Utopia Talk / Politics / Trump still echoes

habebe Member	Sat Jan 09 13:10:48 So apparently Trump is still om social media. You can't get parler on the google store, but you can get it as an unsupported app and Trump isnon there vowing to take down FB and Twitter from what I hear. Plus there is always Linux, it's free and uncensored
jergul large member	Sat Jan 09 13:11:59 Or Huawei's App Gallery.
habebe Member	Sat Jan 09 13:13:12 Remember, Twitter will ban a legally elected US President before they will ban designated foreign terrorists who call for our death regularly, openly call on teitter for more violence than launching rockets at US citizens...facts.
Paramount Member	Sat Jan 09 13:18:49 ” You can't get parler on the google store” I’m boycotting big-tech so I won’t be able to get Parler.
Daemon Member	Sat Jan 09 13:20:20 Can you use Parler without app simply with your browser? I have no account and don't really want to test it.
habebe Member	Sat Jan 09 13:21:11 The wierd thing is , the left claims they were worried that the right was believing misinformation so they can Trumps many platforms. Now the right has more mistrust in big media then evwr before since they seem intwnt in blocking open discussion on political grounds.
jergul large member	Sat Jan 09 13:25:12 Rather rich to suggest the US president lacks a forum to express ideas. He could fire off as many messages as he likes that the white house press gaggle would spread immediately.
Paramount Member	Sat Jan 09 13:26:55 So what is the URL to Trumps Parler? Or is Parler not a webservice? Only an app?
habebe Member	Sat Jan 09 13:27:11 I wonder if he will go on Joe Rogan, that would make my day.
Daemon Member	Sat Jan 09 13:28:55 OK I think parler requires a phone number to sign up, so they are more nazi than twitter. Include me out.
habebe Member	Sat Jan 09 13:44:31 Jergul,And big media has at times refused to air that as well. Twitter actually banned the WH press secretary before for posting a news article from the NYP, a newspaper that's been around.for like ever. daemon, Well you would know Nazi...didnt Merkel just start to rebuild Auschwitz?
habebe Member	Sat Jan 09 13:46:03 btw, On Twitter you " tweet" from what I gather its called an echo on parler, or thats a repost. Not sure yet.
habebe Member	Sat Jan 09 13:51:10 And parler use still skyrockets.hahaha http://tec...Dej-jc9bPxlucd_qzgokWBYLa43xWw While Google uses the CCP playbook, yo "protect" people from free speech.
Wrath of Orion Member	Sat Jan 09 14:28:12 Retard Rod 2.0 and other Trump fluffer support violence and overthrowing free and fair democratic elections. Facts.
Daemon Member	Sat Jan 09 14:54:00 So you have given them your phone number? Better think twice about what you write there.
habebe Member	Sat Jan 09 15:53:11 Daemon, The long arm of Der Merkle? Yes I relize thats masculine.
habebe Member	Sat Jan 09 15:54:58 woo, Glad to hear that you think Lincoln was terrorist war criminal.
Average Ameriacn Member	Mon Jan 11 02:49:52 This means war!!!! http://dea...nd-the-company-1234670607/amp/ Parler CEO John Matze said today that his social media company has been dropped by virtually all of its business alliances after Amazon, Apple and Google ended their agreements with the social media service. “Every vendor from text message services to email providers to our lawyers all ditched us too on the same day,” Matze said today on Fox News. Matze conceded that the bans could put the company out of business while raising free speech issues, calling it “an assault on everybody.” “They all work together to make sure at the same time we would lose access to not only our apps, but they’re actually shutting all of our servers off tonight, off the internet,” Matze said. “They made an attempt to not only kill the app, but to actually destroy the entire company. And it’s not just these three companies. Every vendor from text message services to email providers to our lawyers all ditched us too on the same day.” The remarks come a day after Amazon dropped Parler from its servers, joining Apple and Google. They all cited the potential of spreading violent content on the site, which is favored by conservatives as an alternative to Twitter and Facebook. Matze said that the services are unfairly targeting Parler. “They’re trying to falsely claim that we’re somehow responsible for the events that occurred on the 6th,” he said, the date of the Capitol building takeover by protesters. “It would put anybody out of business,” he said of the tech bans. “This thing could destroy anybody.” He added: “We’re going to try our best to get back online as quickly as possible. But we’re having a lot of trouble because every vendor we talk to says they won’t work with us. Because if Apple doesn’t approve and Google doesn’t approve, they won’t.”
