d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate >
Poll > Trump 2016 > Trump Vs Clinton
Prev1216921702171217221733169Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
  Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.
Member
Posts: 66,666
Joined: May 17 2005
Gold: 17,384.69
Jul 22 2018 10:46am
http://www.businessinsider.fr/us/us-global-standing-will-take-years-to-repair-from-trump-2018-7

Ill just let this here

A majority of Americans (61%) feel the US is less respected across the globe with Trump in the White House, according to an NBC News/SurveyMonkey poll released Wednesday.

This post was edited by Saucisson6000 on Jul 22 2018 10:51am
Member
Posts: 5,942
Joined: Apr 29 2018
Gold: Locked
Trader: Scammer
Warn: 10%
Jul 22 2018 10:56am
Quote (ThatAlex @ Jul 22 2018 12:40pm)
Did you watch the thing? He had a guilty smirk on the whole time. How he can sit there and say he has no bias but also say "No. No he won't. We'll stop it" , just doesn't pass the sniff test to me.

Even if the FBI has a ton of checks and balances in place to prevent the influences of personal bias, Strzok has damaged the perception and integrity of the FBI very greatly.

Look at another text he sent: "I want to believe the path you [Lisa Page] threw out for consideration in Andy’s [McCabe] office - that there’s no way he gets elected - but I’m afraid we can’t take that risk"

Maybe he was just trying to get into Lisa Page's pants and was over-selling his and the FBI's influence in the whole thing? Not discounting that. But I just don't see how there's any way he can check all his biases at the door, it's not in human nature to do that.



In the sake of fairness, a lot of these people are in some of the most stressful situations of their lives. Carter Page, Strzok, etc. So even if they are telling the truth, they could appear guilty just due to some underlying social anxiety. Some people handle it better than others.

That said, I'm no body language expert, but Page looks guilty as hell during this interview with Tapper lol.

I said I watched about 20+ minutes of the Strzok hearing and he did a great job from what I saw (i watched about a dozen 2:00 clips on some guys twitter feed), I didn't see him stutter much (if at all) and it seemed he had his story perfectly straight the whole time.

you're putting in wayyy too much stock into the Strzok hearing. lol. He was just trying to court/impress Lisa Page, his biggest mistake was doing it on an FBI device - that's bad - but the whole Sztrok think is a nothingburger; a lot of people hate Trump, Sztrok did an excellent job of setting the scene of the events that led to those texts he sent (trump insulting the immigrant family of the fallen vet). Pretty reasonable to me.

Not sure of the partisanship of this website, but you should check this out:

https://www.bodylanguagesuccess.com/2018/07/body-language-analysis-no-4320-peter.html

Quote
SUMMARY: Upon detailed nonverbal analysis of the video segment included here, Peter Strzok is being sincere. More specifically, at no time was Mr. Strzok being deceptive. The FBI Deputy Assistant Director is telling the truth.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jul 22 2018 11:15am
Research has shown that everybody in every profession is bad at detecting lies.
Member
Posts: 70,459
Joined: Feb 3 2006
Gold: 28,299.69
Jul 22 2018 11:25am
Quote (Horford @ Jul 22 2018 09:56am)


https://www.bodylanguagesuccess.com/2018/07/body-language-analysis-no-4320-peter.html
SUMMARY: Upon detailed nonverbal analysis of the video segment included here, Peter Strzok is being sincere. More specifically, at no time was Mr. Strzok being deceptive. The FBI Deputy Assistant Director is telling the truth.


that sounds about as legit and objective to me as a Trump Dr talking about the healthiest man in the world on his way to 200 years of age
Member
Posts: 5,942
Joined: Apr 29 2018
Gold: Locked
Trader: Scammer
Warn: 10%
Jul 22 2018 11:32am
Quote (Beowulf @ Jul 22 2018 01:25pm)
that sounds about as legit and objective to me as a Trump Dr talking about the healthiest man in the world on his way to 200 years of age


well, obviously that's his opinion/assessment, it's not like he's stating it as fact. He's been on CNN and shit so he must be credible, right? (that last part is a joke obviously as CNN regularly has Kellyanne and other frauds)
Member
Posts: 70,459
Joined: Feb 3 2006
Gold: 28,299.69
Jul 22 2018 11:36am
Quote (Horford @ Jul 22 2018 10:32am)
well, obviously that's his opinion/assessment, it's not like he's stating it as fact. He's been on CNN and shit so he must be credible, right? (that last part is a joke obviously as CNN regularly has Kellyanne and other frauds)


Quote
We all feel these thought-emotions on occasion(hopefully not too often)- and all three may be manifested via other facial expressions. But this is NEVER an expression we should ever want to see when someone is shaking our hand.


