Angelia

Ovde si pogresio, ne znam kako je bilo na predhodnim glasanjima, ali sada je bilo rano glasanje, mislim od 22og do 27og Oktobra. Cula sam da su u Filiju bili ogromni redovi za rano glasanje.

Inace isto u Filiju - jako tuzna slika, iako nama je stigla i nacionalna garda da nas stiti od "Kosovo za patike", anti-rasista.

Vecina nezavisnih koje ja znam da ce glasati za Trampa (nisu nikakvi trampovci), to rade zbog njegovog programa, i smatra da Biden nema program ili da je budalast (tipa povecacemo porez, zaustaviti fraking, radimo green deal...i sl.). Uz to hoce ljudi red i mir, i to sto su dems cutali na politicko naselje i ponegde i podrzavali, je nesto sto ljudi ne vole, ali ne pricaju o tome da ih ne bi nazivali rasistima. Uglavnom su u pitanju liberali. Oni koji su republikanci tradicionalno, uglavnom zbog konzervativne fiskalne politike, poreske politike i zbog politike protiv ilegalne imigracije.

Naravno da ima, i to mnogo. Zato su pollovi i prosli put bili pogresni. Videcemo da li su ovaj put ispravili to, iako cisto sumnjam. To su uglavnom nezavisni glasaci koji nisu povezani ni sa jednom ni drugom strankom

Sto rece moj burazer kome se zapusio nos (nije isao na testiranje) "jedva cekam da ovo prodje pa da mozemo da imamo i neke druge bolesti".

Ah pa dobro, sad si na nivou Trampa. Da znamo gde stojis a ne da stalno moralises o Trampovim sledbenicima. Btw ja nikad nisam rekla da me nikad nije interesovalo sta Tramp radi Rekla sam da me ne interesuje njegov privatan zivot.

N asve medije koji guse slobodu govora i slobodu stampe.

Meni je savrseno jasno zasto nisu, ali se pitam da li je tebi? Nije da niko nece da je objavi, objavio je NY Post, zar ne? Mogla si da me pitas zasto su mediji zataskali pricu o Bidenu i zenski koja je tvrdila da je sexualno uznemiravao - zasto nisu hteli da objave tu pricu, da li su i nju izmislili Rusi, isti oni mediji koji su kod Kavanagh tvrdili da treba verovati zeni...zasto naprasno nakon toga nece da objave tu pricu...

Twitter i FB ce verovatno izgubiti zastitu koju trenutno imaju. Zato su i isli pred Senat, a veoma lako moze da se zavrsi i na election interference. Njih moze da spasi samo da Tramp i Republikanci izgube, Senat i Predsednika. Sloboda govora i sloboda stampe jeste garantovana ustavom, za medije oni mogu da biraju sta hoce da pisu ali cenzura se protivi tome. To ce ih kostati komercijalno.

Da li si video negde da sam ja napisala da je ilegalno?

Jel ti razumes protivustavno? Postoji razlika u biti naklonjen jednoj politickoj opciji, i cenzurisati slobodu govora. Nije to isto.

Izvini, sta mislis pod kredibilniji, ako vidis da su svi ostali probali da zaustave pricu? Ko je tu onda kredibilniji ako gledamo ociglednu cenzuru i autoceznuru u medijima? Ne bi to bio prvi put da je neka prica zakopana. Ocigledno je ponudjena WSJ koji je odbio. Po tirazu NY Post su 4ta novina u USA.

FBI rekao da nema veze sa Rusima. Aha znaci tako je Tramp trebao da reaguje na Russian collusion Nova cinjenica je da su compu telefoni Hilari, i jos nekih bitnih ljudi, ukljucujuci ceo kabinet Obame. Data je kopija njegovog SSN, i pasosa..... Ne znam mozda je to nebitno, iako kazu FBI ima i drugi njegov laptop. Nista, mozda ja gresim - videcemo.

Moj komentar se odnosio na tajming - da li ce da izazove istu reakciju, nije jasno, mislim da su cekali suvise kasno. Na komentar da je prezvakana afera- mislim da nije. Da su je izbacili pre dva meseca Biden bi imao ozbiljan problem, ovako, mu samo ostaje ako pobedi da se bori sa impichmentom. I to je pitanje da li ce republikanci ici all the way. bukvalno on je otvoren za blackmail

Uporedila sam ta dva samo zato sto se desavaju sekund pre izbora, kad je Comey izasao sa istragom za Hilari bilo je ovako tesno

Pa Greenwald je definitivno levo. Dobitnik Pulitzera, covek koji je pustio pricu o Snowdenu....nije neki nebitan lik. Inace on je objavio razmenu sa urednicima, i definitivno su mu trazili da ukloni iz clanka bilo kakvo pominjanje da je Biden mozda korumpiran. Inace cela prica oko laptopa je upravo explodirala. Ovo je Hilari i server 2016 ispocetka. Zasto su cekali ovoliko dugo da objave - samo oni znaju. Ali za Bidena je naredna dva dana samo damage control, ukoliko mediji ne cenzurisu pricu.

