tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post5946938957660343981..comments2024-03-29T03:56:03.736-04:00Comments on the daily howler: No evidence, baseless, crazy or false?<b>bob somerby</b>http://www.blogger.com/profile/02963464534685954436noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-31075500947937436862022-02-06T16:26:02.895-05:002022-02-06T16:26:02.895-05:00Not one mention by BS in this post that QANON is b...Not one mention by BS in this post that QANON is behind this BS. Because the mention of QANON would instantly discredit the statement that BS is willing to bet the house that these claims are completely unfounded. What kind of an idiot would bet the house on a QANON sex trafficking theory?<br />What kind a right wing tool is Bobby?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-62653396083093997682022-02-04T20:33:01.261-05:002022-02-04T20:33:01.261-05:00Well….Bob is finally making his defense of Trump, ...Well….Bob is finally making his defense of Trump, but he seems to have abandoned the “well, how do we know he doesn’t actually believe it?” route, and will now pursue the “unfounded claims” approach. <br /> Consider every time Bob has lambasted some outlet for “playing” it’s readers/viewers. Greghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288008924419574934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-5725490338014531222022-02-04T20:28:56.952-05:002022-02-04T20:28:56.952-05:00TestTestGreghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09288008924419574934noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-39145131206367720302022-02-04T17:41:45.986-05:002022-02-04T17:41:45.986-05:00You have to be a complete moron to believe there i...You have to be a complete moron to believe there isn’t a connection between the Butterfly Center’s lawsuit against the Trump administration and the harassment and false accusations they have been receiving from Trump supporters. <br /><br />And yes, I said false. mhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937133532381705347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-83508324160189928812022-02-04T17:35:00.456-05:002022-02-04T17:35:00.456-05:00“We'll relate this back to Trump's endless...“We'll relate this back to Trump's endless array of unfounded claims at some point. In the meantime, our stars will keep enjoying the fun of attacking his "lies," “<br /><br />Somerby has been self-contradictory about this. On the one hand, he has pushed the theory that Trump is a “sociopath”, and one of the defining characteristics of a sociopath is the ability to know right from wrong, true from false, and yet choosing the wrong, the false. This was Bandy Lee’s contention. <br /><br />On the other hand, he has also peddled the theory that Trump is delusional, insane, and cannot tell the difference between right and wrong, true and false.<br /><br />So which is it? <br /><br />And whether you call them “lies”, “delusions”, “jokes”, or whatever, they needed to be called out. mhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937133532381705347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-30494435802541881552022-02-04T17:25:18.699-05:002022-02-04T17:25:18.699-05:00"Chief Dominguez says there is "no evide..."Chief Dominguez says there is "no evidence" that the claims are true. That, of course, doesn't necessarily mean that the claims are false. "<br /><br />This is why one cannot prove a negative. A lack of evidence is called a null finding (in science) and it is ambiguous because it could mean either that no evidence exists or that the investigators were simply unable to find the evidence. Studies showing a null finding are not published because their results are ambiguous and thus not helpful to other researchers.<br /><br />In research, scientists are trying to find answers to questions without already knowing those answers in advance. In this situation, with the Butterfly sanctuary, it can be presumed that the operators of that sanctuary know whether they are engaged in sex trafficking or not, and thus when Iatri says categorically that there is no trafficking and that the claims are baseless, she knows the truth and is making a definitive claim about it. Because one cannot prove a negative, but burden of proof is on the Build the Wall Organization members, NOT on the butterfly sanctuary staff.<br /><br />I am explaining this because, from what he says, it isn't clear that Somerby understands it himself. Journalists are well within their rights to proclaim this a false theory unless and until the Build the Wall people have provided evidence to support their trafficking claims. Without that proof, the butterfly people are innocent. Iati shouldn't have to "deal with that point" at all.<br /><br />Somerby claims that Trump's various claims can be dealt with in a similar manner. I disagree. For one thing, when the president says anything, right or wrong, it is news and must be reported. Second, the president's statement carry authority and weight because he is the president and thereby is assumed to have greater access to knowledge and a greater responsibility to speak accurately. Third, there is a cost (or danger, if you will) to the public when they contradict the President -- people are likely to be doubted, considered crackpot, and perhaps be given political or nefarious motives. So people are unwilling to take on those costs. For this reason, the president should be making serious efforts to speak accurately and always tell as much of the truth as possible. Trump has failed in that duty, by a huge margin. THAT is the problem, not anything to do with Iati who is in a very different position.<br /><br />I believe the Build the Wall people should be held accountable for their threats to the endeavor of the butterly santuary. They have recklessly endangered those people (and any visitors) and should apologize and pay for the inconvenience they have caused. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-26097553726594248712022-02-04T17:13:56.225-05:002022-02-04T17:13:56.225-05:00What are we to do about the definitions slander (“...What are we to do about the definitions slander (“the action or crime of making a <i>false</i> spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.”) or libel (“a published <i>false</i> statement that is damaging to a person's reputation”)?<br /><br />If I were to say “Bob Somerby is a raging pedophile who uses his Baltimore residence for the sex trafficking of minors”, I’m pretty sure the police would find no evidence of such a thing.<br /><br />But that doesn’t make it “false” according to Somerby. <br /><br />So one will always wonder…mhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08937133532381705347noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8611810694571930415.post-32169906515512966322022-02-04T16:37:35.865-05:002022-02-04T16:37:35.865-05:00"Has anyone ever offered anything resembling ..."Has anyone ever offered anything resembling evidence in support of these very serious claims?"<br /><br />If someone has, one thing we can be certain of, dear Bob: we won't hear about it from Jeff Bezos' blog, aka WaPo.<br /><br />Moreover, dear Bob: if WaPo claims that something is "false", we can be fairly certain that it isn't. <br /><br />And that's all there is to it, dear Bob. It's the only way to analyze your dembot media. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com