http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ring-life.html

Classic Clinton Cartel

"DailyMail.com has obtained a video in which convicted illegal Clinton fundraisers Johnny Chung gave secret testimony while in fear of his life
The Chinese-American was convicted of funneling money to Bill Clinton's 1996 re-election bid in a breach of campaign finance law known as 'Chinagate'
Now new book revealed how he spilled details of his activities in a video he made because he thought a squad of assassins would come after him
He made the video with a friend after his FBI protection detail was suddenly removed - which Chung said on the tape shocked even his judge
Chung feared meeting same fate as Ron Brown, Clinton commerce secretary, who died in plane crash, friend who made the tape reveals
Video is revealed in new book about the Chinagate scandal "

New York Times, CNN, fake news.
Daily Mail, beacon of truth.

We are definitely in a post-truth world.

Here's a discussion about rape stats, showing that the documentary underlying fox's reporting on Sweden misrepresents more or less everything:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p03gzh7x

Sweden doesn't experience more rape, it hasn't risen in the last 5 years it was a change in the statistical method, and that increase happened before the large scale refugee introduction

lol at the democrats choosing tom perez

i can't imagine how anyone could honestly support the democratic party

I have trouble getting to a place where that description of capitalism is okay.

Sure who has wealth is important, maybe the most important sometimes, but it's not the only thing that is important.

Not very clear what you mean. If I was being generous I'd agree with the entire statement and what it implies.

The last statement I almost agree with but technological innovations aren't fully captured by 'wealth'.

A lot of journalists out there with a lot of backgrounds.

I think your feelings are going to be widely shared on the left. I'm not sure the Democrats really can win without the left but clearly they plan to try.

I don't know of any journalist cynical enough to believe they're in the lying business.

You define capitalism too broadly to make sense of what I said afaik.


They are not just fully captured by it by are motivated by it.

All these alt definitions really mess me up. Anarchy. Capitalism. Fake News.

Tires me out.

Perhaps it'd be better to stick to the same definitions everyone else uses then?

Project mockingbird worth a Google search.

I'm using current America as my model.

I get the feeling I should ask what you mean by wealth?


specifically, how is wealth measured?

I think I'm familiar with an okay number of ways to use words like those.

But political language changes a lot. It's hard to pin down.

Capitalism means the same today it did 50 years ago.

Anarchism has never meant isolationism.

Luckbox, point taken. But I think you shouldn't draw too broad a conclusion from it. Mockingbird was supposed to be 50 journos worldwide.

Wealth is definable in different ways. We could settle on "retained surplus" if we understand that that includes nominal surplus because of course a hundred dollars is not real in the same way a bucket of gold is.

Uh sure, the textbook definition doesn't change much - not that different books don't put emphasis on different parts. Like how you put emphasis on how in capitalism wealth aggregates. (something that is probably more noticeable the more liquid and less well managed an economy is)

But people do change.

When someone says anarchy I don't think they picture any sort of system of law and order beyond our own two hands; but I do understand that there is another way to interpret the word, in light of its history.

Capitalism, the clue is in the name. It is precisely wealth grows wealth.

As for anarchism, not even worth arguing.

How is that?

I admit I'm not familiar with the etymology but it basically means about wealth, no?

Why would there be arguing? You are using anarchy in a very academic way, I think. That's cool.

I don't think an anarchist must refuse to cooperate with others.

I do think an anarchist would not describe an outside majority rule as per se legitimately sovereign over nir.


What do you mean by the term?

Don't the wealth-holders pay a rent on their wealth?

sorry, monkey. you did define it

then i responded

from which you somehow gleaned

trump 2020! Continue To Make America Great Again!!

ironic to be concerned that the corrupt, fake, corporate media is infiltrated by the state?