidential race, incoming president Donald Trump and Republican politics. McGraw extensively covered the Trump White House during his first term in office and his post-presidency. Previously, she was a producer and reporter for ABC News where she began her career and contributed to two Emmy-award winning teams. She joins January 15.
Olivia Beavers will join the WSJ’s team covering Congress. Beavers comes most recently from POLITICO where she was a congressional reporter focusing on House Republicans and GOP leadership. Previously, Beavers broke news for The Hill, covering House-led investigations, Trump’s first impeachment and former Special Counsel Robert Muller’s probe and the parallel congressional Russia investigations. She began her career as a news associate for CNN. She joins January 15.
Gavin Bade will take on the trade beat at a time when the incoming Trump administration is preparing an aggressive trade agenda. He was most recently a trade and economics reporter at POLITICO covering the administration and Congress’ approach to industrial policy and other trade issues. Prior to that role, he was a senior reporter and editor at Utility Dive, an energy trade publication. Bade joins January 13.
The Wall Street Journal Announces Key New Hires for DC Bureau - Dow Jones
And of course:
Molly Ball is The Wall Street Journal’s senior political correspondent, covering campaigns, the White House, Congress, political personalities and policy debates across America.
She is also a frequent television and radio commentator and the author of “Pelosi,” a bestselling biography of the first woman Speaker of the House. Prior to joining the Journal, she covered U.S. politics for Time magazine, the Atlantic, Politico and the Las Vegas Review-Journal. She has worked for newspapers in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Cambodia, as well as the New York Times and the Washington Post. She has received numerous awards for her political coverage, including the Dirksen Award for Distinguished Reporting of Congress, the Gerald R. Ford Prize for Distinguished Reporting on the Presidency and the Toner Prize for Excellence in Political Reporting.
Molly Ball — Senior Political Correspondent at The Wall Street Journal
I'm going to miss that phrase in approx. 4 years.
You mean the misdemeanors that were past their statute of limitations? At least try to be truthful.
Did the MAGAverse completely disconnect from reality already?
And regarding statute of limitations...
The MAGAverse doesn't get their own set of facts, you don't get to just proclaim the 34 felony convictions 'misdemeanors' while they are still standing felony convictions. Is the Dick-tater-in-Chief appealing? Of course he is, because that's what whiny little bitch scum bag convicted felons like Trump do.
Some of them have been gone quite some time now.
Nobody’s ever seen anything like it before!
I guess Rubio needs to be flogged ...
All Rubio signed onto was meddling by Russia. Nowhere is there evidence they wanted Trump to win nor did they collude with Trump.
I do understand that the Committee hearing will be the back up point for the left.
Let me put it simply for you Vic, there is nary a Trump appointee who you would not have flogged if they were given their positions by a democratic President.
This entire line of questioning is one of the dumbest things I've ever seen.
Russia was feeding wikileaks stolen emails from the Democratic National Committeee, Hillary Clinton and one of her political operatives.
Are we supposed to believe that Putin did not give approval for this? Would the Russian intelligence agencies attempt to subvert Clintons chances without Putin knowing and agreeing?
Trump and his lackeys are trying to further dumb down America in real time.
And let me put it to you simply: I voted for Rubio in the 2016 GOP Presidential primary. You see, just like many people including Putin I thought Trump couldn't win.
Intel reports clearly stated that Russia was incapable of influencing elections. Putin was certain that Clinton was going to win and thus HE WITHHELD THE FACT THAT SHE WAS ON Tranquilizers. THAT HE WAS SAVING FOR AFTER SHE WON.
Copilot is shit and btw offered no proof to any of its lies
One of many errors considering the mealy sycophant he has become.
Co-pilot is AI and reaches the same conclusions as the other platforms do.
===========================
this is from the AI platform Perplexity
How Russia Tried to Influence the 2016 U.S. Election
Overview
In 2016, Russia executed a multi-faceted campaign to influence the U.S. presidential election. The central objectives were to undermine public trust in the democratic process, damage Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton, and boost the prospects of Republican candidate Donald Trump. U.S. intelligence agencies unanimously concluded that this effort was ordered directly by Russian President Vladimir Putin .
Key Methods of Interference
1. Cyber Attacks and Hacking
GRU Operatives Involved: Russian military intelligence officers (GRU) orchestrated cyberattacks targeting organizations and individuals connected to the Clinton campaign, the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) .
Phishing Campaigns: Russian agents sent spear-phishing emails to Clinton campaign staff, gaining access to tens of thousands of emails from campaign chairman John Podesta and others .
Data Leaks: Hacked materials were released via online identities such as Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks, and were promoted through WikiLeaks. This resulted in negative media cycles for Clinton throughout the campaign .
2. Social Media Manipulation and Disinformation
Internet Research Agency (IRA): An operation run largely out of St. Petersburg, IRA created thousands of counterfeit social media accounts pretending to be American activists. These accounts promoted divisive topics, amplified radical voices, organized rallies, and targeted swing states .
Propaganda and False News: Russian-controlled media and "troll farms" spread fabricated stories and disinformation. The content was aimed at discrediting Clinton, inflaming social tensions, and promoting Trump-friendly narratives .
Targeted Social Media Ads: Paid advertisements and coordinated hashtag campaigns (#Hillary4Prison, #TrumpTrain) were used to maximize reach and impact among U.S. voters .
3. Election Infrastructure Probing
Russian operatives probed state election systems and at least in a few cases gained access to restricted elements of state voter databases. While there is no evidence that actual votes were altered, these intrusions increased public concern about the integrity of the voting process .
4. Overt and Covert Contacts
Russian officials and intermediaries sought to contact and influence associates of the Trump campaign. Multiple outreach attempts reportedly offered business opportunities or damaging information about Clinton .
Strategic Goals
Undermine Faith in Democracy: Russia's efforts were designed to damage confidence in U.S. electoral institutions and sow discord among the American electorate .
Harm Clinton, Help Trump: Russian influence campaigns had a clear preference for Trump, and worked to denigrate Clinton through negative messaging and the release of stolen data .
U.S. Intelligence and Investigations
Bipartisan Reports: Investigations by the intelligence community and the Senate Intelligence Committee both concluded that Russia conducted a "sophisticated and aggressive campaign" intended to help Trump and harm Clinton .
Special Counsel Investigation: The Mueller Report identified two primary operations: a social media campaign by the IRA and a cyber intrusion campaign by Russian intelligence .
Conclusion
Russia’s interference in the 2016 U.S. election combined aggressive cyber operations, social media manipulation, disinformation, and outreach to campaign officials. These efforts were comprehensive, well-funded, and ultimately aimed to erode confidence in U.S. democracy while favoring one candidate over another .
actually all the AI platforms contain links, they just didnt transfer when I copied and pasted the content.
That's no more than a rumor flogged by the likes of Ms Gabbard ... someone should notify the SPCA for cruelty to squirrels.
None of that shit is true and it runs counter to what US and Dutch intelligence found.
Russian intelligence obtained damaging information about former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s health amid her 2016 presidential campaign — including evidence that she had “psycho-emotional problems” that were being treated with severe sedatives — but Vladimir Putin chose not to release it before that year’s election because he thought the Democrat would win.
The astounding revelations were contained in a Sept. 18, 2020, House Intelligence Committee report that reviewed Russia’s influence on the 2016 contest and was declassified and made public Wednesday by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard.
Putin kept claims Hillary Clinton had physical, ‘psycho-emotional’ problems under wraps because he thought she would win 2016 election: Gabbard
Pro tip : We dont believe Tulsi Gabbard about anything.
You can get out of that rabbit hole if you try.
Pro tip: You believed the Russia hoax and promoted it on this site for over a year.
You also believed the fine people lie.
You also believed that Joe Bident was mentally fit and defended him on this site.
You also believed Comey ran a fair investigation of Hillary Clinton.
So, I don't expect you to believe the Director of National Intelligence.
Is that directed to the Mueller team?
Any time you want to debate "fine people" I am here waiting. I have written more about the Unite The Right rally and Trumps response to it than anyone on this site.
We did that John.
