“Spygate” isn’t news. The fact that former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper is saying that Russian interference decided the outcome of the 2016 election is.

I’ve yet to see it, but apparently James Clapper, who served as Director of the Defense Intelligence Agency under George H.W. Bush, Director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency under George W. Bush, and Director of National Intelligence under Obama said today on PBS Newshour that, in his estimation, Russian interference actually decided the outcome of the 2016 election. This, it seems, is something he’s also just said in print, in his new book, “Facts and Fears: Hard Truths from a Life in Intelligence.”

Clapper, it should also be noted, also said on Newshour this evening that America is at risk of becoming banana republic if our democratic institutions don’t hold up to the pressure being exerted by Donald Trump and his co-conspirators in Congress. [Co-conspirators is my word, not his.]

For what it’s worth, Trump is not terrible happy with Clapper lately, as the former Director of National Intelligence has made it his job these past few weeks to repeatedly shoot down the administration’s most recent bullshit claim, that Obama had placed a “deep state” spy within the Trump campaign with the intention of helping Hillary Clinton take the White House… In a tweet yesterday, Trump called Clapper, who has served four administrations with distinction, the “worlds dumbest former Intelligence Head.” And, yes, he forgot the apostrophe.

Here, if you haven’t been following along, is President Trump, earlier today, trying desperately to introduce the word “Spygate” into our shared lexicon by saying it as many times as humanly possible.

This, of course, is bullshit, just like it was a few months ago when we were told that the ridiculous “Nunes Memo” was going to prove definitively that the government targeted the great American patriot Carter Page without cause. As you’ll recall, in the case, we eventually discovered that Page had been under surveillance since 2013, when members of the intelligence community first observed him meeting with a known Russian operative in New York City. And, I suspect, when all is said and done, “Spygate” will turn out the same way, with the intelligence community once again having to prove that, yes, they did look into members of Trump’s inner circle, but not because they wanted to collect campaign intelligence for Hillary Clinton, so much as because a number of people surrounding Trump were known to have relationships with Russians assets during the period in which the Kremlin was aggressively attempting to interfere in the election.

But Trump is making it sound as though the intelligence community was only interested because they wanted to both harm him and help Hillary Clinton. “If the FBI or DOJ was infiltrating a campaign for the benefit of another campaign, that is a really big deal,” he recently tweeted. “Only the release or review of documents that the House Intelligence Committee (also, Senate Judiciary) is asking for can give the conclusive answers. Drain the Swamp!” [His intention, of course, is just to get his hands on the evidence against him, so that he can distort it, further muddying the waters as we approach impeachment.]

So, yes, it’s probably true that the intelligence community, once they were alerted to the fact that George Papadopoulos, while in a London bar, had told an Australian diplomat that the Trump campaign would be receiving Clinton campaign emails stolen by the Russians, sent an informant to speak with Papadopoulos, in hopes of finding out what in the hell was going on. [This informant, we now know, was Republican academic Stefan Halper.] And, this, is exactly what they should have done, given the seriousness of this tip that they’d received from Australia in the wake of the report that the report that the DNC had been hacked.

The truth is, if Obama, or anyone in his administration, had wanted to scuttle the Trump campaign, it would have been relatively easy. All they would have had to do was pick up the phone, call a reporter, and feed them details about the active investigation into Russian interference and the many connections between Russia and the Trump campaign. They didn’t do that, though. Not only that, but, if James Comey and others were really trying to throw the election in Hillary Clinton’s favor, chances are that they wouldn’t have came out in the week prior to the election, talking about how the ridiculous Clinton email server investigation was going to be reopened.

But, because a good percentage of the American population is stupid, and since we’ve got a corporatist propaganda channel broadcasting 24/7, we’re talking about “Spygate” today like it’s a real, fucking thing that’s “bigger than Watergate.”

One last thing to keep in mind as we discuss this. People only attack “the system” when they don’t have any other legitimate legal defense. All of this bluster on the part of Trump, Nunes and company just means that they’re aware of the severity of the charges they’re facing, and they know their only shot of escaping is to metaphorically burn down the court house and make their way out in the confusion. Of course, in this analogy, the court house is our American democracy.

This entry was posted in Politics, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.

89 Comments

  1. anonymous
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 12:13 am | Permalink

    Another quote from Judy Woodruff: “the intent was not to spy on the campaign, but to determine what the Russians were up to” says former Dir of Nat’l Intelligence James Clapper of an informant meeting with 3 Trump campaign aides.

  2. anonymous
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 12:15 am | Permalink

    Senator Jeff Merkley: Something very dangerous is happening right now. @realDonaldTrump is trying to make the Mueller investigation into just another partisan political battle, to downplay its significance & keep Americans from uniting against any wrongdoing that might be uncovered.

  3. anonymous
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 12:17 am | Permalink

    Senator Jeff Merkley: Now, @realDonaldTrump is bullying the Justice Department into making highly sensitive information about an ongoing investigation available to Congressman Nunes, who has a demonstrated intent and history of abusing information to undermine the investigation.