Paramount Member	Mon Jan 11 02:58:22 What was it Jergul said, third party sanctions must suck?
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Jan 11 03:24:20 [Jergul]: "He could fire off as many messages as he likes that the white house press gaggle would spread immediately." The problem is narrative; they'll only edit his messages to fit their narrative. Then that narrative is spread as fact, and DNC supporters believe that alternate version of reality. .. [Daemon]: "OK I think parler requires a phone number to sign up, so they are more nazi than twitter. Include me out." That was a (near) full stop for my curiosity also. It makes sense for keeping out trolls, foreign influence, and bots; but it leaves a lot of trust in Parler security. Even if Parler has not yet become "big tech", most big tech starts its success streak through data mining. A temporary solution would be to sign up with a no-name no-credit-card burner phone (cash purchase, refilled in cash at a phone store). Paying the burner phone could be considered the subscription fee for using Parler ;) But, the fact that existing big tech has so egregiously used its powers to take Parler down (Amazon even took down Parler.com by denying them web-hosting; the website went down Sunday night / Monday morning) should speak as positive press for Parler. That is, Parler just got publicity for free speech, with Google, Amazon, and Apple showing themselves to be enemies of free speech (or at least overly beholden to shareholders). So, people who don't buy the "hate speech" lies may be curious about Parler and take a look (once it returns). Other social media may thus suffer a small brain drain, and Parler discourse will improve its quality from the influx of visitors. The DNC experienced this same thing when it began its identity politics vitriol leading into 2016. They lost a lot of their medium and high level discourse, leaving mostly low level discourse to support them. It's part of why echo chambers benefit them: if discourse improves, it makes them look bad.
patom Member	Mon Jan 11 04:14:53 Trump could call his friends at the National Enquirer. I'm sure they will back his every utterance. Maybe put out a daily edition. Maybe his buddy that still is in charge of the USPS could offer free mailing and spread his rantings on a daily basis thus circumventing the internet.
jergul large member	Mon Jan 11 04:23:47 CC Wow. That was some incredible projection. Creating alternate realities is what Trump does. The fact remains that Trump has platforms that are publically accessible. Nevermind Parler. Trump supporters can just go to relevant government sites to see whatever Trump spews out.
habebe Member	Mon Jan 11 04:43:06 Jergul, Realistically they have for the the time being made it extremely difficult for him to directly speak to the American people and greatly diminished his reach....yes he could send smoke signals I suppose. They do so under the claim of limiting his ability to incite violence. Im not here ATM to argue that, but I will argue that the ability to "incite violence" comes and goes with the same ability to reach an audience for legitimate purposes. The problem many people have currently is that about 5 people right now in the US can control what and how ideas are shared.That is a tremendous power to have in so few hands.
jergul large member	Mon Jan 11 04:56:43 habebe He can speak directly to the American people any time he likes. His problem is that he has nothing to say because he is caught between alienating his base and increasing his legal and financial jepardy. You doubt it? Where is his blanket pardon for all patriots that took part in the freedom march on the capitol? Several languish in jail as we speak.
habebe Member	Mon Jan 11 05:31:23 Why would he pardon those whom he condemns? Again, any reasonable person would say its more difficult for Trump to speak directly to the public ATM. I'm not saying its impossible.
jergul large member	Mon Jan 11 05:42:26 habebe It is more difficult. Twitter's policies on political leader immunity from its terms of service were obviously flawed. But the leader of the free world still has ample room to take up more oxygen than literally any other person on the planet. If he wanted to. Problem is, there is no upside for him. We both know the condemnation is something he regrets and never believed.
habebe Member	Mon Jan 11 06:00:12 To speak without someone else controlling the narrative? I personally think Trump is. working on just that, a means to deliver his message freely. Obviously with the hit job on parler, it will tale more than app. A tv channel, web hosting, app development etc. Trump still sells seats.Plus Big tech may be one of the few orginizations hated more than Trump.He has plenty of resources/connections to start such an endeavor.
jergul large member	Mon Jan 11 06:17:35 He can go to the press briefing room any time he likes and deliver his message freely. Anyone on the planet can then go to the wh website and view the unadulterated message. He has nothing to say habebe.