If you recall I submitted the Snopes Fact Check (a left wing site btw):
"In a news conference after the rally protesting the planned removal of a Confederate statue, Trump did say there were "very fine people on both sides," referring to the protesters and the counterprotesters. He said in the same statement he wasn't talking about neo-Nazis and white nationalists, who he said should be "condemned totally."
No, Trump Did Not Call Neo-Nazis and White Supremacists 'Very Fine People' | Snopes.com
After that you were down for the count!
Its a seven year old congressional report that was finally allowed to be released
Putin protected Hilllary and did not release the really damning DNC emails about her mental problems.
I know it. You would think that nothing could be found on it after that.
I thought he could easily win. I knew he was a moderate.
But in the end, I got something far better.
I'm not all that anxious today to start a big blow up about this, but I will briefly quote one fact check
The very fine people remark was not immediately followed by " I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists —" .
From the gitgo Trump was searching for a way to appeal to his base. Virtually the first words out of his mouth on that Saturday were that the violence came from all sides. In other words it wasnt the Nazis fault alone. He could have said that there was a white supremacist rally and things got out of hand and violence broke out, but his initial statements didnt even mention that it was a white supremacist rally. Why not?
I'll bet you're not.
The very fine people remark was not immediately followed by " I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists —"
It was in the very same original speech.
It's very interesting. Russia had a Clinton campaign email discussing the Clinton plan to create a link Trump and Russia to distract from her email problem, (which our intelligence also knew) in the summer of 2016. Given Putin's refusal to make the really damning stuff about Clinton public, it really calls into question what Putin's motivations were.
And yet somehow, despite such plain language, many progressives think Trump called neo-nazis very fine people. Truly astounding.
You're never going to win this argument because just like Jan 6th, you dont know enough about it.
========================
copilot
two or three days later
No good John. You can't deny he clarified it right from the get-go.
But thanks for proving that copilot is as leftwing as Google.
IT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL SPEECH!
They could care less what the documents say. it goes against their, now debunked, narrative. That's why they keep using AI. It's based on what bs was reported instead of what actually happened.
You mean...
Yes, the House Committee Chairman confirmed it. Funny how the left-wing media can't find that.
We needed an investigative journalist to simply report on a basic story.
just like Jan 6th, you dont know what you are talking about
Monday July 17, 2017
Trump : "Excuse me, excuse me. They didn’t put themselves -- and you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides. You had people in that group. Excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name."
Reporter : "George Washington and Robert E. Lee are not the same."
Trump : "George Washington was a slave owner. Was George Washington a slave owner? So will George Washington now lose his status? Are we going to take down -- excuse me, are we going to take down statues to George Washington? How about Thomas Jefferson? What do you think of Thomas Jefferson? You like him?"
Reporter : "I do love Thomas Jefferson."
Trump : "Okay, good. Are we going to take down the statue? Because he was a major slave owner. Now, are we going to take down his statue?
"So you know what, it’s fine. You’re changing history. You’re changing culture. And you had people -- and I’m not talking about the neo-Nazis and the white nationalists -- because they should be condemned totally. But you had many people in that group other than neo-Nazis and white nationalists. Okay? And the press has treated them absolutely unfairly.
PolitiFact | In Context: Donald Trump’s ‘very fine people on both sides’ remarks (transcript)
The entire transcript is even worse for trump in its totality but I want to keep this to a reasonable length.
First of all there were no fine people on both sides, this was a white supremacist rally from the start. The president of the United States should have known that or found out about it before he opened his mouth
So many on the left seem to have stopped reading before they got to that part. And they still claim it today that Trump meant there are very fine white nationalists.
So it took 48 hours for Trump to specifically condemn the neo Nazis
Oh, they're all in "cover your ass" mode trying to figure out how they can survive pushing so much opinion
The problem journalism is dead. They don't "report" a damn thing any more. They give one sided opinion of what is going on. They've all relegated themselves to the equivalent of pathetic opinionated bloggers.
Now we have the AI piece. The only information that is going to be spit out by AI is the same nonsense from the bloggers. And they'll stick to that and ignore the actual documented actions.