Procitaj Zoki click Twitter je inace odlucio da oslobodi NYP account, koji su drzali dve nedelje zatvorenim.

La, la, la I jesam primetila, samo sto je to neprofesionalno, opasno i totalitarno, da ne pominjemo protivustavno

Cenzura medija i auto-cenzura koja se desava ovih dana je neverovatna. I definitivno pokazuje problem koji imamo u medijima. Levicari su krenuli da jedu svoju decu. Glenn Greenwald je dao otkaz u mediju u kome je bio su-osnivac, zbog pokusaja cenzure texta u kome kritikuje medije za ponasanje sa pricom o Bidenu i laptopu, i gde poteze neka teza pitanja. Text je objavio u izvornom obliku na svom blogu: TITLE: THE REAL SCANDAL: U.S. MEDIA USES FALSEHOODS TO DEFEND JOE BIDEN FROM HUNTER’S EMAILS Publication by the New York Post two weeks ago of emails from Hunter Biden's laptop, relating to Vice President Joe Biden's work in Ukraine, and subsequent articles from other outlets concerning the Biden family's pursuit of business opportunities in China, provoked extraordinary efforts by a de facto union of media outlets, Silicon Valley giants and the intelligence community to suppress these stories. One outcome is that the Biden campaign concluded, rationally, that there is no need for the front-running presidential candidate to address even the most basic and relevant questions raised by these materials. Rather than condemn Biden for ignoring these questions -- the natural instinct of a healthy press when it comes to a presidential election -- journalists have instead led the way in concocting excuses to justify his silence. After the Post’s first article, both that newspaper and other news outlets have published numerous other emails and texts purportedly written to and from Hunter reflecting his efforts to induce his father to take actions as Vice President beneficial to the Ukrainian energy company Burisma, on whose board of directors Hunter sat for a monthly payment of $50,000, as well as proposals for lucrative business deals in China that traded on his influence with his father. Individuals included in some of the email chains have confirmed the contents' authenticity. One of Hunter’s former business partners, Tony Bubolinski, has stepped forward on the record to confirm the authenticity of many of the emails and to insist that Hunter along with Joe Biden's brother Jim were planning on including the former Vice President in at least one deal in China. And GOP pollster Frank Luntz, who appeared in one of the published email chains, appeared to confirm the authenticity as well, though he refused to answer follow-up questions about it. ..... Publication of that initial New York Post story provoked a highly unusual censorship campaign by Facebook and Twitter. Facebook, through a long-time former Democratic Party operative, vowed to suppress the story pending its “fact-check,” one that has as of yet produced no public conclusions. And while Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey apologized for Twitter’s handling of the censorship and reversed the policy that led to the blocking of all links the story, the New York Post, the nation’s fourth-largest newspaper, continues to be locked out of its Twitter account, unable to post as the election approaches, for almost two weeks. ..... The few mainstream journalists who tried merely to discuss these materials have been vilified. For the crime of simply noting it on Twitter that first day, New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman had her name trend all morning along with the derogatory nickname “MAGA Haberman.” CBS News’ Bo Erickson was widely attacked even by his some in the media simply for asking Biden what his response to the story was. And Biden himself refused to answer, accusing Erickson of spreading a "smear." ....... To justify her own show’s failure to cover the story, 60 Minutes’ Leslie Stahl resorted to an entirely different justification. “It can’t be verified,” the CBS reporter claimed when confronted by President Trump in an interview about her program’s failure to cover the Hunter Biden documents. When Trump insisted there were multiple ways to verify the materials on the laptop, Stahl simply repeated the same phrase: “it can’t be verified.” After the final presidential debate on Thursday night, a CNN panel mocked the story as too complex and obscure for anyone to follow -- a self-fulfilling prophecy given that, as the network's media reporter Brian Stelter noted with pride, the story has barely been mentioned either on CNN or MSNBC. As the New York Times noted on Friday: "most viewers of CNN and MSNBC would not have heard much about the unconfirmed Hunter Biden emails.... CNN’s mentions of “Hunter” peaked at 20 seconds and MSNBC’s at 24 seconds one day last week." ....... First, the claim that the material is of suspect authenticity or cannot be verified -- the excuse used on behalf of Biden by Leslie Stahl and Christiane Amanpour, among others -- is blatantly false for numerous reasons. As someone who has reported similar large archives in partnership with numerous media outlets around the world (including the Snowden archive in 2014 and the Intercept’s Brazil Archive over the last year showing corruption by high-level Bolsonaro officials), and who also covered the reporting of similar archives by other outlets (the Panama Papers, the WikiLeaks war logs of 2010 and DNC/Podesta emails of 2016), it is clear to me that the trove of documents from Hunter Biden’s emails has been verified in ways quite similar to those. ....... Second, the oft-repeated claim from news outlets and CIA operatives that the published emails and texts were “Russian disinformation” was, from the start, obviously baseless and reckless. No evidence — literally none — has been presented to suggest involvement by any Russians in the dissemination of these materials, let alone that it was part of some official plot by Moscow. As always, anything is possible — when one does not know for certain what the provenance of materials is, nothing can be ruled out — but in journalism, evidence is required before news outlets can validly start blaming some foreign government for the release of information. And none has ever been presented. Yet the claim that this was "Russian disinformation" was published in countless news outlets, television broadcasts, and the social media accounts of journalists, typically by pointing to the evidence-free claims of ex-CIA officials. ...... Third, the media rush to exonerate Biden on the question of whether he engaged in corruption vis-a-vis Ukraine and Burisma rested on what are, at best, factually dubious defenses of the former Vice President. Much of this controversy centers on Biden's aggressive efforts while Vice President in late 2015 to force the Ukrainian government to fire its Chief Prosecutor, Viktor Shokhin, and replace him with someone acceptable to the U.S., which turned out to be Yuriy Lutsenko. These events are undisputed by virtue of a video of Biden boasting in front of an audience of how he flew to Kiev and forced the Ukrainians to fire Shokhin, upon pain of losing $1 billion in aid. But two towering questions have long been prompted by these events, and the recently published emails make them more urgent than ever: 1) was the firing of the Ukrainian General Prosecutor such a high priority for Biden as Vice President of the U.S. because of his son's highly lucrative role on the board of Burisma, and 2) if that was not the motive, why was it so important for Biden to dictate who the chief prosecutor of Ukraine was? ....... That a media outlet should even consider refraining from reporting on materials they know to be authentic and in the public interest because of questions about their provenance is the opposite of how journalism has been practiced. In the days before the 2016 election, for instance, the New York Times received by mail one year of Donald Trump's tax returns and -- despite having no idea who sent it to them or how that person obtained it: was is stolen or hacked by a foreign power? -- the Times reported on its contents. Veoma interesantan text i analiza zasto mediji stite Bidena, a i zasto ima dovoljno materijala da se ispituje Bidenovo koriscenje pozicije. Predugacak je da celog kopiram pa koga interesuje ima link.