  4. anonymous
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 12:25 am | Permalink

    Maddow: Is there anything in the dossier that has been disproven?

    Clapper: No.

  5. EOS
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 4:12 am | Permalink

    Bigger than Watergate. What did Obama know and when did he know it?

    https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/most-think-obama-white-house-spied-on-trump-campaign-want-special-counsel-ibdtipp-poll/

  6. Jean Henry
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 7:44 am | Permalink

    EOS fundamentalist faith applies to Fox News as well I guess.
    They are hanging by a thread.
    Can you imagine how thrilled she’d have been if the FBI had investigated the Obama campaign?

    Mark– In our list of trumped up controversies meant to divert from and call into question the Russia Probe, let’s not forget Horowitz’s much anticipated OIG report on the FBI. Remember HW said it was going to blow the lid off the deep state and Come et al would go to jail? Well it’s been delayed and delayed for months now. OIG Horowitz’ testimony before bogies has been delayed until just before the report’s release. They are saying it may be June now. McCabe was fired in April. And even Fox News is back peddling it. I think it may actually end up going after Comey for the announcing the re-opening of Clinton email investigation and withholding the Trump Russia probe information more than anything else. Not exactly what HW was looking for.
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/05/21/ig-report-on-clinton-case-expected-to-hit-fbi-leaders-for-sitting-on-emails-in-2016.html

    I know that we on the left are following developments closely and impatiently too. But we’ve actually had some results and the web is growing larger. I almost feel sorry for the right. The entire deal for them is about how Trump is being unfairly maligned. They are developing a persecution complex. While in power.

    I guess, as with Peterson et al, this has become standard. I’m not crazy about persecution complexes from anyone, but from white Christian conservatives, it’s just funny.

  7. EOS
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 8:04 am | Permalink

    If the FBI was so interested in preventing Russian interference in the campaign, why didn’t they plant operatives in both campaigns? Is there any evidence of FBI surveillance of the Clinton campaign? Did they use honeypots to entrap anyone besides Papadopoulos? They leaked that Clinton’s emails were available, then got Papadopoulus to reveal that to an aggressive woman in a bar, which he stupidly denied under oath. He lied, and should be charged, but this had everything to do with the plot to take down Trump than anything that Trump has done.

    Just wait, by the time this is over there will be far more indictments of the previous administration than of the current one. Comey’s response yesterday was hilarious. We can’t investigate the tactics of the FBI for the sake of our grandchildren? There will be blowback on the FBI, but far less once the scum at the top are brought to justice than if we covered up their abuse of power for political gain.

  8. Jean Henry
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    Hey EOS– Guess what? The FBI can’t surveil anybody about anything without probable cause.
    They didn’t find any known foreign operatives talking to Clinton campaign staff, I guess.

  9. Jean Henry
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 8:15 am | Permalink

    “Just wait, by the time this is over there will be far more indictments of the previous administration than of the current one. Comey’s response yesterday was hilarious. We can’t investigate the tactics of the FBI for the sake of our grandchildren? There will be blowback on the FBI, but far less once the scum at the top are brought to justice than if we covered up their abuse of power for political gain.”

    I took a screen shot of that one to preserve in perpetuity, EOS.

  10. EOS
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 8:58 am | Permalink

    Guess you missed the report of Clinton campaign financing of the dossier produced by a former British spy. There is actual proof that Clinton colluded with foreigners to influence the campaign. It seems everything they accuse Trump of doing, they have done themselves. Glass houses…

    https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/24/us/politics/clinton-dnc-russia-dossier.html

  11. anonymous
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    Nixon resigned over “Watergate” for covering up the GOP’s break in at the Washington hotel. All of Obama’s Director’s (DOJ/FBI/CIA/DNI), and the former President himself, should be in jail for instigating and covering up “Spygate”.

    Your opinion is (using your words) “F—ing Bull S—-“.

  12. EOS
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 10:13 am | Permalink

    Thank you anonymous. What a breath of fresh air.

  13. Jean Henry
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 10:50 am | Permalink

    EOS–Clinton hired a British (ally) foreign national to compile opposition research. Actually she took over the contract from a GOP pac after Trump won the primary. That is not the same thing as meeting with active agents of an enemy secret service during a campaign and lying about it.
    Also both campaigns WERE investigated by the FBI as they were underway. I have zero issue with investigating the shit out of people in power or seeking power. Why would you?
    Do you really feel that Trump is a victim of unfair treatment?
    I think that’s amazing.

    Anonymous– your bold statement is meaningless. “Should be in jail” Please tell me where’s the indictment? Where’s the law they violated? Lay out your case. Don’t just make bold declarations and call bullshit. Can’t you wait for the Horowitz IOG report? I know the right is laying a lot at the feet of that report and have been for months now. We on the left are all waiting patiently for the Mueller probe to conclude. Most of us on the left are not asking for arrests before due process. We are following the story of course, but also being patient. Watergate took several years to prosecute. Hold your roll, friend. Due process matters. Right?

