How Counter-Narratives Emerge

[Belsnickel]

(07-13-2017, 01:38 PM)Vlad Wrote: The fact that the White House is still pushing this story is just asinine.

You really don't get what I was alluding to?

I don't.

(07-13-2017, 01:38 PM)Vlad Wrote: I just don't believe I've ever read any of your posts in which you stated how asinine it is that democrats and the media were still pushing this Russian story.
Hey, if the persistent push of this story plants into peoples minds that Trumps election was somehow tainted or illegitimate then lets just stick with it.

Actually, I have plenty of posts talking about how I am tired of the media talking about it and would like them to just let Mueller do his job. But, this is also a big false equivalency. The false narrative about the uranium deal has been proven to be untrue, whereas the situation with Russia's influence on our election and any possible collusion is still under investigation. Then you also have the false equivalency of this is the White House we are talking about, not a media outlet. There is a difference between what a government agency puts out and what a media outlet, or even an individual politician, puts out.

(07-13-2017, 01:38 PM)Vlad Wrote: And who "thoroughly debunked"  the Clinton/Russian Uranium deal?  Snopes?

You know as well as I do that had it been Trump cutting a Uranium deal with Russia, the scrutiny from the left would be harsh an unrelenting....as from the Republican establishment as well.

Dino has already pointed it out, but there have been many things that have come out concluding that the claim was not true based simply on the facts of the situation. If you would like to be critical of the deal overall, I have no problems with that and as long as the critique is reasoned well then good on you. Trying to hang it around Clinton's neck when it is possible she didn't have anything to do with it at all, and if she did it was a small hand in it, is asinine.