Ma podseticu te ja: The study’s conclusions are supported by Covid-19 testing data in many of the cities that were home to prevalent protesting. For instance, the Minneapolis Department of Health reported that more than 15,000 people were tested at centers set up in communities affected by the protests, and 1.7% of tests came back positive—below the statewide average of about 3.6%. According to the Washington Post, protest attendees in Minneapolis returned positivity rates of less than 1% and that “officials believe the low infection rates reflect that the protests were outside, that most people wore masks and that people spent most of their time in motion, circulating through the crowd.” NPR reported last week that parties—not protests—are believed to have caused coronavirus spikes in Washington. https://www.forbes.com/sites/tommybeer/2020/07/01/research-determines-protests-did-not-cause-spike-in-coronavirus-cases/?sh=395e95927dac The leading theory to explain this paradox is that being outdoors is safer than indoors. Numerous studies support this. Japanese researchers, for example, found the odds of indoor transmission of the coronavirus were about 19 times greater than in the open air. But a new study funded by the National Bureau of Economic Research offers another explanation: The protests prompted an overall increase in people staying home, which mostly offset any impact of transmission among protesters. https://www.inquirer.com/health/coronavirus/coronavirus-no-spike-cities-despite-protests-big-surge-in-states-that-reopened-20200627.html That seemed to be especially true in areas where the media reported on violence at protests, the study concluded: “We generally find increases in the percent of residents staying at home full-time and time spent at home for both sets of protests [peaceful or violent], though effects are expectedly stronger when protests are accompanied by media reports of violence.” As a result, the study didn’t detect an increase in Covid-19 cases. “We went in not knowing if we would find an increase in cases, a decrease in cases, or no effect,” Dhaval Dave, an author of the study, told me. “It was somewhat surprising to us.” If anything, there may have been a decrease in Covid-19 cases due to the protests, the study found. But Dave cautioned against making too much of that finding, since it wasn’t statistically powerful. https://www.vox.com/2020/6/26/21300636/coronavirus-pandemic-black-lives-matter-protests Lucky us - znaci sto nasilniji protesti to manje obolelih.

Pa strucnjaci i vlasti. Vec si zaboravila?

Pa valjda ne, tako su nam rekli u vreme proslih riots, da su u stvari smanjili sirenje virusa, pa tako ocekujem i od predizbornih skupova Poenta je da niko ne obraca paznju na virus, dok ne prodju izbori.

Ali preizborni skupovi ne pale i ne pljackaju ....

Mi imamo riots, mislim koga briga za virus Cekam da prodju izbori.

Njegova reakcija jeste cudna. A i gde je Hunter da kaze nije istina? Pogotovo u kampanji. Ne mozes reci da nisu sumnjivi samo zato sto ne znamo kako je laptop dospeo do FBI. U svakom slucaju ne mislim da ce republikanci tek tako odustati od istrage.