That can obviously mean he was talking about the counter protesters. There were some very bad in the group of people not wanting to take the statue down and also some fine people that want to keep those statues up. Of course many on the left can't accept the fact that anyone not wanting to take the statues down must be racist. That just goes with the "if they don't agree with me they must be racist" narrative many on the left have been trying to sell for years in order for people ti bend to their will. Luckily that is being seen for what it is more an more.
Nope. There is no evidence of an actual protest about the Lee statue on that Saturday. The "good people" of Charlottesville knew it was a shit show and didnt show up. The rally was a white supremacist rally period. Trump should have known that before he opened his mouth.
No John, the media had him denouncing Nazis just about every day at that time.
Don't you remember?
It is pointless to "debate" you because you know very little about it.
[✘]
You'll lose.
You dont know what you are talking about.
There were no "fine people" on the white supremacists side that saturday. It never happened. Trump was too lazy to find out what was going on.
Sadly many MAGA conservatives will tell you that those folk flying confederate flags alongside the swastika flags are "fine people" and that the confederacy was misunderstood and that slave owners took good care of their slaves and the civil war wasn't really about slavery at all, it was just about States rights (yeah, the right to own slaves) and that all those confederate generals were great Noble commanders of the South and should be memorialized and celebrated in large bronzes in parks and public spaces throughout the South. It's all bullshit of course, and anyone with more than half a brain can see that by the very act of flying the confederate flags and protecting memorials to confederate generals they reveal what kind of people they really are, and "fine" would not be the adjective used. "Bigoted", "ignorant", "racist", those would be 'fine' to use to describe those on the 'protest the removal of a confederate statue' side. But certainly not 'fine' as to mean "high quality" as they represent the very lowest common denominator when it comes to Americans.
Even if one were to theoretically concede that there may be "fine people" who would protest the removal of a statue, they werent there that day. All the "fine people" stayed home.
Are you, by any chance, referring to this Marco Rubio?
Marco Rubio escalated his slate of recent attacks on Donald Trump's looks Sunday, telling supporters at an event Sunday night that Trump can't be trusted because he has "small hands."
He was responding to Trump's habit of calling him "Little Marco." And while Rubio freely admitted he's the shorter one of the two, he said he was baffled by the size of Trump's hands.
"He's like 6'2'' which is why I don't understand why his hands are the size of someone who is 5'2". Have you seen his hands?" Rubio said during a rally in Roanoke, Virgina. "You know what they say about men with small hands? You can't trust them. You can't trust them."
We are now learning that "17 intelligence agencies" NEVER said that Trump was colluding with Russia.
As a matter of fact, they said just the opposite. Brennan asked Obama what he wanted to do and now we know. Obama likely has immunity but there is a lot of exposure for Brennan who lied to congress twice and admitted it and Clapper how told a whopper and said it was the least offensive answer and Comey who suffered from about 245 lapses of amnesia. It should be interesting.
The question is how far Bondi wants to go with it?
She should avoid heights lest the 'good' squirrels mistake her for a survivable allergy and not a deadly parking lot attendee.
The question is how far Bondi wants to go with it?
She'll do whatever Trump tells her to do!
(But you probably already knew that, eh?)
There is always the matter of what can be proven and these days even if it can, the venue might negate the effort.
There is the bright side of making those who tied up Trump for about 2 years having to pay legal fees.
What? WoW! That is big news! Or would be if it had been reported that 17 intelligence agencies said Trump "colluded with Russia".
Instead, all that's left to see here is a massive dumb as fuck straw man.
Even Hillary didn't claim the 17 intelligence agencies were claiming collusion.
"We have 17 intelligence agencies, civilian and military, who have all concluded that these espionage attacks, these cyberattacks, come from the highest levels of the Kremlin, and they are designed to influence our election." - Hillary Clinton October 2016
Every word she said was proved true.
Here was the 17 agencies joint statement:
"The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities."
Every word of their statement was proved true.
