SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the where's-a-muckraker-when-you-need-one? dept.
Okay, so, I wasn't going to submit these here because I've really had quite enough of politics for the year but it seems the mainstream media are having an absolute blackout on anything critical of Hillary, to the point of CNN has both coincidentally lost a sitting congressman's satellite feed immediately after mentioning wikileaks and tried to tell their viewers that even reading the wikileaks emails is illegal.
These two videos by Project Veritas Action, apparently with more to come, are the result of a year or so of actual investigative journalism and deserve coverage somewhere though. I don't personally care at all if you like Hillary or not but it's always better to know the truth than to stick your head in the sand, so here they are.
The first part in the series is titled Clinton Campaign and DNC Incite Violence at Trump Rallies. It basically shows precisely what it says it does. Hidden cameras capture Scott Foval of Americans United for Change not so much admitting as bragging that they have operatives in numerous major cities that are actually trained in how best to incite violence at Trump rallies.
The second part of the series is again aptly titled Mass Voter Fraud. In this video Scott Foval is again captured going into minute detail on how not only go commit mass voter fraud but how to get away with it.
Scott Foval and Robert Creamer (also in the videos) are currently unemployed as a result of these videos. Whether Mrs. Clinton should be as well, that's for you to decide.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20 2016, @11:46AM
The Soviet newpaper Pravda ("Truth") was eventually used by many Russians as a way to obtain a good idea of the truth of a reported account by believing an opposing viewpoint to the one presented in Pravda.
It's much the same in the USA now for the plebs and the mainstream media: almost every major point the mainstream media has been pushing recently is blatantly false. The shorthand way to adopt a generally accurate view of such subjects is to generally take the opposite view of a point being pushed hard by US media.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by weeds on Thursday October 20 2016, @12:09PM
AC: Do you really think there is an analogy there?
"Pravda was the official newspaper of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. The Pravda paper is today run by the Communist Party of the Russian Federation" - thanks Wikipedia.
The US media is liberal, but that's a far cry from being run by the democratic party. Take a look at the BBC or the CBC, is it suddenly clear to you that the US media has some huge bias? I guess the US liberal party runs those too.
The US media is motivated by one thing - getting eyes on. The person/event/incident that will get the most eyes, gets the front page and the headlines. Looking at the candidates, it's easy to see who's going to get the press and that it's not likely to be flattering.
Get money out of politics! [mayday.us]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20 2016, @12:19PM
Yes, obviously, which is why I made the comparison.
I thank you for your service, in keeping with the tradition of not RTFS, but your assertion appears to be contradicted by said media refusing to mention what looks like a critical election story uncovered by old-school investigative journalism which has drawn 5 million recorded viewers [youtube.com] in two days, and 2.7 million in one [youtube.com], with more of the story promised to come.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by weeds on Thursday October 20 2016, @01:06PM
For sure, I didn't watch the video. My comment was about media, not the content of the video.
First video - "Rigging the Election" would better be called "Dirty Tricks in line at the Trump Rallies." Clearly dirty tricks. I'm not going to get on board with, "Getting Trump supporters to throw a punch in line at a rally" = "rigging the election." It's despicable, I don't condone it.
Second video - They describe a method to register illegal voters and how to bus in voters to vote in place of people who have moved. That is voter fraud alright. No one can deny that. And those bastards need to go to jail.
Get money out of politics! [mayday.us]
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday October 20 2016, @01:43PM
Of course they'll cheat. I wonder why they bother trying to hide it anymore. They've already demonstrated that Hillary is above the law. She can do whatever she likes and the establishment will never prosecute her. They've really enjoyed rubbing our noses in that fact, so I don't see why they don't also steal the election openly and rub our noses in that, too. I am sure they'd have great fun drinking their cognac on their balconies while the powerless masses gnash their teeth in the gutters below.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Thursday October 20 2016, @06:12PM
No one can deny that. And those bastards need to go to jail.
Which gets directly to the point. The so called media will first attempt to simply not speak it, but if that fails and the story breaks through they will deny that any serious crime happened, certainly nothing jailworthy. Because they must, at all cost, maintain their Narrative that there is no 'real' election fraud and that all discussion of it is undermining trust in our government.
They are 'too big to jail.'
It started when Nixon was weak and decided 'it would be too painful' to contest the outright fraud that put JFK in the Oval Office. It is now hard to find a historian who disputes that it happened. But once it was made clear that even if they got caught the Republicans would cuck out 'for the good of the Republic' and allow the cheating to go unchallenged it has grown ever worse every cycle. As the lying bastards in the media wing of Democrat Party insist that it is UnAmerican to want to prevent fraud it grows ever worse. Senator Franken's final margin of victory was smaller than the number of convictions for election fraud. Ponder that statement.
(Score: 2) by weeds on Friday October 21 2016, @02:19PM
After reading and participating, I come to this conclusion:
Neither side is going to scream too much about the other side since they both do it. "kettle, meet pot."
The videos have been out long enough for the republicans to have jumped all over them. They could have commercials running, they could have brought it up in the debate... they didn't.
We, so much to the joy of "they", spend our time bickering about which side is worse and miss the real truth that the system is broken, not rigged, broken.
Each side does it's best to take advantage of those breaks.
Get money out of politics! [mayday.us]
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Friday October 21 2016, @03:03PM
It is worse than even that now. Back when Nixon was surrendering 'for the good of the country' there was still a hint of a two party system. There is only now one 'side', the UniParty. It is like the Harlem Globetrotters, the Democrats are the Globetrotters and the Republicans are the Washington Generals. They pretend to be two parties, they go out on the field and play a sham game for the amusement of the audience but the Generals know that a) the audience is there to watch the Globetrotters, b) the audience expects the Globetrotters to win and c) it doesn't really matter since their paycheck says "Globetrotters, Inc" on it too. Besides, what would they DO if they actually won? The Republicans now look to the exact same 'sunny uplands of history' as the Democrats. Even 99% of the Conservatives only want to slow the trip down because of the transition costs; but most of the 'hills they would die on' are hills the Progressives took from their fathers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20 2016, @08:17PM
You put a lot of stock in videos from someone known for fraud. I'll reserve opinion until after I see the unedited video.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20 2016, @01:40PM
Look up the BCCI scandal and remember that few people were ever charged and the money and power was left untouched. It's not that the US liberal party controls them, it's that they control the Democratic Party and the BBC and CBC and so on, so they get to define what liberals and progressives are allowed to believe. Leftist ideas like Transgenderism and Islamophobia are literally invented in a board room somewhere and pushed out on all controlled channels simultaneously when they come to a consensus to adopt the platform.
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Thursday October 20 2016, @04:04PM
Your tinfoil hat may be on too tight.
I have read somewhere that if you want ideas to spread, you have to do it at the grass-roots first. When a new idea pops up in the Mainstream Media, It may look like a coordinated plot. But it may actually mean that fact-checking was happening with local people.
I specifically object to the notion that transgenderism is a leftist idea. I know of several transgendered people brought up in conservative families. They had to decide that life was more important than good relations with their family. Being transgendered is not something you choose.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday October 20 2016, @05:05PM
Nice tangent there. He wasn't talking about being a tranny, he was talking about how the left has taken up championing them as special snowflakes who are oppressed by everyone who doesn't actively campaign for them.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday October 20 2016, @06:07PM
I used that term, "special snowflake" at work last night, in a mixed crowd of male, female, black, white, and Mexican. Amazingly, most of them had never heard the term. Their reactions were - interesting. Special snowflakes. It seemed to have slightly different connotations for black people, but they all got a kick out of it.
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Thursday October 20 2016, @09:16PM
Many people on the right appear to want to deny the existence of trans people. I have seen trans people called special snowflakes [www.therebel.media] or similar just for wanting to be gendered properly.
- Bathroom Bills: Dehumanization and Control (Gender Analysis 06) [genderanalysis.net]
By Zinnia Jones, bold in original.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday October 20 2016, @09:40PM
Trannys are by definition not gendered properly. And no, it's not to dehumanize them. It's to keep the vast majority of the other users of the bathroom from having to be freaked out by a weirdo being around them while they're especially vulnerable.
Yes, I'm sure they have to piss the same as I do. Let them find a one-holer. That way they might get a scowl for being in the wrong bathroom but nobody is really going to care and the 99% of us who aren't confused about what gender we are can take a shit in peace.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Thursday October 20 2016, @11:21PM
I see I read GP correctly :)
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday October 21 2016, @12:15AM
Apparently not if you're still missing the point. 99% of the population should not be inconvenienced to accommodate an extreme minority that have affirmatively chosen to be deviant.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 1) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Friday October 21 2016, @12:20AM
Just where do you think they were going pee before if became a hot-button issue?
They are not asking for special accommodation. They are asking to be left alone.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday October 21 2016, @12:26AM
No, they're asking to make the vast majority of the nation uncomfortable to accommodate their chosen weirdness.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Scruffy Beard 2 on Friday October 21 2016, @12:32AM
Trans people try to act invisible while using the washroom.
If they don't pass well, they are probably more nervous than the rest of the population.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 21 2016, @03:52AM
...and here's where your argument falls apart. Transgendered folks don't choose to be trans, we're born that way, and we aren't "deviant" by any stretch, or at least no moreso than anyone else.
I just want to go in, find a toilet, do my business, wash my hands, straighten my clothes, and leave, same as any other woman. I don't need anyone accosting me, or claiming I'm just there to spy/ogle, or something else equally ridiculous.
What's so difficult about that concept? The only real demands any one of us have can be summed up thus:
I'm just here to pee, so leave me the hell alone!
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Friday October 21 2016, @10:20AM
You apparently don't know what the word deviant means. You should look it up.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday October 20 2016, @11:30PM
I still say the recent fascination of the media with transgender issues grew out of a drunken bet between press hacks who thought they could get the whole world talking about it, in much the same way that L Ron Hubbard and his buddy bet they could invent a religion and created Scientology.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Thursday October 20 2016, @06:03PM
"that's a far cry from being run by the democratic party."
how sure are you of that statement? An interesting exercise would be to look up the family names of the people who own the liberal media (hearst, turner, etc) and try to untangle their involvement in the party. Many of us have often wondered who really calls the shots. But, all the shot calling is made in private. George Soros figures in there somewhere.
Who runs the DNC? Who really runs the RNC?
Watch those videos, and a man explains how the DNC can do things that are illegal for the DNC to do, with the application of just a little smoke and mirrors. Take those smoke and mirrors up a level, and start asking questions.
We constantly hear Hitlery harping on that "vast right wing conspiracy". People who have made a modest attempt to keep up with the news know that Hitlery is ass-deep in her own conspiracies. Unless they refuse to hear the truth due to partisan interests.
(Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Thursday October 20 2016, @09:04PM
Random fact: Soros is mentioned well over 100 times in the Podesta emails.
My rights don't end where your fear begins.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday October 20 2016, @03:23PM
That's not how I read outlets like the New York Times, actually. The point is not to find out the truth. The point is to find out what the Powers That Be want to be declared to be "The Truth". For example, the Times recently published an extended piece on how the Russian military is using new sneaky tactics, never mind that the US has done all of the things they are accusing Russia of doing. So now I know that I'm supposed to, as a citizen, fear Russia, which means that they're gearing up for a war with Russia under the future Clinton administration.
So it's not a waste, just make sure to interpret it as propaganda, not fact.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Thursday October 20 2016, @11:37PM
Why would they want a war with Russia? Is it because, once again, they're living on top of our oil? Or are they thinking of taking them down for all the BRICS impertinence? They've kind of neutered Brazil already, so Russia's up next kind of thing?
I'm glad you pointed it out, though, because i have been thinking that all the recent tension with Russia is rather invented and hollow.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Friday October 21 2016, @02:50AM
Some reasons the Powers That Be in the USA want war with Russia:
- They're allied with countries that are sitting on oil we want, such as Iran.
- They've been cutting in on our action, e.g. resisting our efforts of a Western takeover of Ukraine.
- They're unhappy that they never got that final Cold War showdown, because Gorbachev screwed the whole game up in 1989.
- They want to make sure all those military contractors get sagans of dollars thrown their direction, and they can't do that if there isn't a war on, and the War on Terror is winding down.
- Their ally in Syria, Bashar al Assad, makes it harder for Israel to commit the religiously-motivated genocide of the Palestinians they've always wanted.
These aren't exactly what I'd call good reasons, nor are they motivated by anything remotely resembling Truth, Justice, Humanitarian Concerns, or any of the usual excuses tossed around, of course, but they are exactly how Clinton's good friend Henry Kissinger thinks.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday October 20 2016, @11:41PM
I really doubt they're aiming at a war with Russia, though that may be the result. I *think* they just intend increased friction and tension.
OTOH, this is stuff coming out at the end of the campaign, so I wouldn't believe that it really indicates anything long-term.
That said, everyone seems to be assuming that things are a lot more unified than they seem to me to be. And those who are busy being horrified at DNC plans for election fraud seem complacent about the widely published plans of the Republicans to do the same, using different tools.
There's no good guy in this election cycle. Sanders *MAY* have been one, but it was clear before he announced his candidacy that he was the designated loser. (See, I think, superdelegates.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 20 2016, @04:07PM
That's kind of pushing a bias of its own though, no?
I mean, think of it this way: RT is basically the propaganda wing of the Russian Federation, and they run criticism of America all the time. Now, just because the reason they're doing that is to push their own anti-American viewpoint, doesn't mean the criticism isn't true. It just means you have to be a little more discerning about what's truth and what's a lie.