Summary: Kim Jong-un was momentarily shocked when he saw Donald Trump saluting a North Korean general. Kim then showed bravado/hubris.

President Trump's expression was insincere while shaking the foreign subordinate's hand. More specifically, Trump projected emotions of arrogance, contempt, and/or sarcastic disbelief.


a lot of bullshit mixed in the analysis from the site

statements are too strong for opinion and too much opinion in the "professional" analysis

https://www.bodylanguagesuccess.com/2018/06/body-language-analysis-no-4306-donald.html

there is manipulation in the wording for a site that claims it not pushing anything

This post was edited by Beowulf on Jul 22 2018 11:37am
Member
Posts: 50,889
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,836.00
Jul 22 2018 12:00pm
Quote (IceMage @ Jul 21 2018 10:12pm)


well for starters, the source is obviously pro-left/schiff/etc, anti-right/nunes/trump/etc
but he's also flat out incorrect on his analysis. Like, whats supposed to be going on in this tweet:
https://twitter.com/pwnallthethings/status/1020853493207322626

Quote
Nunes memo (left), first FISA application (right).

Notice the footnote here is the FBI directly alerting the FISC that this news article is based on Source #1's underlying reporting. This is the exact opposite of them asserting the news article is corroborating Source 1's info.


What the report shows is the exact opposite of what that guy said, and just what Nunes said in his memo. The very image he included in his tweet disproves what he's trying to say.
Did he accidentally mess up on who the 'business associate' and 'law firm' are? It says:

Quote
As discussed above, Source #1 was hired by a business associate to conduct research into Candidate #1's ties to Russia. Source #1 provided the result of his research to the business associate, and the FBI assesses that the business associate likely provided this information to the law firm that hired the business associate in the first place. Source #1 todl the FBI that he/she only provided this information to the business associate and the FBI. -redacted- The FBI does not believe that Source #1 directly provided this information to the press.


The footnote says the exact opposite of what that guy on twitter claimed it said. He said that it was "alerting the FISC that this news article is based on Source #1's underlying reporting"
It says the FBI believes that the news article is not based on Steele's reports. It says that they think Steele only shared his information up the chain to Fusion GPS and Perkins Coie (and then the Hillary Campaign, which Nunes pointed out is conspicuously missing from the report).

it doesn't say anywhere in there that Isikoff's 'high placed western intelligence source' originated from Steele. The only thing it does is attempt to rule out Steele as the source, thereby making it 'independent corroboration'.
Except steele actually was the source. But there's no insinuation in their footnote that the information was passed from either the business associate or law firm to the media, and they wouldn't be considered 'western intelligence sources' to begin with, only Steele would.
I don't see how that can be interpreted as anything other than insinuating independent corroboration. It certainly doesn't state what the guy on twitter claimed it did. It says the opposite.

How does that footnote alert the FISC that Ikisoff's article was based on Steele's reporting? It does no such thing. He's full of crap.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Jul 22 2018 12:10pm
Member
Posts: 33,927
Joined: Oct 9 2008
Gold: 2,528.52
Jul 22 2018 01:49pm
Quote (Horford @ Jul 22 2018 12:56pm)
I said I watched about 20+ minutes of the Strzok hearing and he did a great job from what I saw (i watched about a dozen 2:00 clips on some guys twitter feed), I didn't see him stutter much (if at all) and it seemed he had his story perfectly straight the whole time.

you're putting in wayyy too much stock into the Strzok hearing. lol. He was just trying to court/impress Lisa Page, his biggest mistake was doing it on an FBI device - that's bad - but the whole Sztrok think is a nothingburger; a lot of people hate Trump, Sztrok did an excellent job of setting the scene of the events that led to those texts he sent (trump insulting the immigrant family of the fallen vet). Pretty reasonable to me.

Not sure of the partisanship of this website, but you should check this out:

https://www.bodylanguagesuccess.com/2018/07/body-language-analysis-no-4320-peter.html



Listening to that shit is like presidential debates

If youre a Democrat you root for the Democrat and vice versa theres not much to take away. Completely worthless
Member
Posts: 5,942
Joined: Apr 29 2018
Gold: Locked
Trader: Scammer
Warn: 10%
Jul 22 2018 02:01pm
Quote (EndlessSky @ Jul 22 2018 03:49pm)
Completely worthless


kind of like your post
Member
Posts: 16,621
Joined: Jan 7 2017
Gold: 90.58
Jul 22 2018 02:02pm
Quote (Horford @ Jul 22 2018 12:01pm)
kind of like your post


Repent & payback your scams.

This post was edited by JohnMiller92 on Jul 22 2018 02:02pm
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1216921702171217221733169Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll