Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Russia releases US Marine vet in surprise prisoner exchange
By ERIC TUCKER and MATTHEW LEE
Today
WASHINGTON (AP) — Russia and the United States have carried out an unexpected prisoner exchange in a time of high tensions, trading on Wednesday a Marine veteran jailed by Moscow for a convicted Russian drug trafficker serving a long prison sentence in America.
The deal involving Trevor Reed, an American imprisoned for nearly three years, would have been a notable diplomatic maneuver even in times of peace but it was all the more surprising because it was done as Russia's war with Ukraine has driven relations with the U.S. to their lowest point in decades.
On the other end of the swap was Konstantin Yaroshenko, a Russian pilot who’d been serving a 20-year federal sentence for conspiring to smuggle cocaine into the U.S.
Even as the Biden administration trumpeted the swap, it made clear the resolution did not herald a broader breakthrough between the countries. Russian forces remain determined in their assault on Ukraine, the U.S. and Western allies continue to impose punishing sanctions and other Americans, including WNBA star Brittney Griner and Michigan corporate security executive Paul Whelan, still remain jailed in Russia.
The swap, the culmination of longstanding requests by both countries as well as private diplomatic wrangling, took place in Turkey when “the two planes pulled up side by side, essentially, and then they got out,” said Reed's father, Joey.
“I think it’s going to really hit home for him and for us when we finally get to see him and touch him,” he said in an interview with The Associated Press.
Reed, a 30-year-old former Marine from Texas, was arrested in the summer of 2019 after Russian authorities said he assaulted an officer while being driven by police to a police station following a night of heavy drinking. He was later sentenced to nine years in prison, though the U.S. government has described him as unjustly detained and pressed for his release while his family has asserted his innocence and expressed concerns about his deteriorating health — which included coughing up blood and a hunger strike.
Even on Wednesday, his parents' joy was mitigated by the concern they said they felt about his physical appearance. They were struck by his unsteady gait and how thin he looked as TV footage captured him walking, flanked by guards, from a van to the jet.
“He just didn’t sound like himself,” said Reed's mother, Paula, recounting their brief phone conversation while he was on the plane. “We just asked him how he was doing and he said, ‘I’m fine.’ But he always says that even when he isn’t. And he just didn’t sound like his normal self.”
Reed was en route back to the U.S., traveling with Roger Cartsens, the U.S. government’s special presidential envoy for hostage affairs.
President Joe Biden, who met in Washington with Reed’s parents last month, hailed Reed’s release and noted without elaboration that “the negotiations that allowed us to bring Trevor home required difficult decisions that I do not take lightly.” The Russian government also confirmed the deal, with the foreign ministry describing the exchange as the “result of a long negotiation process.”
A senior Biden administration official cautioned that the negotiations centered on a “discrete set of prisoner issues” and did not represent a change to the U.S. government’s condemnation of Russia’s violence against Ukraine.
“Where we can have discussions on issues of mutual interest we will try to talk to the Russians and have a constructive conversation without any way changing our approach to the appalling violence in Ukraine,” the official told reporters, speaking on condition of anonymity under ground rules set by the administration.
Yaroshenko, for his part, was arrested in Liberia in 2010 and extradited to the U.S on drug trafficking charges. The Justice Department has described him as “an experienced international drug trafficker” who conspired to distribute thousands of kilograms of cocaine around the world.
A lawyer for Yaroshenko, who in 2020 unsuccessfully sought to have his client freed on compassionate release because of the coronavirus pandemic, did not return an email seeking comment Wednesday.
Russia had sought Yaroshenko's return for years while also rejecting entreaties by high-level U.S. officials to release Reed, who was approaching his 1,000th day in custody after being convicted on what one U.S. official, Ambassador John Sullivan, decried as “laughable” evidence.
The prisoner swap was the most prominent release during the Biden administration of an American deemed wrongly detained abroad and came even as families of detainees who have met over the last year with administration officials had described the officials as cool to the idea of an exchange.
The U.S. government does not typically embrace such exchanges. It fears doing so might encourage foreign governments to take additional Americans as prisoners as a way to extract concessions. And it is concerned about a potential false equivalency between an unjustly detained American — which U.S. officials believe Reed was — and a properly convicted criminal.
In this case, though, the U.S. decided the deal made sense in part because Yaroshenko had already served a long portion of his prison sentence, which has now been commuted, a senior official told the AP on condition of anonymity.
In a statement, the Reed family thanked Biden, “for making the decision to bring Trevor home," other administration officials, and Bill Richardson, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. The family said Richardson traveled to Moscow in the hours before the Ukraine war began in hopes of securing Reed's release.
Reed's release had no immediate impact on the cases of other Americans held by Russia. Griner, for one, was detained in February after Russian authorities said a search of her bag revealed vape cartridges containing oil derived from cannabis. Whelan is being held on espionage-related charges his family says are bogus.
Biden said Wednesday “we won’t stop until Paul Whelan and others join Trevor in the loving arms of family and friends.” U.S. officials have described Whelan as unjustly detained but as yet have not characterized Griner’s case in those terms. Whelan was convicted and sentenced to 16 years in prison; Griner is awaiting trial.
At home in Texas, the Reeds had been given a general sense of progress and had even begun cleaning Trevor's room in preparation for his return home, removing paperwork from his bed so he'd have a place to sleep.
It was a welcome turnabout from a month ago when they were demonstrating outside the White House for their son's release, then pressing their case in a private meeting with Biden.
“We’ve been saying for over a year if we could just speak to the president, that we felt like we could make this thing happen — and that’s exactly what happened,” Joey Reed said.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
WASHINGTON – President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden paid $150,439 in federal income taxes last year after earning $610,702, according to their joint tax return the White House released Friday ahead of Monday's tax filing deadline.
Wife and I didn’t make nearly that much and paid a higher %. It’s the only thing both dems and repubs agree with…people like us should be paying the vast majority of the taxes. Repubs protect the rich and super rich. Dems protect people that don’t pay hardly any taxes to begin with. The middle and upper middle always getting stuck with the bill at the end of the night.
FTR, when the news makes the statement that you paid x in federal taxes, it usually means income tax, and doesn't include social security and Medicare. 25% is a pretty decent tax rate when you exclude those social benefits. Curious if you were including those or not.
Fair enough….cause I believe I was including it all. But still…my point going to remain the same. Cause it’s for sure not going to be a lower % than Bidens
It absolutely is lower unless you make more than $611K/year
Ummm it’s a % I’m talking about. Not total $. But I have to check my records to see but am away.
so no it’s not “absolutely lower” that’s just dumb
Biden's % is absolutely higher than yours. Without doubt. His income is mostly wages and S Corp earnings so he is very likely in the 35% bracket.
If a lot of his income was long term capital gain you might have an argument but that is not what makes up his income.
Right but a combined income of $419,000 (married/joint) would hit that bracket too, wouldn’t they? Thankfully, or not, we are below that for now. So yup he’s paying higher %.
It’s crazy to see how much money goes to taxes when each year….I don’t like to look at it till I have to
no....the brackets are based on taxable income so if total income was $419K you would be in the 32% bracket. Biden is solid in the 35%. The more income you have in the higher brackets pushes your effective rate up.
And just to be sure you know...only the income that enters the next bracket gets taxed at the higher rates. It doesn't pull all of your income to that rate.
But even that 35% is often not very accurate. I don’t know any specifics on Biden’s returns, but rich people sometimes get ridiculous tax breaks. If you spend enough money on your hobbies and you have a good tax guy, they find ways to write it off. A multimillionaire with huge land and lots of horses? Great, it’s just a failed business opportunity so everything you out into your hobby of horses is now a tax write off. Like the central coast of California? Buy a big house and a bunch of land, plant a few grapes and now that’s just a failed winery and a tax write off.
The average person who can’t afford that has to pay taxes on their average properties. So that’s why many rich people actually do pay a lot less in taxes than they should.
The key word is "loss". Why is it smart to lose money in order to save tax?
I agree that if you own a horse farm to keep your horses and you turn it into a business for write offs that can make sense. But keep in mind there are hobby loss rules that prevent you from doing this too long.
But none of these are the case for Biden's return.
It’s smart for the taxpayer if it’s money you were going to spend anyway to make it look like a business expense or a loss. It’s not smart to intentionally lose money, but that’s not what they do, it’s money they spend anyway. There are way too many tax write offs and loops holes. I just met a realtor, who even in this market is doing very well. Just bought a decked out F150 to pull a camper. Told me since that’s what Hendricks to meet his clients the 70k he spent on his truck is a tax write off. I think even things like that are dumb, a truck is a horrible car to drive around and meet fliers, why does that deserve a tax break? Ther rare way too many opportunities for tax breaks, and the more you make and spend the more opportunities you have.
I can tell you that there are a lot of people that don't do things right. And if the IRS selects them for audit they will be in for a surprise.
Yes if you use your $70K truck for business you can either take a standard mileage rate as a write off or deduct the actual costs of the truck. You are required to track total mileage and business mileage to come up with a business use % to apply to your actual costs.
So....if he's doing things right he is only deducting the business % of the truck rather than the whole thing.
Thats why we vote republican, so we can dismantle the irs and deduct our F150 in full.
Nobody is worried about the Disinformation Governance Board?
This is where you want the country to go? Gov't regulating truth? What's the bridge too far for this echo chamber?
Will there be criminal penalties for disinformation? What does that mean to you? To me it means a group at DHS that seeks to combat what it views as inaccurate or misleading information. Do you think a political party or our gov't doesn't have the right or obligation to combat what it sees as misinformation? Isn't that what a press secretary does every single day?
Unless 'disinformation' or speech in general is criminalized, I don't see what the issue is. Explain to me where you think this is a bridge too far.
First - no the press secretary is getting the President's message out. Some of what they say is not truthful or at the very least not completely forthright. It's spin. If you believe otherwise, that's part of the problem.
Second - no - I don't want the Gov't determining what is and is not truth. Yes, they should get their message across. But, not they should not be regulating what is truth. We've all read those books.
In terms of criminalization - sure, that's yet to be seen. So, is that your bridge? As long as they only try to promote their truth, it's ok? But if they start jailing people it's not? That's what I'm asking. At what point are you troubled by that? I'm troubled already.
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
First - no the press secretary is getting the President's message out. Some of what they say is not truthful or at the very least not completely forthright. It's spin. If you believe otherwise, that's part of the problem.
Second - no - I don't want the Gov't determining what is and is not truth. Yes, they should get their message across. But, not they should not be regulating what is truth. We've all read those books.
In terms of criminalization - sure, that's yet to be seen. So, is that your bridge? As long as they only try to promote their truth, it's ok? But if they start jailing people it's not? That's what I'm asking. At what point are you troubled by that? I'm troubled already.
But you didn't seem troubled at all by the POOTWH administration. Not. At. All.
Stop the presses, press secretaries spin? Holy shit.
Show me an example of the Gov't determining truth. You mean like Bill DISbarred and his Team Mueller Report summation?
What's this criminalization you speak of? Echo chambering somewhere?
The idea of a disinformation board is not good. there are better ways to combat disinformation. For one authenticating user accounts on all social media platforms. Maybe raise the age of internet adulthood to actual adulthood which would really help fight kids dependency on social media and its harmful aspects. Direct engagement with people and not talking down to them etc.
The government declaring what is and isn't disinformation is a slippery slope and will almost certainly be bad for democrats and progressives that support it at the very least in an electoral sense.
I mean how about a repeal of the telecommunications act and a reinstatement of the fairness doctrine with amendments for the digital age. I can't imagine how great this Disinformation group will be when it gets taken over by conservatives in the coming elections. Good grief.
Let me put it to you this way - If Donald Trump had formed this Board would you have been concerned?
Donald trump lying about elections puts us all in danger. “Either I win or it’s rigged” is among the most dangerous phrases spoken in American history, yet very few on the right or middle seem to care. The phrase allows for no outcome other than trump winning, so no liberty, no freedom, we all must take a conservative president down our throats no matter what.
When republicans and independents begin to take the crimes of trump and his disciples seriously perhaps we can have some hope. It is alarming how many candidates for congress right now are parroting his election lies, and they have tons of supporters.
When J6 happened, congress and rioters were in imminent danger. That’s when his words became a crime. Yet he gets away with it because republicans vote R no matter the consequences and independents hate politics to the extent they never hold politicians accountable.
First - no the press secretary is getting the President's message out. Some of what they say is not truthful or at the very least not completely forthright. It's spin. If you believe otherwise, that's part of the problem.
Second - no - I don't want the Gov't determining what is and is not truth. Yes, they should get their message across. But, not they should not be regulating what is truth. We've all read those books.
In terms of criminalization - sure, that's yet to be seen. So, is that your bridge? As long as they only try to promote their truth, it's ok? But if they start jailing people it's not? That's what I'm asking. At what point are you troubled by that? I'm troubled already.
But you didn't seem troubled at all by the POOTWH administration. Not. At. All.
Stop the presses, press secretaries spin? Holy shit.
Show me an example of the Gov't determining truth. You mean like Bill DISbarred and his Team Mueller Report summation?
What's this criminalization you speak of? Echo chambering somewhere?
No idea what you're talking about as it relates to Winnie the Pooh. That has nothing to do with this conversation. What I think about another Administration is irrelevant to the discussion.
There are plenty of examples and your dismissing the spin a press secretary does (in all Administrations - I guess you missed the part where I stated that as a generality) proves your issue.
There is no criminalization. I didn't say there was. That was me asking if that's the bridge too far.
When folks here learn to actually take the time to read and comprehend, I'll consider your opinion valid. You completely made up your own world based on nothing.
So, again - does it not bother you that the Government (any Administration) created a Disinformation Board?
Yes, each Administration creates their own narrative (thus, the Press Secretary points). But, should they create an Agency that determines what the truth is? Hard no for me. So, I'll ask again - where is your line in the sand when it comes to the Government creating an agency to monitor truth?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
Let me put it to you this way - If Donald Trump had formed this Board would you have been concerned?
Donald trump lying about elections puts us all in danger. “Either I win or it’s rigged” is among the most dangerous phrases spoken in American history, yet very few on the right or middle seem to care. The phrase allows for no outcome other than trump winning, so no liberty, no freedom, we all must take a conservative president down our throats no matter what.
When republicans and independents begin to take the crimes of trump and his disciples seriously perhaps we can have some hope. It is alarming how many candidates for congress right now are parroting his election lies, and they have tons of supporters.
When J6 happened, congress and rioters were in imminent danger. That’s when his words became a crime. Yet he gets away with it because republicans vote R no matter the consequences and independents hate politics to the extent they never hold politicians accountable.
Let's go with your line of derangement-
So, are you saying it's ok for Biden to have this Agency but not Trump? If so, what's your plan when Desantis is President in 3 years and this Agency exists and he decides to keep it (he won't - that's another example of why he'll be elected, but stick with the point and pretend Biden isn't President in 3 years)?
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
First - no the press secretary is getting the President's message out. Some of what they say is not truthful or at the very least not completely forthright. It's spin. If you believe otherwise, that's part of the problem.
Second - no - I don't want the Gov't determining what is and is not truth. Yes, they should get their message across. But, not they should not be regulating what is truth. We've all read those books.
In terms of criminalization - sure, that's yet to be seen. So, is that your bridge? As long as they only try to promote their truth, it's ok? But if they start jailing people it's not? That's what I'm asking. At what point are you troubled by that? I'm troubled already.
But you didn't seem troubled at all by the POOTWH administration. Not. At. All.
Stop the presses, press secretaries spin? Holy shit.
Show me an example of the Gov't determining truth. You mean like Bill DISbarred and his Team Mueller Report summation?
What's this criminalization you speak of? Echo chambering somewhere?
No idea what you're talking about as it relates to Winnie the Pooh. That has nothing to do with this conversation. What I think about another Administration is irrelevant to the discussion.
There are plenty of examples and your dismissing the spin a press secretary does (in all Administrations - I guess you missed the part where I stated that as a generality) proves your issue.
There is no criminalization. I didn't say there was. That was me asking if that's the bridge too far.
When folks here learn to actually take the time to read and comprehend, I'll consider your opinion valid. You completely made up your own world based on nothing.
So, again - does it not bother you that the Government (any Administration) created a Disinformation Board?
Yes, each Administration creates their own narrative (thus, the Press Secretary points). But, should they create an Agency that determines what the truth is? Hard no for me. So, I'll ask again - where is your line in the sand when it comes to the Government creating an agency to monitor truth?
“An agency to monitor the truth.” Delusional.
How does that work? The headlines will blare, “Government Disinformation Board declares Biden won 2020 election fair and square.” And people like you will dismiss it. What is there to be afraid of? Or concerned about? After all, we have Project Veritas.
”An agency to monitor the truth.” The world is round. Ivermectin cures covid. It’ll be gone by Easter. I don’t know any Russians. And you’re suddenly concerned with an agency to monitor the truth? Please.
To answer your faux rage question of the day, no, not at all. It’s too late for that.
First - no the press secretary is getting the President's message out. Some of what they say is not truthful or at the very least not completely forthright. It's spin. If you believe otherwise, that's part of the problem.
Second - no - I don't want the Gov't determining what is and is not truth. Yes, they should get their message across. But, not they should not be regulating what is truth. We've all read those books.
In terms of criminalization - sure, that's yet to be seen. So, is that your bridge? As long as they only try to promote their truth, it's ok? But if they start jailing people it's not? That's what I'm asking. At what point are you troubled by that? I'm troubled already.
Yes, it's spin. And that's exactly the point. To me, there's no real moral or legal difference between between this "disinformation board" and the White House putting out a statement. The difference is in execution. In other words, having a centralized group focused on countering what they see as disinformation makes the White House (whoever controls it) more focused on combating what they see as an incorrect or misinterpretation of their message, is a more efficient way of message control. It's almost a subset of a press secretary office.
Therefore I don't understand your point in how this would be 'regulating truth'. Regulation means the gov't has an enforcement authority over a practice. There's no enforcement authority here, is there? If not, it's not regulation. And yes, a very bright line for me is criminalization or suppression of speech. Unless that happens, this is a little ado about nothing.
First - no the press secretary is getting the President's message out. Some of what they say is not truthful or at the very least not completely forthright. It's spin. If you believe otherwise, that's part of the problem.
Second - no - I don't want the Gov't determining what is and is not truth. Yes, they should get their message across. But, not they should not be regulating what is truth. We've all read those books.
In terms of criminalization - sure, that's yet to be seen. So, is that your bridge? As long as they only try to promote their truth, it's ok? But if they start jailing people it's not? That's what I'm asking. At what point are you troubled by that? I'm troubled already.
But you didn't seem troubled at all by the POOTWH administration. Not. At. All.
Stop the presses, press secretaries spin? Holy shit.
Show me an example of the Gov't determining truth. You mean like Bill DISbarred and his Team Mueller Report summation?
What's this criminalization you speak of? Echo chambering somewhere?
No idea what you're talking about as it relates to Winnie the Pooh. That has nothing to do with this conversation. What I think about another Administration is irrelevant to the discussion.
There are plenty of examples and your dismissing the spin a press secretary does (in all Administrations - I guess you missed the part where I stated that as a generality) proves your issue.
There is no criminalization. I didn't say there was. That was me asking if that's the bridge too far.
When folks here learn to actually take the time to read and comprehend, I'll consider your opinion valid. You completely made up your own world based on nothing.
So, again - does it not bother you that the Government (any Administration) created a Disinformation Board?
Yes, each Administration creates their own narrative (thus, the Press Secretary points). But, should they create an Agency that determines what the truth is? Hard no for me. So, I'll ask again - where is your line in the sand when it comes to the Government creating an agency to monitor truth?
“An agency to monitor the truth.” Delusional.
How does that work? The headlines will blare, “Government Disinformation Board declares Biden won 2020 election fair and square.” And people like you will dismiss it. What is there to be afraid of? Or concerned about? After all, we have Project Veritas.
”An agency to monitor the truth.” The world is round. Ivermectin cures covid. It’ll be gone by Easter. I don’t know any Russians. And you’re suddenly concerned with an agency to monitor the truth? Please.
To answer your faux rage question of the day, no, not at all. It’s too late for that.
Lol. The faux. this is 2022's left version of false equivalency.
I do enjoy the crazy word play.
I'm not raged about anything. Concern would be the word.
And to put it in perspective these are Agencies that the last 2 Admins have created -
Trump creates International Development Finance Corporation Biden creates Misinformation Board
And if you want to go back and forth - do you think Trump invented saying elections are rigged when he loses? Lol. Hillary has spent 6 years fabricating documents to prove her case. And, she didn't invent it either.
(And why does the left always lead with the point that whoever their arguing with thinks Biden didn't win the election?)
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
I'll also save you guys time for when Elon Musk is the head of the Disinformation Board in Nikki Haley's Administration - When Biden ran it, they did it right, Haley's Admin is abusing it (which of course, ironically, proves the point in the first place. lol).
Sorry. The world doesn't work the way you tell it to.
First - no the press secretary is getting the President's message out. Some of what they say is not truthful or at the very least not completely forthright. It's spin. If you believe otherwise, that's part of the problem.
Second - no - I don't want the Gov't determining what is and is not truth. Yes, they should get their message across. But, not they should not be regulating what is truth. We've all read those books.
In terms of criminalization - sure, that's yet to be seen. So, is that your bridge? As long as they only try to promote their truth, it's ok? But if they start jailing people it's not? That's what I'm asking. At what point are you troubled by that? I'm troubled already.
But you didn't seem troubled at all by the POOTWH administration. Not. At. All.
Stop the presses, press secretaries spin? Holy shit.
Show me an example of the Gov't determining truth. You mean like Bill DISbarred and his Team Mueller Report summation?
What's this criminalization you speak of? Echo chambering somewhere?
No idea what you're talking about as it relates to Winnie the Pooh. That has nothing to do with this conversation. What I think about another Administration is irrelevant to the discussion.
There are plenty of examples and your dismissing the spin a press secretary does (in all Administrations - I guess you missed the part where I stated that as a generality) proves your issue.
There is no criminalization. I didn't say there was. That was me asking if that's the bridge too far.
When folks here learn to actually take the time to read and comprehend, I'll consider your opinion valid. You completely made up your own world based on nothing.
So, again - does it not bother you that the Government (any Administration) created a Disinformation Board?
Yes, each Administration creates their own narrative (thus, the Press Secretary points). But, should they create an Agency that determines what the truth is? Hard no for me. So, I'll ask again - where is your line in the sand when it comes to the Government creating an agency to monitor truth?
“An agency to monitor the truth.” Delusional.
How does that work? The headlines will blare, “Government Disinformation Board declares Biden won 2020 election fair and square.” And people like you will dismiss it. What is there to be afraid of? Or concerned about? After all, we have Project Veritas.
”An agency to monitor the truth.” The world is round. Ivermectin cures covid. It’ll be gone by Easter. I don’t know any Russians. And you’re suddenly concerned with an agency to monitor the truth? Please.
To answer your faux rage question of the day, no, not at all. It’s too late for that.
Lol. The faux. this is 2022's left version of false equivalency.
I do enjoy the crazy word play.
I'm not raged about anything. Concern would be the word.
And to put it in perspective these are Agencies that the last 2 Admins have created -
Trump creates International Development Finance Corporation Biden creates Misinformation Board
And if you want to go back and forth - do you think Trump invented saying elections are rigged when he loses? Lol. Hillary has spent 6 years fabricating documents to prove her case. And, she didn't invent it either.
(And why does the left always lead with the point that whoever their arguing with thinks Biden didn't win the election?)
Perhaps you’d like to link to a DHS, government or another website that fully describes this “Disinformation Board,” it’s charge, structure, staffing and budget rather than say things like, “determine the truth?” And then follow that up with some original thoughts as to why it concerns you. But nah, let’s pretend we should be concerned about something that’s going to “determine the truth.”
Im more concerned with a POOTWH who accepted and encouraged a massive Putin on the ritz social media disinformation campaign to “win” an election and told north of 25,000 + verifiable outright lies or mistruths while in office, the house minority leader saying one thing privately, as it relates to the “truth,” and another thing publicly regarding a coup attempt and folks who will welcome a Deathsantis Administration with a repub majority Congress.
I'll also save you guys time for when Elon Musk is the head of the Disinformation Board in Nikki Haley's Administration - When Biden ran it, they did it right, Haley's Admin is abusing it (which of course, ironically, proves the point in the first place. lol).
You still have not explained their authority. Again, it sounds like a 'strike force' or something to counter narratives with which they disagree, likely on social media. This happens every day already. Unless they can suppress or reduce free speech, I don't understand your concern.
First - no the press secretary is getting the President's message out. Some of what they say is not truthful or at the very least not completely forthright. It's spin. If you believe otherwise, that's part of the problem.
Second - no - I don't want the Gov't determining what is and is not truth. Yes, they should get their message across. But, not they should not be regulating what is truth. We've all read those books.
In terms of criminalization - sure, that's yet to be seen. So, is that your bridge? As long as they only try to promote their truth, it's ok? But if they start jailing people it's not? That's what I'm asking. At what point are you troubled by that? I'm troubled already.
But you didn't seem troubled at all by the POOTWH administration. Not. At. All.
Stop the presses, press secretaries spin? Holy shit.
Show me an example of the Gov't determining truth. You mean like Bill DISbarred and his Team Mueller Report summation?
What's this criminalization you speak of? Echo chambering somewhere?
No idea what you're talking about as it relates to Winnie the Pooh. That has nothing to do with this conversation. What I think about another Administration is irrelevant to the discussion.
There are plenty of examples and your dismissing the spin a press secretary does (in all Administrations - I guess you missed the part where I stated that as a generality) proves your issue.
There is no criminalization. I didn't say there was. That was me asking if that's the bridge too far.
When folks here learn to actually take the time to read and comprehend, I'll consider your opinion valid. You completely made up your own world based on nothing.
So, again - does it not bother you that the Government (any Administration) created a Disinformation Board?
Yes, each Administration creates their own narrative (thus, the Press Secretary points). But, should they create an Agency that determines what the truth is? Hard no for me. So, I'll ask again - where is your line in the sand when it comes to the Government creating an agency to monitor truth?
“An agency to monitor the truth.” Delusional.
How does that work? The headlines will blare, “Government Disinformation Board declares Biden won 2020 election fair and square.” And people like you will dismiss it. What is there to be afraid of? Or concerned about? After all, we have Project Veritas.
”An agency to monitor the truth.” The world is round. Ivermectin cures covid. It’ll be gone by Easter. I don’t know any Russians. And you’re suddenly concerned with an agency to monitor the truth? Please.
To answer your faux rage question of the day, no, not at all. It’s too late for that.
Lol. The faux. this is 2022's left version of false equivalency.
I do enjoy the crazy word play.
I'm not raged about anything. Concern would be the word.
And to put it in perspective these are Agencies that the last 2 Admins have created -
Trump creates International Development Finance Corporation Biden creates Misinformation Board
And if you want to go back and forth - do you think Trump invented saying elections are rigged when he loses? Lol. Hillary has spent 6 years fabricating documents to prove her case. And, she didn't invent it either.
(And why does the left always lead with the point that whoever their arguing with thinks Biden didn't win the election?)
And let’s be honest about the “truth.” POOTWH didn’t create shit. He rebranded it.
(It’s also worth noting that the Trump administration’s DHS undertook similar efforts; in 2018 it created the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which dealt extensively with the spread of misinformation online — including both foreign interference in elections and the domestic spread of coronavirus misinformation. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said that the new board would be “a continuation of the work of the former president” when asked about it on Friday.”)
Seems like the truth was already being monitored and yet, no concern.
(It’s also worth noting that the Trump administration’s DHS undertook similar efforts; in 2018 it created the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which dealt extensively with the spread of misinformation online — including both foreign interference in elections and the domestic spread of coronavirus misinformation. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said that the new board would be “a continuation of the work of the former president” when asked about it on Friday.”)
Seems like the truth was already being monitored and yet, no concern.
I'm guessing these folks either were not aware of this or, dare I say it, are being a tad disingenuous in their rhetoric today. I know, shocking, right?
(It’s also worth noting that the Trump administration’s DHS undertook similar efforts; in 2018 it created the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which dealt extensively with the spread of misinformation online — including both foreign interference in elections and the domestic spread of coronavirus misinformation. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said that the new board would be “a continuation of the work of the former president” when asked about it on Friday.”)
Seems like the truth was already being monitored and yet, no concern.
I'm guessing these folks either were not aware of this or, dare I say it, are being a tad disingenuous in their rhetoric today. I know, shocking, right?
It’s become typical. Biden’s DHS head testifies before Congress and the repubs release a 60 page “memo” for “members only” (does a satin jacket come with it?) listing all the “gotcha” Faux News faux rage clips they can ask or pontificate about to faux rage their base and own the libs (wonder if Hannity gave them 59 of the 60 pages?). You know, rather than ask about the continuation of a POOTWH DHS program, raise concerns, perhaps ask about potential safeguards to protect “the truth” and then work with your colleagues across the aisle to enhance border security, particularly the advertising and funding for those caravans.
Either naive or disingenuous but considering the OP misrepresented both examples of what POOTWH “created” versus Biden, I’d say both. But hey, we should all be concerned, notwithstanding Hillary and election rigging.
(It’s also worth noting that the Trump administration’s DHS undertook similar efforts; in 2018 it created the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which dealt extensively with the spread of misinformation online — including both foreign interference in elections and the domestic spread of coronavirus misinformation. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said that the new board would be “a continuation of the work of the former president” when asked about it on Friday.”)
Seems like the truth was already being monitored and yet, no concern.
I'm guessing these folks either were not aware of this or, dare I say it, are being a tad disingenuous in their rhetoric today. I know, shocking, right?
It’s become typical. Biden’s DHS head testifies before Congress and the repubs release a 60 page “memo” for “members only” (does a satin jacket come with it?) listing all the “gotcha” Faux News faux rage clips they can ask or pontificate about to faux rage their base and own the libs (wonder if Hannity gave them 59 of the 60 pages?). You know, rather than ask about the continuation of a POOTWH DHS program, raise concerns, perhaps ask about potential safeguards to protect “the truth” and then work with your colleagues across the aisle to enhance border security, particularly the advertising and funding for those caravans.
Either naive or disingenuous but considering the OP misrepresented both examples of what POOTWH “created” versus Biden, I’d say both. But hey, we should all be concerned, notwithstanding Hillary and election rigging.
Yeah I just read up on all that too in the Wapo article.
It's funny how this guy calls this little website of a 30 year old band an echo chamber, while the right wing Outrage Machine just continues churning and churning and telling their tens of millions of viewers/listeners/headline readers about what to get riled over time and time again without much context.
Let me put it to you this way - If Donald Trump had formed this Board would you have been concerned?
Donald trump lying about elections puts us all in danger. “Either I win or it’s rigged” is among the most dangerous phrases spoken in American history, yet very few on the right or middle seem to care. The phrase allows for no outcome other than trump winning, so no liberty, no freedom, we all must take a conservative president down our throats no matter what.
When republicans and independents begin to take the crimes of trump and his disciples seriously perhaps we can have some hope. It is alarming how many candidates for congress right now are parroting his election lies, and they have tons of supporters.
When J6 happened, congress and rioters were in imminent danger. That’s when his words became a crime. Yet he gets away with it because republicans vote R no matter the consequences and independents hate politics to the extent they never hold politicians accountable.
Let's go with your line of derangement-
So, are you saying it's ok for Biden to have this Agency but not Trump? If so, what's your plan when Desantis is President in 3 years and this Agency exists and he decides to keep it (he won't - that's another example of why he'll be elected, but stick with the point and pretend Biden isn't President in 3 years)?
Forgive me if this is common knowledge, but what power does a "Board" formed by the White House have, besides to have time, energy and resources officially committed to research the topic and make proposals? I know 'governance' is in its name, but do they have any honest governance capacities besides producing recommendations to the Biden administration on how to tackle some of these challenges?
If they do have power beyond recommendations, I have concerns. If they don't - I really don't think it matters.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Let me put it to you this way - If Donald Trump had formed this Board would you have been concerned?
Donald trump lying about elections puts us all in danger. “Either I win or it’s rigged” is among the most dangerous phrases spoken in American history, yet very few on the right or middle seem to care. The phrase allows for no outcome other than trump winning, so no liberty, no freedom, we all must take a conservative president down our throats no matter what.
When republicans and independents begin to take the crimes of trump and his disciples seriously perhaps we can have some hope. It is alarming how many candidates for congress right now are parroting his election lies, and they have tons of supporters.
When J6 happened, congress and rioters were in imminent danger. That’s when his words became a crime. Yet he gets away with it because republicans vote R no matter the consequences and independents hate politics to the extent they never hold politicians accountable.
Let's go with your line of derangement-
So, are you saying it's ok for Biden to have this Agency but not Trump? If so, what's your plan when Desantis is President in 3 years and this Agency exists and he decides to keep it (he won't - that's another example of why he'll be elected, but stick with the point and pretend Biden isn't President in 3 years)?
A president can investigate as he sees fit, if any crimes are discovered, that’s why we have the Dept of Justice.
DeSantis is an extremist who organizes against free speech and attacks minority groups of the population. To prove he is a maniac and a liar will not be difficult in 2024.
Did Biden organize and provoke an attack against Congress?
Not admitting the truth is significant derangement.
Comments
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
WASHINGTON (AP) — Russia and the United States have carried out an unexpected prisoner exchange in a time of high tensions, trading on Wednesday a Marine veteran jailed by Moscow for a convicted Russian drug trafficker serving a long prison sentence in America.
The deal involving Trevor Reed, an American imprisoned for nearly three years, would have been a notable diplomatic maneuver even in times of peace but it was all the more surprising because it was done as Russia's war with Ukraine has driven relations with the U.S. to their lowest point in decades.
On the other end of the swap was Konstantin Yaroshenko, a Russian pilot who’d been serving a 20-year federal sentence for conspiring to smuggle cocaine into the U.S.
Even as the Biden administration trumpeted the swap, it made clear the resolution did not herald a broader breakthrough between the countries. Russian forces remain determined in their assault on Ukraine, the U.S. and Western allies continue to impose punishing sanctions and other Americans, including WNBA star Brittney Griner and Michigan corporate security executive Paul Whelan, still remain jailed in Russia.
RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR
Live Updates | Germany leader defends ongoing gas purchases
Occupied Ukrainian city fears sham Russian referendum plans
A chilling Russian cyber aim in Ukraine: Digital dossiers
Most in US fear Ukraine war misinformation: AP-NORC poll
The swap, the culmination of longstanding requests by both countries as well as private diplomatic wrangling, took place in Turkey when “the two planes pulled up side by side, essentially, and then they got out,” said Reed's father, Joey.
“I think it’s going to really hit home for him and for us when we finally get to see him and touch him,” he said in an interview with The Associated Press.
Reed, a 30-year-old former Marine from Texas, was arrested in the summer of 2019 after Russian authorities said he assaulted an officer while being driven by police to a police station following a night of heavy drinking. He was later sentenced to nine years in prison, though the U.S. government has described him as unjustly detained and pressed for his release while his family has asserted his innocence and expressed concerns about his deteriorating health — which included coughing up blood and a hunger strike.
Even on Wednesday, his parents' joy was mitigated by the concern they said they felt about his physical appearance. They were struck by his unsteady gait and how thin he looked as TV footage captured him walking, flanked by guards, from a van to the jet.
“He just didn’t sound like himself,” said Reed's mother, Paula, recounting their brief phone conversation while he was on the plane. “We just asked him how he was doing and he said, ‘I’m fine.’ But he always says that even when he isn’t. And he just didn’t sound like his normal self.”
Reed was en route back to the U.S., traveling with Roger Cartsens, the U.S. government’s special presidential envoy for hostage affairs.
President Joe Biden, who met in Washington with Reed’s parents last month, hailed Reed’s release and noted without elaboration that “the negotiations that allowed us to bring Trevor home required difficult decisions that I do not take lightly.” The Russian government also confirmed the deal, with the foreign ministry describing the exchange as the “result of a long negotiation process.”
A senior Biden administration official cautioned that the negotiations centered on a “discrete set of prisoner issues” and did not represent a change to the U.S. government’s condemnation of Russia’s violence against Ukraine.
“Where we can have discussions on issues of mutual interest we will try to talk to the Russians and have a constructive conversation without any way changing our approach to the appalling violence in Ukraine,” the official told reporters, speaking on condition of anonymity under ground rules set by the administration.
Yaroshenko, for his part, was arrested in Liberia in 2010 and extradited to the U.S on drug trafficking charges. The Justice Department has described him as “an experienced international drug trafficker” who conspired to distribute thousands of kilograms of cocaine around the world.
A lawyer for Yaroshenko, who in 2020 unsuccessfully sought to have his client freed on compassionate release because of the coronavirus pandemic, did not return an email seeking comment Wednesday.
Russia had sought Yaroshenko's return for years while also rejecting entreaties by high-level U.S. officials to release Reed, who was approaching his 1,000th day in custody after being convicted on what one U.S. official, Ambassador John Sullivan, decried as “laughable” evidence.
The prisoner swap was the most prominent release during the Biden administration of an American deemed wrongly detained abroad and came even as families of detainees who have met over the last year with administration officials had described the officials as cool to the idea of an exchange.
The U.S. government does not typically embrace such exchanges. It fears doing so might encourage foreign governments to take additional Americans as prisoners as a way to extract concessions. And it is concerned about a potential false equivalency between an unjustly detained American — which U.S. officials believe Reed was — and a properly convicted criminal.
In this case, though, the U.S. decided the deal made sense in part because Yaroshenko had already served a long portion of his prison sentence, which has now been commuted, a senior official told the AP on condition of anonymity.
In a statement, the Reed family thanked Biden, “for making the decision to bring Trevor home," other administration officials, and Bill Richardson, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. The family said Richardson traveled to Moscow in the hours before the Ukraine war began in hopes of securing Reed's release.
Reed's release had no immediate impact on the cases of other Americans held by Russia. Griner, for one, was detained in February after Russian authorities said a search of her bag revealed vape cartridges containing oil derived from cannabis. Whelan is being held on espionage-related charges his family says are bogus.
Biden said Wednesday “we won’t stop until Paul Whelan and others join Trevor in the loving arms of family and friends.” U.S. officials have described Whelan as unjustly detained but as yet have not characterized Griner’s case in those terms. Whelan was convicted and sentenced to 16 years in prison; Griner is awaiting trial.
At home in Texas, the Reeds had been given a general sense of progress and had even begun cleaning Trevor's room in preparation for his return home, removing paperwork from his bed so he'd have a place to sleep.
It was a welcome turnabout from a month ago when they were demonstrating outside the White House for their son's release, then pressing their case in a private meeting with Biden.
“We’ve been saying for over a year if we could just speak to the president, that we felt like we could make this thing happen — and that’s exactly what happened,” Joey Reed said.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
Thats why we vote republican, so we can dismantle the irs and deduct our F150 in full.
This is where you want the country to go? Gov't regulating truth? What's the bridge too far for this echo chamber?
Unless 'disinformation' or speech in general is criminalized, I don't see what the issue is. Explain to me where you think this is a bridge too far.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Second - no - I don't want the Gov't determining what is and is not truth. Yes, they should get their message across. But, not they should not be regulating what is truth. We've all read those books.
In terms of criminalization - sure, that's yet to be seen. So, is that your bridge? As long as they only try to promote their truth, it's ok? But if they start jailing people it's not? That's what I'm asking. At what point are you troubled by that? I'm troubled already.
Stop the presses, press secretaries spin? Holy shit.
Show me an example of the Gov't determining truth. You mean like Bill DISbarred and his Team Mueller Report summation?
What's this criminalization you speak of? Echo chambering somewhere?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Check out the woman running it....
Pearl Jam bootlegs:
http://wegotshit.blogspot.com
Well, obviously Donald Trump would've had to run it by his advisor, Sean Hannity, before implementing such a board.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/29/politics/mm-sh-texts/index.html
About – Nina Jankowicz (wiczipedia.com)
The government declaring what is and isn't disinformation is a slippery slope and will almost certainly be bad for democrats and progressives that support it at the very least in an electoral sense.
I mean how about a repeal of the telecommunications act and a reinstatement of the fairness doctrine with amendments for the digital age. I can't imagine how great this Disinformation group will be when it gets taken over by conservatives in the coming elections. Good grief.
There are no kings inside the gates of eden
When republicans and independents begin to take the crimes of trump and his disciples seriously perhaps we can have some hope. It is alarming how many candidates for congress right now are parroting his election lies, and they have tons of supporters.
When J6 happened, congress and rioters were in imminent danger. That’s when his words became a crime. Yet he gets away with it because republicans vote R no matter the consequences and independents hate politics to the extent they never hold politicians accountable.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
There are plenty of examples and your dismissing the spin a press secretary does (in all Administrations - I guess you missed the part where I stated that as a generality) proves your issue.
There is no criminalization. I didn't say there was. That was me asking if that's the bridge too far.
When folks here learn to actually take the time to read and comprehend, I'll consider your opinion valid. You completely made up your own world based on nothing.
So, again - does it not bother you that the Government (any Administration) created a Disinformation Board?
Yes, each Administration creates their own narrative (thus, the Press Secretary points). But, should they create an Agency that determines what the truth is? Hard no for me. So, I'll ask again - where is your line in the sand when it comes to the Government creating an agency to monitor truth?
So, are you saying it's ok for Biden to have this Agency but not Trump? If so, what's your plan when Desantis is President in 3 years and this Agency exists and he decides to keep it (he won't - that's another example of why he'll be elected, but stick with the point and pretend Biden isn't President in 3 years)?
How does that work? The headlines will blare, “Government Disinformation Board declares Biden won 2020 election fair and square.” And people like you will dismiss it. What is there to be afraid of? Or concerned about? After all, we have Project Veritas.
”An agency to monitor the truth.” The world is round. Ivermectin cures covid. It’ll be gone by Easter. I don’t know any Russians. And you’re suddenly concerned with an agency to monitor the truth? Please.
To answer your faux rage question of the day, no, not at all. It’s too late for that.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Therefore I don't understand your point in how this would be 'regulating truth'. Regulation means the gov't has an enforcement authority over a practice. There's no enforcement authority here, is there? If not, it's not regulation. And yes, a very bright line for me is criminalization or suppression of speech. Unless that happens, this is a little ado about nothing.
I do enjoy the crazy word play.
I'm not raged about anything. Concern would be the word.
And to put it in perspective these are Agencies that the last 2 Admins have created -
Trump creates International Development Finance Corporation
Biden creates Misinformation Board
And if you want to go back and forth - do you think Trump invented saying elections are rigged when he loses? Lol. Hillary has spent 6 years fabricating documents to prove her case. And, she didn't invent it either.
(And why does the left always lead with the point that whoever their arguing with thinks Biden didn't win the election?)
Im more concerned with a POOTWH who accepted and encouraged a massive Putin on the ritz social media disinformation campaign to “win” an election and told north of 25,000 + verifiable outright lies or mistruths while in office, the house minority leader saying one thing privately, as it relates to the “truth,” and another thing publicly regarding a coup attempt and folks who will welcome a Deathsantis Administration with a repub majority Congress.
Do you believe Biden won the election?
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._International_Development_Finance_Corporation
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
(It’s also worth noting that the Trump administration’s DHS undertook similar efforts; in 2018 it created the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which dealt extensively with the spread of misinformation online — including both foreign interference in elections and the domestic spread of coronavirus misinformation. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said that the new board would be “a continuation of the work of the former president” when asked about it on Friday.”)
Seems like the truth was already being monitored and yet, no concern.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
Either naive or disingenuous but considering the OP misrepresented both examples of what POOTWH “created” versus Biden, I’d say both. But hey, we should all be concerned, notwithstanding Hillary and election rigging.
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©
It's funny how this guy calls this little website of a 30 year old band an echo chamber, while the right wing Outrage Machine just continues churning and churning and telling their tens of millions of viewers/listeners/headline readers about what to get riled over time and time again without much context.
If they do have power beyond recommendations, I have concerns. If they don't - I really don't think it matters.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Not admitting the truth is significant derangement.