  14. EOS
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 10:57 am | Permalink

    There’s no exception for allowing foreign influence regardless of whether on not they are “allies”. We are not at war with Russia either and they were our “allies” in WWII. Not that that matters at all because I don’t see a shred of evidence that Trump colluded with Russia in the first place. But there is a financial trail for the Clinton campaign collusion with foreigners.

  15. M
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 11:38 am | Permalink

    What’s to understand, Jean? He didn’t like the Obama administration, so they should all be in jail. #EvidenceSchmevidence #FactsBeDamned

  16. Donal Trump this morning
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    Not surprisingly, the GREAT Men & Women of the FBI are starting to speak out against Comey, McCabe and all of the political corruption and poor leadership found within the top ranks of the FBI. Comey was a terrible and corrupt leader who inflicted great pain on the FBI! #SPYGATE

  17. Jean Henry
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

    Setting aside your false equivalency, I’m fine with Clinton being investigated for the Steele Dossier and the emails, as it appears she is being.
    Why, EOS, do you object to Trump being investigated?
    And why in the world are you feeling certain about the outcome?

    “The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, but wiser people so full of doubts.” – Bertrand Russell

  18. Donal Trump this morning
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    Clapper has now admitted that there was Spying in my campaign. Large dollars were paid to the Spy, far beyond normal. Starting to look like one of the biggest political scandals in U.S. history. SPYGATE – a terrible thing!

  19. Jean Henry
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

    And… Trump cancels North Korea summit because they insulted Mike Pence.
    Man, I thought maybe we could get something out of having a scary, volatile madman at the helm. Nope.
    He truly is the biggest idiot ever.
    I hate the word idiot, but this is like a Mel Brooks movie.

  20. Posted May 24, 2018 at 8:59 pm | Permalink

    I don’t do it for the “likes” but it does kind of bug me when I notice that something this important only has five of them. It could, of course, be because I did a shit job of conveying exactly what’s going on. I worry, however, that it has more to do with Trump fatigue… I mean it’s kind of a fucking big deal when a sitting president accuses his predecessor of placing a spy inside his campaign, right? Oh, and then there’s the part about the former Director of National Intelligence saying that, in his estimation, Trump is only in office because of Russian interference. Also kind of a big deal.

  21. NBC News
    Posted May 24, 2018 at 10:54 pm | Permalink

    “Clapper has now admitted that there was Spying in my campaign,” President Trump tweeted.

    Responding to a direct question — “Was the FBI spying on Trump’s campaign?” — DNI James Clapper said in an interview, “No, they were not.”

    https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/999859874870816768

  22. EOS
    Posted May 25, 2018 at 4:31 am | Permalink

    Former Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper, in sworn testimony before the Senate Intelligence Committee in 2013 was asked if the National Security Agency was collecting any information at all on millions of Americans. His answer was “No sir.” Shortly thereafter, it was shown that the NSA is indeed collecting massive amounts of data on millions of Americans. Clapper then admitted “He made a mistake.”

    When the HPSCI (House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence) asked Clapper if he had leaked information about the Steele dossier to the press, he flatly denied discussing any intelligence matter with the press. When confronted with evidence to the contrary he admitted to providing the story to Jake Tapper of CNN and that he “might have spoken with several other reporters about the topic.” The leaks on the Trump administration did not come from within the Intelligence Community, they came from the very top of the Intelligence Community.

    Top Deep State operatives, including former FBI director James Comey, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, and former CIA Director John Brennan, were, and are, engaged in collusion/conspiracy to remove Donald Trump from office. The good part is that they are all “former” officials.

    James Comey does not want any further investigation of the inner workings of the FBI, “for the sake of our grandchildren”. He also decided that Clinton was not going to be prosecuted for her breech of security with classified documents. He obviously feels that it would be harmful to the future operations of the intelligence community to reveal the extent of their illegal involvement in the political process during the Obama administration.

    Recently, the DOJ has refused to provide requested documents to Congress. Only when threatened with contempt of Congress did they provide some documents, but those had substantial portions redacted, and some had entire pages redacted.

    We know that the Obama administration used the IRS to target conservative organizations for lengthy audits during campaign seasons, which diminished their ability to participate in the political process. We are now seeing how the Intelligence Community was used against political opponents of the Democratic nominee.

    We don’t need Mark Maynard pulling the levers behind the curtain, declaring what is “news” and what isn’t. “Don’t look this way, look that way.” We know that there has been a terrible abuse of power during the past administration, and whether or not we support the policies of the former administration, we know that for the sake of our futures, it would be better to put in safeguards to prevent this abuse of power to continue into the future.

  23. Sad
    Posted May 25, 2018 at 5:14 am | Permalink

    When did liberal progressives become so fond of spooks?

    If Trump did collude should Mueller really be taking his time?

    If there is no collusion will people apologize to Trump?

  24. Jean Henry
    Posted May 25, 2018 at 5:18 am | Permalink

    https://www.google.com/amp/www.newsweek.com/remember-irs-scandal-it-was-fake-news-all-along-681674%3famp=1

    Wish I had time to dispute all your fake news EOS. I wish you offered a more developed conservative perspective than what’s on Fox News everyday too.

    Also I’ve noticed that people on the left are paying less attention to Trumps diversion tactics, which may be a good thing. So ‘spygate’ is being played for quick laughs.

    Mark— it’s nice out. And a holiday weekend. The Trump scandal parade news will be here waiting the next rainy day.

  25. Jean Henry
    Posted May 25, 2018 at 5:28 am | Permalink

    Sad—
    1) stupid question. Everyone hates institutional players: lawyers, spooks, lobbyists etc until they need them. This is as it should be. A critical eye is necessary. Paranoia is not useful.

    2) investigations should not be rushed. Not Ever. Indictments definitely should not be. If Mueller acted as you suggest, then yes we should all be suspicious of the ‘spooks.’

    3)the investigation has already produced indictments. And it didn’t center on Trump Ever. This is an investigation of Russian interference into our elections, not an investigation of Trump. Trump, if he were at all decent would be cheering this investigation as criticalbto preserving our democracy. Maybe you are confusing press coverage and speculation with the investigation. Given what has been discovered so far, no apology to anyone will be necessary. It has already been a success.

  26. EOS
    Posted May 25, 2018 at 5:32 am | Permalink

    Wish in one hand, spit in the other, what have you got? I deal in facts, and don’t see any advantage of using labels or name-calling. When you do find the time to read the published documents, try to respond with equally factual material.

  27. Mark
    Posted May 25, 2018 at 6:07 am | Permalink

    “I deal in facts.”

    By far the funniest thing I have read in my entire life. I cannot stop laughing.

  28. Mark
    Posted May 25, 2018 at 6:07 am | Permalink

    EOS, please post your photo. I want to create a meme.

  29. EOS
    Posted May 25, 2018 at 6:27 am | Permalink

    From the man behind the curtain..

  30. Jean Henry
    Posted May 25, 2018 at 7:19 am | Permalink

    Did I use labels or name calling? Did I not simply post a link, refuting your assertion? Why would I not trust the NEWsweek article to be truthfully reported, especially since there were multiple sources reporting the same conclusion.

    This idea that you read all primary sources and come to your own conclusions, which just happen to match exactly what is being peddled on Fox News etc every single time is highly amusing.

    Lastly, is the ‘man behind the curtain’ angle not an ad hominem attack?
    What curtain? Last I checked the name of this blog is the name of the blogger.
    What’s your name EOS? Why the curtain?

  31. Jcp2
    Posted May 25, 2018 at 10:34 am | Permalink

    You know you’ve made it biggly when mm.com wants to create a meme in your honor.

  32. Frosted Flakes
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 11:23 am | Permalink

    How would knowing Mark’s name make Mark immune from EOS’s “man behind the curtain” comment/criticism?

  33. Jean Henry
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

    FF— man behind the curtain implies deception about not just the narrative and ‘facts’ conveyed but the author.
    There is something to be said for being willing to stand by your words. I understand why many don’t use their own names, but using your own name puts skin in the game and I think leads to greater accountability and so greater integrity of voice.
    I could be wrong. I often am. I’m willing to be wrong in public! imagine that.

  34. Frosted Flakes
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

    Holding onto liberal views, no matter how poorly thought out, in Ann Arbor/Ypsi is not exactly a risky enterprise. In fact, it is insanely profitable and a form of social/ financial insurance.

  35. Iron lung
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

    “I deal in facts”

    This is the funniest thing I have seen all day.

    EOS might actually believe her own bullshit.

  36. Jcp2
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 3:32 pm | Permalink

    FF, you’re just jealous that Jean didn’t invite you to sail on her yacht this weekend. I couldn’t go either, as I’m vacationing at Mark’s condo in Santa Monica.

  37. Jean Henry
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 3:49 pm | Permalink

    FF— I’d wager you that my liberal views catch me more shit from all angles than your moderate conservative status quo-loving, social Darwinist views ever will.

    I can guarantee my big liberal mouth has lost me money too. That’s a simple point of fact. Independent thought spoken plainly is generally frowned upon in midwestern middle class America. It’s considered conceit relative to holding ones tongue and ones thoughts to oneself where they bear no correction. I find that amusing.

    But still what’s the curtain? I still don’t understand what that means.

  38. disinterested observer
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 4:13 pm | Permalink

    In my unbiased opinion, Mark’s facts are much more factual than EOS’s.

  39. Frosted Flakes
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 5:26 pm | Permalink

    EOS revealing his identity in Ann Arbor is not an equal act to Mark revealing his identity in Ann Arbor. That was my point.

    I don’t want to speak for EOS but I took the curtain to be assumption. Insofar as mm.com readers assume that Mark is in possession of the truthful narrative then there is a curtain. What is behind the curtain? Mark’s loyalty to the Democratic Party? Mark’s Faith in CNN? …EOS is Toto in this analogy, I guess.

    I have no idea how the investigations will unfold. I do find Mark’s pronouncements funny because if he is being honest he has no way of knowing how the investigations will unfold either.

  40. Jean Henry
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 5:48 pm | Permalink

    I don’t Mark has ever suggested he knew the outcome of the investigation. He has done a good job reporting on the many prongs of the story as it unfolds. It’s not a stretch based on the facts we do know to say that Trump is corrupt and using the office for personal financial gain. There is plenty of evidence. Not the subject of the investigation but against the emoluments clause and so unconstitutional . (Suits are underway). I have criticized Mark fro drumming up outrage where it’s gratuitous. He for sure does it, although it’s hard these days for those of us left and center to not be quick to outrage. At any rate, I’m not under the impression that his audience is buying all that he’s selling, or doing so without consideration, at least as far as the comments section reveals.

    As for the revelation of identity, given that EOS is a proselytizing evangelical Christian, hiding behind a fake name seems counter to her identity. Evangelicals do not hide their religiosity in any aspect of their life. She is asked by her faith to bear testimony to her beliefs. That would be much more effective if she had the courage of her convictions and revealed her identity.

    I don’t see the curtain still, not on Mark.

  41. Frosted Flakes
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 6:09 pm | Permalink

    Investigation(s).

  42. Iron lung
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

    EOS believes that the earth is 4,000 years old.

  43. Jean Henry
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 7:10 pm | Permalink

    Because facts.

    For a fundamentalist Christian, wouldn’t ‘the man behind the curtain pulling levers’ be God???

  44. Jean Henry
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 10:24 pm | Permalink

    “Facts are simple and facts are straight
    Facts are lazy and facts are late
    Facts all come with points of view
    Facts don’t do what I want them to
    Facts just twist the truth around
    Facts are living turned inside out
    Facts are getting the best of them
    Facts are nothing on the face of things
    Facts don’t stain the furniture
    Facts go out and slam the door
    Facts are written all over your face
    Facts continue to change their shape

    I’m still waiting…I’m still waiting…I’m still waiting…’

  45. EOS
    Posted May 26, 2018 at 10:56 pm | Permalink

    The man behind the curtain was merely a reference to the Wizard who projected a large smokescreen in front of Dorothy and her friends. Mark wrote that “spygate isn’t news” but that the latest quote from Clapper was news. The smokescreen is the whole investigation into Trump’s collusion with Russia to steal the election. It’s a diversion to keep everyone’s attention off the real crimes that were committed by the Clinton campaign and the Obama administration. I pointed out two well publicized events where Clapper deliberately lied in the past, and was caught, as a way of pointing out that he has no credibility at the present time. James Clapper’s most recent quote isn’t news. The news is exactly what he is trying to cover up and divert attention from. He says Russian interference decided the outcome of the 2016 election? I think he should give more credit to James Comey.

    There was no ad hominem attack against Mark. It was a legitimate comment, on topic, that pertained to his original post. It’s obvious some didn’t understand the allusion.

    I’m not a Republican, I’m not an evangelical or a fundamentalist (which are themselves very different), and I think the earth is at least 6,000 years old. And BTW, my preferred pronoun is Your Excellency.

  46. Jean Henry
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 7:18 am | Permalink

    EOS You proselytize here all the time and believe the Bible is the absolute word of God, is to be read literally and followed absolutely. Maybe you are Catholic. If so you are an evangelical fundamentalist Catholic. Those descriptors which weren’t capitalized were accurate. You leave us no choice but to speculate on such things. Not giving adequate information and than acting like people are idiots for gettingsoemthing wrong is obnoxious.

    I got your Wizard of Oz reference. It doesn’t make sense.

    “I pointed out two well publicized events where Clapper deliberately lied in the past, and was caught, as a way of pointing out that he has no credibility at the present ”
    –This is just funny. How can you honestly believe you have any right whatsoever to assert some kind of righteous indignation about politicians who lie.

    So far your earth origin time Frame has slid from 4000 years old to 6000 years old to ‘at least 6000 years old,” Do you still believe humans and dinosaurs co-existed? I mean, “on the 6th day…”

  47. Jean Henry
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 7:19 am | Permalink

    Sorry not politicians, government officials.

  48. EOS
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 9:53 am | Permalink

    I’m not a Catholic. Stop trying to label me. There is no such thing as an evangelical, fundamentalist Catholic. They are non-overlapping spheres of belief. I’m an individual who reads the Bible and tries to follow Jesus to the best of my ability. On a good day, I fall miserably short of my goal. I don’t see anywhere where I expressed any righteous indignation. I quoted what the man said.

    I’m not surprised that a literary reference is beyond your comprehension, but I thought you might have seen the movie.

    I belive the Bible is true – 100%. Sometimes, actually quite frequently, men misinterpret it. IL is consistent in saying 4000 years. I believe I’ve said 6000 to 8000 years repeatedly. Yes, animals were created on the 6th day. Dinosaurs and men co-existed. You may find persons with different opinions, but there is no evidence that disproves the possibility. If the Book of Genesis is all allegory, what is the purpose of listing the genealogies and the family relationships throughout the generations. It’s not like it adds to the “plot”.

  49. Posted May 27, 2018 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    “I deal in facts”

  50. Posted May 27, 2018 at 9:56 am | Permalink

    Written by the same person:

    “animals were created on the 6th day”

    “I deal in facts”

  51. Dan Blakeney
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 10:30 am | Permalink

    I read. I consider. If I speak, I sign my name. Accountability is nutrition.

  52. Jean Henry
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 10:58 am | Permalink

    EOS— Interestingly, because my son at a young age was obsessed with wizard of Oz the book at a young age, memorizing large tracts of it, I have read that book at least 50x, more than any other book. And, as a child I read all the other books in the series. I have seen the movie maybe 3 times…. And I still think your reference is inaccurate. I got it. I made that clear. I just think it’s wrong.

    I know you are inclined to imagine those who disagree with you must not be smart enough to understand what you say, but every one of your attempts here to prove my ignorance only shows you are a poor reader. I don’t care what groups you associate with our don’t, your positioning here is fundamentalist Christian and evangelical and extremely politically conservative. Please note where I used capitalization and where I did not. You don’t have to be GOP to repeat their talking points ad nauseam.

    As far as I can tell, my assessment of your perspective is 100% accurate.
    Thanks for confirming.

  53. EOS
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 11:10 am | Permalink

    Mark,

    It’s the most reasonable explanation considering all the facts that are known. Can you supply any facts to dispute it, or just opinion?

  54. EOS
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 11:51 am | Permalink

    Jean,

    In your own words, “It doesn’t make sense.” It indicated to me that you didn’t understand. You obviously missed the point. I think you are just being obtuse. And that’s not a capital o, is if it makes a difference.

  55. Jean Henry
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

    EOS- tha curtain analogy does not work with regards to Mark. He is neither hidden nor duplicitous, he doesn’t speak in omniscient tone using the language of certainly. He’s self deprecating to a fault. He’s not hiding his identity. He has a left progressive perspective he didn’t hide. He uses facts. His tone is not falsely optimistic.

    It Just doesn’t corresponspond .

  56. Jean Henry
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 2:02 pm | Permalink

    EOS– I studied comparative literature. I understand how analogies work. I know the book forward and backwards. What I’m saying is you made a false analogy. It doesn’t follow. I’m not being obtuse. I explained why twice. You are simply incapable of admitted ever being wrong. I left room for misinterpreting your intention, given that our perspectives are so at odds, I might have missed some reasonable correlation. Apparently that’s not the case. Somethings don’t make sense.

    This did: https://www.theguardian.com/world/live/2018/may/26/irish-abortion-referendum-result-count-begins-live

  57. Jean Henry
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

    PS you may want to look up the difference between fundamentalist and Fundamentalist and Evangelical and evangelical. While your at it check out Cathoic v catholic, because that’s a good one. Capitalization of proper names matters. https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/catholic

    Obtuse is not ever a proper noun to my knowledge.

    Clear enough?

  58. Jean Henry
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 2:15 pm | Permalink

    65 million years passed between the last dinosaur and the first human. You must deny carbon dating as real. Whatever is necessary to confirm the narrative bias, right??

    It’s almost impossible to argue against anti-science positions. There can be hundred of years of mountainous evidence to back up a theory and anti-science people will point to a few flawed studies to call it all into question. There is a scientific review process. The theory you support, EOS is not born out by study. I’m sure you believe this is a vast conspiracy against Christianity. At any rate, arguing with you is pushing against a curtain, There;s no point.

  59. EOS
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 4:28 pm | Permalink

    You can be obnoxious at times, but you are seldom accurate. The theoretical limit for C-14 dating is 100,000 years using AMS, but for practical purposes it is 45,000 to 55,000 years. The half-life of C-14 is 5730 years. If dinosaur bones are 65 million years old, there should not be one atom of C-14 left in them. It is impossible to use carbon dating to verify the age of anything to be 65 million years. If you are confident that carbon dating is real science, can you explain why dinosaur bones are always found to contain carbon that is significantly younger than 50,000 years?

  60. wobblie
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

    https://www.kidsdinos.com/how-old-are-fossils/

  61. wobblie
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 4:39 pm | Permalink

    https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geology/dinosaur-bone-age1.htm

  62. EOS
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 5:17 pm | Permalink

    Wobblie,

    Thanks for confirming that it isn’t carbon dating that is used to estimate the age of dinosaur bones. Instead they find some nearby igneous rock, date that by a different means, and then speculate that all objects in the same layer of strata are the same age.

    This is interesting and also relevant to current events. I’ve been watching film of the lava flow from the volcanic eruption on the big island of Hawaii. I’ve watched it roll down a street and engulf vehicles in its path. In a thousand years, scientists may unearth the automobiles, and by testing the nearby igneous rock, will date the age of the cars to be equivalent to the age of the molten lava formed in the interior of our planet.

    Does anyone else see a flaw in the “scientific method”?

  63. wobblie
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 7:47 pm | Permalink

    Read the articles EOS. Since the lava will be sitting on rock made much earlier, they will have several methods to arrive at the age of the cars (not to mention the plastic and steel they might find). More importantly, fossils are not formed in lava. Geology is a fascinating science. You might spend some time trying to understand it.

  64. Jean Henry
    Posted May 27, 2018 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

    https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur-shocker-115306469/

  65. Iron lung
    Posted May 28, 2018 at 11:31 am | Permalink

    Amazing that people are spreding the idea that you can carbon date a fossil millions of years old.

    Even simple math can tell you why that wouldn’t work.

  66. Iron lung
    Posted May 28, 2018 at 11:41 am | Permalink

    If god creted the world in a week, he sure went out of his way to make it look as shoddy as possible.

    The least he could have done was have humans not eat from the same hole they breathe from.

  67. Jean Henry
    Posted May 28, 2018 at 12:34 pm | Permalink

    Carbon dating allows measurements back to 50000 years old which is enough to disprove EOS hypothesis.
    That was my point. I apologize that I opened myself up to a false dichotomy, as in: if carbon dating can’t measure the age of dinosaurs, there is no proof that they did not exist concurrently with man. In fact carbon dating shows how old human remains are– Not as old as dinosaurs. duh.

  68. Jean Henry
    Posted May 28, 2018 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    IL who spread the idea that you can carbon date a fossil millions of years old, exactly? Or did you misread? Because I don’t see that here.

  69. Iron lung
    Posted May 28, 2018 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

    Clearly creationists are spreading this idea.

    Simple mathematics will show one why it would be in appropriate for dating anything much older than several tens of thousands of years.

  70. EOS
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 5:13 am | Permalink

    Wobblie,

    When a volcano erupts, it spews molten lava which solidifies on the surface of the earth. The igneous rock is significantly older than the sedimentary rock at the surface of the earth which it will cover. Layers beneath the igneous rock are significantly younger than that which is used to estimate the dinosaur age. If a dinosaur fossil is found in sedimentary rock, it is not estimated to be the same age as the rock it is embedded in, but to be as old as the nearby solidified lava, which has been liquified at the center of our earth since the inception of the planet.

    When dinosaur bone is dated with carbon dating techniques, it gives an age between 10,000 and 30,000 years old. There are numerous peer-reviewed publications that confirm this.

  71. Jean Henry
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 5:36 am | Permalink

    But I thought the earth was only 6000 years old?

  72. Sad
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 5:37 am | Permalink

    Can y’all carbon date your bickering?

    Seems like it’s getting pretty old.

  73. Sad
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 5:45 am | Permalink

    Have EOS and friends been here since 2002 when the blog started- going on about abortion and creationism?

    Who cares? I’m getting on the Trump train. As someone pointed out – if the left is upset at Trump because Obama separated migrant families something is amiss and fake news might be real. It’s all enough to make a person…..Sad.

  74. stupid hick
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 7:06 am | Permalink

    “When a volcano erupts, it spews molten lava which solidifies on the surface of the earth. The igneous rock is significantly older than the sedimentary rock at the surface of the earth which it will cover.”

    Fundamental(ist) misunderstanding about how the age of rock FORMATION is estimated. For the love of God, are you unable to Google “how to date igneous rocks” before you post?

  75. Jcp2
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 9:11 am | Permalink

    It’s because EOS loves God that those lines of inquiry are not pursued.

  76. Iron Lung 2
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 9:12 am | Permalink

    “When dinosaur bone is dated with carbon dating techniques, it gives an age between 10,000 and 30,000 years old.”

    I don’t get it. I thought EOS believed that the world was 4,000 years old. Now the bar has been moved?

  77. Iron Lung 2
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

    Regardless, only a complete idiot would do a carbon test on a fossilized dinosaur bone.

    You could do a C-14 test on a tin can and get a reading out of it. It doesn’t prove anything about at all about the can… but if you had some agenda of showing that the sky wizard was in the business of making soda 60,000 years ago, you might use it if you like.

  78. Iron Lung 2
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 1:40 pm | Permalink

    “The igneous rock is significantly older than the sedimentary rock at the surface of the earth which it will cover. Layers beneath the igneous rock are significantly younger than that which is used to estimate the dinosaur age. If a dinosaur fossil is found in sedimentary rock, it is not estimated to be the same age as the rock it is embedded in, but to be as old as the nearby solidified lava, which has been liquified at the center of our earth since the inception of the planet.”

    Idiocy. Of course a geologist can tell if an igneous bed is due to an eruption or not.

    If your toilet overflows, you can tell the difference between a pile of human shit buried under the floor and a layer of shit that spewed out of your backup toilet OVER the floor. This is pretty simple.

    Face it, you simply want to believe your own bullshit.

  79. Jean Henry
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 1:58 pm | Permalink

    SAd– Obama did a lot of shitty things visa vi immigration during his tenure, but he did not separate migrant families as Trump is doing now. Obama took kids who were migrating alone and caught crossing and placed them in border detention facilities ( these are the pictures we are seeing) They were then very quickly moved to DSS care and from there placed with people here, 80% of the time, family. They were not held in perpetuity. The spike in young migrants seeking asylum in 2014 was a failing of policy, albeit a well intended one, but it was not intentional torture.

    Maybe you should read more of what is said here, or more in general. It seems you come her with assumptions and half information to pass judgment on others. Its a bit perverse, no?

  80. Jean Henry
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 2:05 pm | Permalink

    Many appreciations here for the toilet analogy from IL. I, in fact, laughed out loud. (But don’t ask me to acronym it. I’m too old and enjoy mis-spelling things too much)

    I asked a plumber years ago how things were going and he replied, “Same shit, different toilet.” That’s MM some days, but I’m ok with it. I am still learning things about creationist assumptions and scientific fact from this long winded debate.

  81. Jean Henry
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    I made a deal with my kid that I would stop posting here if he would help me around the house when asked, without complaint or diversion. It seemed like a fair deal, so see y’all round the bend when the house is clean and the lawn is mowed and the bathroom demoed and redone. So like September… Maybe.
    Same shit, different toilet. or tub. Same toilet. different shit. new tub. or old tub. new old tub to be precise. older than the old tub but new. so different shit same toilet, new older tub, new older sink and some tile. And grass and tidiness. And some peace. Later Dudes.

  82. EOS
    Posted May 29, 2018 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

    If a tin can or a dinosaur bone both can give inaccurate readings, then one should have less confidence in the accuracy of the test.

    Sometimes molten materials solidify underground to produce igneous rock and sometimes the molten materials are exuded from a volcanic eruption and form igneous rock on the surface when it cools. Both have the same starting material. Solidifying the material does not change the radioactive decay rates of the isotopes or increase or decrease the isotopic content. How is it that a rock has a different age than its components? Why wouldn’t the age of the magma be the same in the molten form as it is when it hardens? Stupid Hick, I’m looking for something a little more in depth than Wikipedia and hoping you could elaborate.

  83. Iron Lung 2
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

    “If a tin can or a dinosaur bone both can give inaccurate readings, then one should have less confidence in the accuracy of the test.”

    lol

  84. Iron Lung 2
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 1:06 pm | Permalink

    Is the test accurate? Or not? Aside from moving the bar of how old the earth is, EOS can’t even decide.

    When attempting to “prove” that the world is 4000 years old, it is accurate, when attempting to “prove” that the sky wizard made Bud Light Lime, it is not.

    lol

  85. EOS
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

    You are the one moving the bar. I’ve been consistent in stating the earth is between 6,000 and 8,000 years. Never once did I say 4,000. As science continues to test their hypotheses, I’ve no doubt they will eventually stumble closer to the truth. The fact is, no one was there when the earth was created, but the Creator.

  86. Iron Lung 2
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 1:41 pm | Permalink

    “I’ve been consistent in stating the earth is between 6,000 and 8,000 years.”

    4,000, 6,000, 8,000? Who cares?

    The point is that it is stupid to conduct a C14 test what is, for all practical purposes, a rock or a tin can.

    That you already know this makes it all pure fucking comedy.

  87. EOS
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

    No, it’s not stupid at all. It is the scientific method. If the testing of dinosaur bones gives consistently young dates, then there are two options. You can conclude that dinosaurs are really that young or that the test is not a valid means of establishing age.

    What is not scientific is to state, “You are stupid for testing dinosaur bones using Carbon dating.” When the experiment does not confirm your hypothesis, you test a different hypothesis until you find a model that can be consistently applied to all observable data. You keep the new model only until it proves itself to be invalid. Science isn’t conducted by assuming you know the answer prior to conducting the experiment.

  88. Sad
    Posted May 30, 2018 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

    Really, how old is this conversation? Has it been going on since the inception of this blog? Why don’t you debate something more useful like how many angels can fit on the head of a pin?

    Screw Trump. ABC should apologize to him? What’s he a cross of?

  89. Iron Lung 2
    Posted May 31, 2018 at 1:46 pm | Permalink

    lol

One Trackback

  1. […] « “Spygate” isn’t news. The fact that former Director of National Intelligen… […]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Connect

Sidetrack ad Aubree’s ad BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative Hischak2