• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

A Deeply Fractured US

Status
Not open for further replies.
Special Counsel Jack Smith has just filed a new superseding indictment against Donald Trump in the District of Columbia federal criminal prosecution around Jan 6th and the transition of power. This new indictment replaces the old one, lays the same charges, and was approved by a new Grand Jury based on a more limited set of evidence responsive to the SCOTUS “official acts” immunity ruling. This new indictment will allow that prosecution to resume with greater confidence that it will withstand challenges based on presidential official acts immunity.

 
And news cycle changed again lol
Not really, it’s the same charges, but the prosecution is on the ball in proofing the underlying indictment from challenge by seeking it afresh with a new grand jury. I don’t see much happening with this until into 2025.

Also, just yesterday prosecutors have filed an appeal with the 11th Circuit against the dismissal of the classified documents prosecution on the grounds that the special counsel was unlawfully appointed. Judge Cannon’s decision to dismiss on those grounds doesn’t have a hope of standing on appeal.
 
Not really, it’s the same charges, but the prosecution is on the ball in proofing the underlying indictment from challenge by seeking it afresh with a new grand jury. I don’t see much happening with this until into 2025.

Also, just yesterday prosecutors have filed an appeal with the 11th Circuit against the dismissal of the classified documents prosecution on the grounds that the special counsel was unlawfully appointed. Judge Cannon’s decision to dismiss on those grounds doesn’t have a hope of standing on appeal.
I meant that whatever was in the news today has now changed to this.
 
Interesting starting statement by Ambassador Cohen:
U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Cohen says Canadians are consuming too much American news, which he believes is “unhealthy” because of American legacy media’s polarizing and partisan nature.

He added that it’s come at the expense of Canadians consuming news about their own country’s politics.


Luckily the Federal government devised a plan to ensure Canadians had greater access to a myriad of Canadian news outlets, to get their information from…
 
Interesting starting statement by Ambassador Cohen:



Luckily the Federal government devised a plan to ensure Canadians had greater access to a myriad of Canadian news outlets, to get their information from…
I did not know you were a comedian as well - damn you are talented. ;)
 






All of these articles were all just released, around the exact same time, from multiple news organizations (some of whom claim to be competitors)

Even our own Globe & Mail copied and pasted the original CNN article





The Hill, so far, is the only news outlet that hasn't copied and pasted the article verbatim...but more or less used the other article as a concrete model to follow.



What are the odds that all these news organizations would release the same article, with the same title, exact same wording, etc etc at the same time?
 
Even our own Globe & Mail copied and pasted the original CNN article
No. They took the Reuters article.

What are the odds that all these news organizations would release the same article, with the same title, exact same wording, etc etc at the same time?
Given that many news agencies procure stories from Reuters, it is not an improbable occurrence. Certainly, it is less concerning than some of what can be seen quoted in the article.
 
No. They took the Reuters article.


Given that many news agencies procure stories from Reuters, it is not an improbable occurrence. Certainly, it is less concerning than some of what can be seen quoted in the article.
Agreed. One of the key things I try to keep in mind when I read any political news articles is to read anything quoted with a grain of salt.

Context matters.

(I'm not making excuses for what was said, I'm just saying the obvious we all know...context matters)


As for the media outlets all releasing the same article, copied & pasted from Reuters (thank you for the correction) at around the same time...true, it's not improbable.

Especially if they are all using the same article, written by the same news organization...but does that cause anybody else to wanna raise an eyebrow?

The same title. The same article. All released by a variety of different news organizations at roughly the same time. Just copying and pasting an article written by a competitor...

(I want to trust the media. I really really do. But man, it's that kinda stuff that just reminds me 'Nooppeee')
 
No surprise he would say that in an interview. It’s consistent with who he is. To the extent he thinks he can get away with it, he’ll subordinate the law to his own personal desires or convenience. Nothing new there. Sucks to be his lawyer though; last thing you need is your client going on national TV and saying something like this about the crimes you’re trying to defend him again.
 
No surprise he would say that in an interview. It’s consistent with who he is. To the extent he thinks he can get away with it, he’ll subordinate the law to his own personal desires or convenience. Nothing new there. Sucks to be his lawyer though; last thing you need is your client going on national TV and saying something like this about the crimes you’re trying to defend him again.
I’d say “that’s why they get paid the big bucks” but given Trump’s history of stiffing the bill…. :ROFLMAO:
 
No, it’s common practice for news outlets to get stories from a wire service and post them verbatim. No conspiracy.
I’ll add that this time I haven’t seen it in the news articles listed, but often the outlets will say “from the Canadian Press” or “from Reuters” to distinguish that it was essentially a repost of their source.
 
I’ll add that this time I haven’t seen it in the news articles listed, but often the outlets will say “from the Canadian Press” or “from Reuters” to distinguish that it was essentially a repost of their source.

If an article is from a news service and is printed complete, the service along with the author (if identified) is indicated in the byline. This is the article as from the G&M site.

1725384160030.png


From the Globe and Mail Code of Conduct.

Attribution​

  • It is unacceptable to represent another person’s work as your own. Excerpts from other people’s prose must be attributed so as to avoid even a suspicion of copying. Although it is sometimes reasonable to adopt a few words without attribution (in a technical definition, for example), careful judgment is required. When in doubt, consult a senior editor.
  • Any extensive unacknowledged use of another’s words, structure or ideas may constitute plagiarism. Exception: Background and technical information from previously published Globe staff and news-service items may be recycled, verbatim or otherwise, without credit, although you should not borrow someone’s distinctive prose style in doing so.
  • Information from another publication must be checked or credited before it is used. This does not apply to material supplied by news services to which proper credit is given. When in doubt about information from any source, always double-check.
  • Although verified facts need no attribution, The Globe and Mail identifies sources of less-than-obviously-factual information in most circumstances.
  • In cases of leaked documents, we have an obligation to make every reasonable effort to confirm the veracity of the document.
 
JD Vance seems to enjoy stepping in it.

One thing that wasn’t noted is that the Heritage Institute is financially supported by - drum roll please - Viktor Orbán, PM of Hungary, (who pretty much is Putin’s lapdog these days, and the end financier of it, using Orbán to get around sanctions)
 
Anyone wondering why American politics is getting so divisive? Follow the money…

Putin is a lot smarter than folks give him credit for in way to divide the West.
He also knows how to excite the useful idiots … And not just the easy useful idiots who will preach “do your own research” while dismissing established media and simultaneously accepting truthy-sounding anonymous blogs as legitimate primary sources.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top