So, conservatives will of course try and make hay out of this because you can't build a straw man without hay, but it will mean the same as every other pointless moronic straw man they create, which is less than nothing which is about the same as their understanding of how Russia did in fact interfere in the 2016 election. They didn't hack voting machines (another of their massive straw men) and there is no direct evidence of collusion, though we know team Trump was "eager" for any Russian assistance as the Republican Senate led investigation confirmed. But what they did was criminal interference in our elections and nearly a dozen Russian operatives were sent to jail for their part in the hacking.
Nope. They did not say 'the opposite' which would have been "Trump did not collude with Russia!". They simply never claimed he was colluding and pointed out that there was no hard evidence of collusion, which of course is why they didn't make that claim and neither did the administration.
Do conservatives ever get tired of lying all to defend one of the most repugnant men on the planet?
They are playing a semantic game that is obvious to everyone with a brain.
I support the USA leading the charge in AI. Absolutely. This is the next Techno-Economic Paradigm. It has worldwide impact and basically changes everything. It would be entirely irresponsible for the USA to NOT try to be the best.
But being the best also involves being responsible. The best AI is not necessarily the most powerful AI, but rather one that addresses all the relevant dimensions. That includes security, correctness, psychological, and environmental concerns, etc. Trump, of course, is an irresponsible psychopath who does not care about (and likely does not understand, except at the most superficial level) factors other than those that allow him to get a quick win that he can spin as part of his perpetual self-aggrandizement.
I am fully on board with the concept of the USA being the leader in AI. I hope that the electorate has learned enough from the Trump disaster to elect future PotUS' whose support (correctly) for major goals such as this is not poisoned by the narcissism of a psychopath.
I think you told me that before.
I am fully on board with the concept of the USA being the leader in AI.
I think we are in total agreement.
Btw: Welcome to the news.
What is your opinion on Trump ? Is TiG accurate ? If you feel not, please elaborate.
I know I wouldn't let him babysit my teenage daughter, cause the orange marauder has proven to be the 'on slaughter' as he continues to lead US down the golden toilet as we become a shithole country, as he Makes America Sewer Grate Again!
He is incessantly flushing that toilet so as to overwhelm and distract to him being a pedophile act, gone wild on some poor child, and even his maga base knows thats a disgrace even they refuse to forgive, and as his torrent release of shit from that swamp he loved to drain to find the worst of the worst to install in his medicinal cabinet with the one way mirrored medical cabinet, he can't even face the disgrace in the mirror, as his face has grown to fit the disgrace he is, and even the gullible herds won't allow the flushing of 'those' turds....
A I is awesome and dangerous as hell be using it to manipulate the hate that has built what sure as fck ain't made America great
This should be obvious to everyone, yet we still have people blindly supporting this psychopath.
It's been told ad nauseam.
I dont think its blind, its intentional
sometimes, no doubt
The same as my opinion of Gen George Patton. If you know the history of WWII, you may recall that he said and did things that constantly drew bad press and made trouble for his superiors like IKE. In case you may not know Patton regarded what we now call PTS as cowardice. He famously slapped a soldier apparently suffering from it. Many would have liked to get rid of Patton, but IKE and others stuck their necks out for him because they firmly believed that Patton was essential to winning the war.
Is TiG accurate ?
No. I believe some people would rather have a more civil leader, even at the expense of an effective one. I happen to think TiG doesn't like the man, but more importantly, I don't think TiG likes the ideology either, which is where he and I differ. I think Trump was exactly what was needed in the terrible era of the left.
The problem with your analogy is that almost all Americans wanted the US to defeat the Nazis. It was a unanimous desire.
All Americans do not want Trump. Not even close.
Not to parse hairs, but that's not exactly true.
Sadly, just like back then, we have a segment of America that embraces Trump and his barely disguised Christo-fascism.
There were a lot less of them back in the 1930's so it was an almost unanimous desire, but there was still that segment of the American people who choose to side with the dictators. Perhaps they're just too stupid to think for themselves so they just jump on the bandwagon that tickles their ears and tells them they're super special and better than anyone else which is what those bigots like to hear.
That is the typical bullshit from Trump supporters. This is not about personal like or dislike of Trump. My comments do not deal with personal factors such as come-over, weight, moral failures, etc. which is what you would expect from someone who merely dislikes Trump. My comments are ALWAYS about what Trump does, says, and the underlying plausible reasons for why he acts and speaks as he does. My comments deal with his character, demeanor, integrity, intelligence, etc. because these factors shape his words and deeds.
Trump is, without question, a horrible choice for PotUS. He is irresponsible and dangerous for this nation. Yet his supporters somehow are blind to this and somehow think that the criticism of Trump is based on mere dislike of the individual.
Sorry, but that sure as HELL sounds like personal dislike to me..................and probably several others.
This bullshit again? Please remind readers and members of how you make that determination. I understand you may think that everyone agrees with you but that just isn't the case.
Totally missed the point ... happens waaaaay too often to give benefit of the doubt. Real simple, Jim: my criticism of Trump is based on his words and deeds, not the fact that I dislike him.
You need me to yet again explain why Trump is irresponsible and dangerous? Would detailing this one more time make a difference? No. So you will just have to wait until I next find it appropriate to enumerate the irresponsible acts of Trump and why he is dangerous to this nation.
Here, however, is one fundamental notion you should realize. Trump, unlike other PotUS', has no ethical, legal, or moral concerns. He will do whatever he pleases as long as he can get away with it. Trump is demonstrating just how powerful the presidency can be when it is held by the equivalent of a 5th grade mentality. Or do you think it is great that the PotUS can extort private enterprises such as universities and law-firms (just one recent example) or run out responsible officials to replace them with incompetent sycophants?
If you dislike his words and deeds, what's left? Nothing. I don't remember any positive output by you but, perhaps I missed something.
In other words, today, you don't know. I will wait for your unbiased "enumeration" at that time. Until then, look deep cuz it sure sounds and reads like you dislike him to me...............and I am sure I am NOT alone on this.
Odd that you are confused by this. I care about his words and deeds as PotUS. For example, I do not care if he is a serial adulterer any more than I care about any other serial adulterer. I do, however, care that he engages in unconstitutional, unlawful, immoral, unethical, dishonest, etc. acts as PotUS.
This ⇡ is a perfect example of taunting. FYI.
[✘]
You know damn well that I not only know why Trump is both irresponsible and dangerous but that I have enumerated this many times on this forum. So you claiming that I do not know after I have told you why I am not going to yet again enumerate on demand is just taunting. Further, you even ignored the fact that I did indeed give you an example of why Trump is irresponsible and dangerous. And even with that you put forth your taunt of "you don't know".
You have no argument, just feeble taunts and platitudes.
Further, after I give you the benefit of the doubt and clearly explain that my criticism of Trump is not based on personal dislike but rather based on his words and deeds as PotUS (because that is what affects us all), you fail to acknowledge that. In super simple terms, I of course dislike Trump (who could like that psychopath?), but my criticism is on what he is saying and doing. Pay attention.
For anyone who lived in this country the past 4 years, that seems to be a silly idea.
Just as almost all Americans want to defeat radicalism and indoctrination.
Me
Sure picked a hell of a way to show it. You don't even realize that Trump is all about establishing the radical ideals of the Unitary Executive theory and indoctrinating people to hate and be suspicious of others. Fuck Trump. His ideals are aligned directly against the moral foundation of this country. He tries to break the CotUS at every chance that avails itself. He deals in bad faith and lies and is corrupt absolutely.
Your commentary is indicative of support for the breaking of the laws, the Constitution, and the rending of the very fabric of this nation.
Good Job /s
Oh, I didn't know that. Is that what they are teaching at the University?
His ideals are aligned directly against the moral foundation of this country.
I thought the country was founded as a sovereign nation based on freedom of speech & enterprise.
Your commentary is indicative of support for the breaking of the laws, the Constitution, and the rending of the very fabric of this nation.
Actually, I want to break the radical left's hold on our institutions, which began gradually & silently in the late 60s.
I think that you do know exactly what the Trump administration is doing and you are all for it. They don't have to teach it at the university, Trump gets his mindless plebes to post articles by authors with pornstar names that manufacture and jin up stories that would not get past a fifth grade fact checker. Then the plebes have to wash their keyboards.
It was. That is why everybody is so pissed that Trump is turning it into Russia 2.0.
Example of commentary displaying a loss of connection with reality.
Oh, and here I thought it was the followers of the great divider who came in and are always over the line both in word and deed. Two dozen were killed in the 2020 riots that the deep state sanctioned. Jewish students were attacked not long ago at US universities. Fentanyl, traffickers and terrorists were among the unvetted 20 million let into the country. And your response in to try and vilify decent people.
It was. That is why everybody is so pissed that Trump is turning it into Russia 2.0.
Everybody isn't pissed. Just the people who almost turned the country into the Soviet Union 2.0.
Example of commentary displaying a loss of connection with reality.
An example of honest commentary. There was a time when we trusted our institutions. A district judge who had been overruled by the Supreme Court would have felt ashamed. Now they wear it like a badge of honor and giggle & say: "oh look, I tied up the Trump agenda for months."
What is it that you are 'seeing' that makes you think this nation was anywhere near a command economy with authoritarian rule? And who are these mysterious people who ostensibly were engaging in this attempt?
Seems to me you should be concerned about Trump surrounding himself with sycophants, removing inspectors general, removing those who even seem to oppose him (e.g. DoJ employees who worked on his indictments), breaking the law, violating the CotUS, forcing private enterprises to do his bidding via extortion, attempting to control the Fed, etc.
That is the kind of shit that the 'strongmen' Trump admires have done in the past. That is the recipe for building authoritarian rule.
You voted up a thinly veiled personal attack on me. Now you want to give us a definition of Communism.
All I want to hear from you is an explanation of that which helped get the man you hate elected:
Two dozen were killed in the 2020 riots that the deep state sanctioned. Jewish students were attacked not long ago at US universities. Fentanyl, traffickers and terrorists were among the unvetted 20 million let into the country.
[deleted,] [✘] who are [✘] these people that believe Trump is trying to turn the US into Russia 2.0?
In addition, can you give some examples of exactly what he is doing, documented and proven as fact, to make this country Russia?
It has not been proven but I heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend who heard it from a cousins mother that someone that passed Trump from only 30 feet away that Trump called his driver comrade. Not definitive proof That Trump wants to make the US Russia but pretty close. S/
I voted up the (correct) observation that your comments suggest you are all in for whatever Trump does.
I asked you:
You deflected.
More of the same feeble retort pretending that objection to Trump is mere personal hatred and NOT based on cause ... NOT based on what the man does and says.
Well, Vic, my comments ALWAYS are based on what Trump does and says. He is (thanks to people like you) the PotUS and his words and deeds matter — especially when they cause harm.
If Trump were not PotUS, I would care as much about him as I do any other corrupt psychopath.
So explain to us all how you give Trump a pass on all this ⇣ yet rail on people like Fauci based on connecting dots that are a mile away:
So do all the leaders of all the American large cap tech companies!
(AKA "The Magnificent Seven")
In breaking news : its being reported that Pro wrestler Hulk Hogan has died at 71 .
Good riddance to bad trash.
Now there's a name that brings back memories!
At this point any reporting about Trump by a Rupert Murdoch publication cannot be trusted. Murdoch has a history of abusing the independence of the fourth estate for his own self-serving purposes.
Trump's techno gimmicks are not going to help Republicans for the Midterms. Trump needs to pivot to reshoring jobs ASAP. The One Big Beautiful Bill killed all the red meat issues. How many times do Republicans need to shoot dead horses? Tariffs and trade deals have run their course. Everyone is waiting for the other shoe to drop. Deportations are well underway and the protests have proven ineffectual. The geopolitical wins haven't gotten the US out of any quagmires; we're still stuck in Ukraine and Gaza. Relitigating past elections does nothing but pound heads on walls. Fluff and distractions won't hold off Democrats' teeth and claws; the Democratic establishment can't even control their party now. The only meaningful thing to do now is pivot to reshoring jobs. That was one of Trump's campaign promises, too.
Let's see some results.
Nobody’s ever seen anything like it before!