jergul large member	Mon Jan 11 06:24:08 You can be sure that everyone on the planet will know he said something. How the media reports on it will vary, but Fox pundits will certainly present it in a form TLM people will approve of.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Jan 11 06:25:07 [jergul]: "Wow. That was some incredible projection. Creating alternate realities is what Trump does." It's no surprise hearing this from you, despite the many threads we've had where I have shown explicitly that the media has taken edited clips of Trump and created false narratives out of them. E.g., - The "fine people" hoax (Scott Adams Essays; April 30th, 2019; http://www...0/the-fine-people-hoax-funnel/ ) - The "Stand back and stand by" hoax (news sources willfully misinterpreting Trump's meaning at the presidential debate) - The hoax of the white supremacist Proud Boys (TimcastIRL; October 12th, 2020; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pj-WUk0c5wQ ) - The "suckers" and "losers" hoax (Kayleigh McEnany responds to the Atlantic article; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3yM6QvOkiw ) A fun thing about the last one: the White House Press Secretary gave on-the-record sources confirming that Trump had not said those things, and the media response? The next day they called her a liar, collected their own series of lies as proof, and submitted no contrary evidence on the actual "suckers"/"losers" topic. The story was dropped altogether. It was likely just a misinformation campaign designed to erode the GOP's reliable military vote. The DNC's best hope is that their anonymous source (if he/she exists) will come forward after the election (perhaps they had a mole that they did not want to give up at the time), or, much more likely: they hope that the misinformation did its work and everyone will forget about the story altogether. .. [Jergul]: "Trump supporters can just go to relevant government sites to see whatever Trump spews out." It's a little disingenuous to think that voters will go to WhiteHouse.Gov — which has average website design and offers no push notification features — to hear day-to-day responses from Trump. The reality is that Twitter, despite its many problems, has made that kind of information-sharing much more accessible. I would agree that presidents need a more direct and accessible line to the American people which does not rely on a private company such as Twitter, but it currently does not exist.
jergul large member	Mon Jan 11 06:33:01 CC Already responded to. The existence of a Trump message will be known globally. Reporting on it will vary, but the TLM movement have their pundits that will present it in a way they approve of. He just has nothing to say. Anything will either alienate the base, or increase exposure to legal and financial jepardy. I find that the dog whistle perspective has been highly underreported. For example the stand back and stand by. Proud Boys understood that exactly as Trump wanted and came in force to the 6th rally.
Paramount Member	Mon Jan 11 06:35:13 "He can go to the press briefing room any time he likes and deliver his message freely. Anyone on the planet can then go to the wh website and view the unadulterated message. He has nothing to say habebe. " Jergul is correct.
Paramount Member	Mon Jan 11 06:37:43 Cherub cow, "It's a little disingenuous to think that voters will go to WhiteHouse.Gov — which has average website design" lol that's subjective. IMO Twitter has avarage design. I haven't seen Parler but I bet it is even worse. White House could stream live video from whitehouse.gov, enabling Trump to speak live to the people if he has anything to say. It's not rocket science.
habebe Member	Mon Jan 11 06:50:31 Twitter has 180 million.daily users....wh.gov has how many? Big enough smoke signals could work, DC is mostly a shit hole anyway, you could probably just start a BLM protest and let nature take its course to.start the fire.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Jan 11 06:53:24 [jergul]: "Reporting on it will vary" Exactly, and that's a problem. There is a vast difference between primary and secondary sources. The president's own words directly from him to the people should be available. If those words must go through an intermediary, then interpretation may distort them — for better or worse. Often, when people read the words themselves, they understand and cannot be so easily misled. .. [jergul]: "I find that the dog whistle perspective has been highly underreported. For example the stand back and stand by. Proud Boys understood that exactly as Trump wanted and came in force to the 6th rally." Thank you for confirming that you do indeed believe the narrative of the hoax. You really believe that he was telling the Proud Boys to stand by for orders. Your tiny mind is so very malleable to the right frequencies! [Chris Wallace]: "Are you willing, tonight, to condemn white supremacists and militia groups [Trump]: "Sure." [Chris Wallace]: "..and to say that they need to STAND DOWN and not add to the violence in a number of these cities as we saw in Kenosha and as we've seen in Portland." [Trump]: "Sure, I'm willing to do that, but" [Chris Wallace]: "Are you prepared to specifically —" [Biden]: "Do it." [Chris Wallace]: "Well, go ahead, sir." [Trump]: "Sure. But I would say, I would say, almost everything I see is from the left wing, not from the right wing" [Chris Wallace]: "So, what are you, what are you, what are you saying?" [Trump]: "I'm willing to do anything. I want to see peace." [Chris Wallace]: "Well, then do it, sir." [Biden]: "Say it. Do it. Say it." [Trump]: "You want to call 'em, what do you want to call 'em? Give me a name, give me a name," [Chris Wallace]: "White supremacists and right —" [Trump]: "go ahead. Who would you like me to condemn?" [Biden]: "White sparons—, Proud Boys." [Chris Wallace]: "White supremacists and right wing militias—" [Biden]: "Proud Boys." [Trump]: "Proud Boys? Stand back and stand by. But I'll tell you what, somebody's gotta do something about Antifa and the left." ( http://twitter.com/axios/status/1311127476391772160?lang=en ) He was clearly condemning the Proud Boys, whom Biden had introduced as the enemy he needed to condemn. If he was not, then the word "but" would not have even appeared after he condemned them. He was also using Wallace's "stand down" language, rephrasing it with different "Stand" phrases. He also would not have said, "sure" so many times if he was not condemning white supremacists. He also would not have called for peace. But as you can see from the Twitter title, the idea was to get people to only see the selected part and believe the narrative instead of the spoken words. You bought it. Congratulations.
Paramount Member	Mon Jan 11 06:56:32 "Twitter has 180 million.daily users....wh.gov has how many?" Yeah, but if Trump starts posting there and if starts live streaming from whitehouse.gov then millions of people are going to come to whitehouse.gov because people loves Trump.
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Jan 11 06:58:36 [Paramount]: "White House could stream live video from whitehouse.gov, enabling Trump to speak live to the people if he has anything to say." Could they? On what service? YouTube? The same YouTube owned by Google, which just silenced Trump content and purged right-wing content creators? Vimeo, which is owned by publishers that have been critical of Trump? Or do you think that a government-led effort to make a new web page video encoder will result in an encoding solution that will support millions of page-views per second? Just make a video encoder, Paramount. It's not difficult. "It's not rocket science." Just.. do the thing.
jergul large member	Mon Jan 11 07:09:38 CC He is clearly telling Proud Boys to stand back and stand by. It matches squarely with his whole narrative on reversing the outcome of any adverse relection result. I understood it this way and the proud boys certainly underestood it that way. They showed up in force on the 6th answering Trump's rally call. The TLM has their news sources and their pundits who will report on what Trump says in a way they like. Never mind intellectual laziness not being a basis for supression. Trump remains the leader of the free world and will easily take up more oxygen than anyone else on the planet if he deigned to say something. The core problem is that he has nothing to say.
Paramount Member	Mon Jan 11 07:27:26 "Could they? On what service?" On their own webserver / website.
chuck Member	Mon Jan 11 08:22:12 > Or do you think that a government-led effort to make a new web page video encoder will result in an encoding solution that will support millions of page-views per second? "Reverse the polarity" style techno babble. You don't need a video encoder to host videos on a web page, you just need the video tag http://dev...US/docs/Web/HTML/Element/video and a CDN to host the video file if you expect it will get many visitors. The video, being a static resource instead of something that gets generated specifically for each user, can just be uploaded to a CDN (public or govt) and then the web page uses that URL as the source. The government can handle these requirements just fine. That private companies do a lot of fancy things on top of this (online transcoding to enable livestreaming, upgrading/downgrading video quality based on connection speed, configurable playback speed, etc) does not impact the ability to post videos on the White House website.
Paramount Member	Mon Jan 11 14:19:43 Here, they already have live streaming: http://www.whitehouse.gov/live/ January 11, 2021 Live There are no live streaming events. Check back soon. But Trump has nothing to say. Or, maybe the White House has banned Trump from speaking.
Paramount Member	Mon Jan 11 14:27:44 Looki looki here: http://twitter.com/potus Trump can still tweet if he wants. So it turns out that everyone who is saying that "Trump is being silenced" and that "freedom of speech is being attacked" does not know what he/she is talking about.
Paramount Member	Mon Jan 11 14:28:35 I also want to leave my favorite Trump-quote here: ”Somebody will say, 'Oh freedom of speech, freedom of speech.' These are foolish people." – Donald Trump
tumbleweed the wanderer	Mon Jan 11 14:35:24 "You knew damn well I was a snake before you took me in!" ~ Donald J. Trump (said many times too)
habebe Member	Mon Jan 11 19:40:06 TW, Strike First Strike Hard No Mercy
habebe Member	Mon Jan 11 19:42:15 Paramount, Generally don't you favor government approved speech over freedom of speech anyway?
Cherub Cow Member	Mon Jan 18 00:43:27 [jergul]: "He is clearly telling Proud Boys to stand back and stand by." Literally, yes, he is saying those words. If, on the other hand, you (still) think that that means he used those words as a dog whistle and wanted them to "stand by" for violence or for his orders, then you are a useful idiot. We we know this of you in particular, but in a broader sense, useful idiots in general swallowed this dog whistle media narrative. The "dog whistle" narrative has become QAnon conspiracy theory for dishonest left-wing useful idiots — low level discourse that they regurgitate into each other's mouths. To someone who can read words in good faith and see their actual meanings within a context: absolutely not, that's not his meaning. He was clearly ready to condemn *any* name that Wallace or Biden gave to him, letting them qualify any particular group. Proud Boys was name-dropped, so Trump echoed Wallace's words to "STAND DOWN" and varied them to say "stand back and stand by", meaning: "[get out of the way, I condemn you]". This was further reiterated above when he kept saying, "Sure [I condemn these groups]." It was further confirmed again when he said, "(BUT) I'll tell you what, somebody's gotta do something about Antifa and the left." The word "but" was used to position his next independent clause in contrast to his former, meaning: yes, he condemns the Proud Boys based on the name-drop association with white supremacy, but he thinks that left-wing violence should also be condemned. These meanings were confirmed both before and after the debates via reels and reels of video where he echoed his sentiments on white supremacy, issuing full condemnations dozens and dozens of times ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ov69GR0vBXk ). He further confirmed that he didn't even know much about the Proud Boys but was willing to condemn them (Fox News, October 1st, 2020; http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rj97Uygh2qQ ). He then repeated the same "but" conjunction, asking that Biden condemn left-wing violence. If you continue to disagree with the text even when it's posted in front of you for your supreme convenience, please use actual textual evidence to support your point. .. [jergul]: "I understood it this way and the proud boys certainly underestood it that way." Actually, no, they did not. That link I posted above? Here it is again: TimcastIRL; October 12th, 2020 "Chairman Of The Proud Boys, Enrique Tarrio, In Studio" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pj-WUk0c5wQ The chairman of the Proud Boys realized that Trump had "thrown [them] under the bus", saying, "The president, to me, unequivocally, he denounced the Proud Boys" (1:17:50). He then started getting media calls from outlets asking him what he felt about the president denouncing them. He said that fellow Proud Boys in their community chats were joking about how they should re-brand to the "Denounced Boys" (1:19:40). He went on to say that he understood it as, "stand back and let the police do their job." He explains that the media treated it as the Proud Boys being some kind of "militia" or "force that's ready to pounce" — when they're not. They're not even a white supremacist group. .. [Paramount]: "Looki looki here: http://twitter.com/potus Trump can still tweet if he wants." That aged well, given that @POTUS was suspended. .. [chuck]: ""Reverse the polarity" style techno babble." Yikes. Chuck thought my very bland mention of video encoding was "techno babble", but then he went on to explain how simple it all was while using the terms, "CDN", "static resource", "online transcoding", and "configurable playback speed". Or maybe he was saying that *he* was about to commit the sins that he was condemning? That would make more sense and soften the blow of his idiotic hypocrisy, so let's pretend that that was the case — chuck couldn't possibly be an idiot! He was just *satirizing* what an idiot *would* say! At any rate, it's pretty easy to tell that whoever designed WhiteHouse.gov isn't really committed to that project. It's another one of these poorly designed tile sites that lacks any clear update pattern. The front page still has a story from October. It's not meant to handle daily news. It doesn't even cross-reference its own contents. It was a build-a-website-using-templates project that was abandoned five minutes after it was completed. But that's supposed to replace Twitter? Maybe in six months, after hiring someone with actual qualifications to build it. In the meantime, dissent was already strategically silenced, and the hack teamsters have signed on for the silencing because it fits their short-sighted objectives.
jergul large member	Mon Jan 18 05:03:45 CC I think Trump literally want his people do to whatever it took to have him inagurated on the 20th. The fellow you cited was arrested on the 5th in Washington DC for burning stuff outside a church. He was there for the rally in support of Trump. The only useful idiot here is yourself.
	show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message: