Infosec pros tell Trump to quit bullying Chris Krebs – it's undermining security The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and numerous infosec leaders are lobbying US President Donald Trump to drop his enduring investigation into Chris Krebs, claiming that targeting the former CISA boss amounts to bullying. The open letter, co-signed by the industry bigwigs, compares the campaign against Krebs and, by …
I think it's not so much what he enjoys as the need to deliver constant and unending series of noisy but fundamentally meaningless distractions that keep the press, opponents, and the populace busy chasing the nothing in a chaotic hailstorm of threats and gossip. It's a technique long popular with dictators, oligarchs, and (ostensible) strong-men throughout human history.
The enemy changes from day to day, hour to hour so no one has time to notice or act on what's inevitably happening in the background.
It works as long as we're always at war with Eastasia. Or Eurasia. Or, well...any person, group, or nation. Every obstacle or failure is attributed to them, the feared but ever-inchoate other; every success or achievement goes to Dear Leader.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it, whereas those who do learn from history are also doomed to repeat it.
It's going to be a long and difficult day for a few years.
As not-the-grandparent, the reason seems to be the one given in highschool civics for limiting the presidency to two terms: on the second term, they have nothing to lose - they're not trying to keep their approval rating up, they're not trying to vie for a reelection, they have the power, and there's no disincentive to do what needs to be done. So do that. It's an explicit perceived benefit.
OTOH, I feel that Trump is just doing what he feels needs to be done. For term 1, he didn't have any idea what any of this gub'mint stuff was, and he executed his, "Why, If _I_ were president, I'd ....!" and within 30 days he was done president'n and was unheard of again until Covid. *sigh*.
Round 2, he's talked with the republican party, and they've made an agenda. When he got power again, there was such a flurry of executive actions around this agenda that no one could possibly keep up (what have we missed??). Now, with that plan "realized", he's looking around, seeing people giving him the stink eye in every direction, and going, "I've got to fix this!" and so makes a proclamation. The agenda seems to be largely executed, and now he's trying to do ... I don't really know. Damage control? Reputation building? Character assassination? It feels like the agenda is out of his mind, he's arguing with his own party, and there are only two or three things more to "fix". Donald will be done president'n in 60-90 days, except for his side fights -- like this one.
* This will - predictably - be down-voted, seemingly for suggesting there's any reason for Donald's actions other than intentional malice. (Honestly, I just don't consider him capable of the thought required to *plan* any sort of malice: it's all just reaction.) (Don't include this line in your consideration for votes - it's just vacuous reflection.)
People who are timid, waffle on their decisions, or can't seem to make decisions have a tough time getting things done.
Musk and president Trump are both huge jerks because they do what they feel is right and don't bother to wonder if anyone agrees with them. They make a decision and go forward to get done what they think needs to get done. They're often unpopular or flat-out wrong in their decisions, but they do make decisions and act.
"political retaliation puts democracy and national defense at risk"
But retaliation is the very reason why the Orange pseudo-king wanted to be president in the first place. Besides raking in the dough, obviously.
Revenge is part of his personality (disorder). Narcissists want revenge so much that it looks like they are born to ruin lives. And he is currently trying to ruin the maximum number of lives.
Remind you, he wanted to get his then vice president Mike Pence lynched.
What more evidence can one want?
So its bullying for Trump to pursue someone who allegedly participated in claiming 2020 was legit (that can really go either way) and may have been involved in what has been exposed as the misinformation campaign over Covid which was used as a political weapon against Trump? But not to have done those things (if he did)?
It is even directly claimed that he was involved in the serious and political cover up of the Hunter Biden laptop!
https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/04/addressing-risks-from-chris-krebs-and-government-censorship/
So why is it not bullying when this guy and others attacked Trump?
You know that it isn’t bullying to point out that someone is a Nazi if they’re being an actual Nazi don’t you?
We’re also talking about a man, Trump, with pretty much the most power in the world at his fingertips (as long as his master Putin lets him exercise it). Saying that he’s being bullied is a bit like saying that a kid with a peashooter is bullying someone with an AK47. And even when he wasn’t president, he had enough toadies and gullible idiots supporting him that it was a distinction without a difference.
@45RPM
"You know that it isn’t bullying to point out that someone is a Nazi if they’re being an actual Nazi don’t you?"
Sure, so as I said- the 2020 election WAS AND IS questionable, Covid misinformation from government has already been exposed and Hunter Biden's laptop was real. So if Chris Krebs was involved why is it not bullying to participate in bullying Trump but bullying to then investigate Krebs involvement in such bullying?
"We’re also talking about a man, Trump, with pretty much the most power in the world at his fingertips (as long as his master Putin lets him exercise it)."
I guess you reference that based on the exposed lie of the Steele Report? Or that Trump is actually trying to stop the invasion in Ukraine which both Obama and Biden were fine with?
"Saying that he’s being bullied is a bit like saying that a kid with a peashooter is bullying someone with an AK47"
Weaponization of the state vs Trump? We have been watching this for a decade remember.
I mean you’ve got words in your post. And they’ve even been assembled in an order that makes them look a bit like sentences. Unfortunately, on closer examination, it’s still all just babble.
It may be that an infinite number of monkeys with an infinite number of typewriters will eventually come up with the works of Shakespeare. Sadly, an infinite number of codejunkys will only manage to jam the keys up with drool.
The 2020 election is "questionable" in the sense that you can ask questions of anything. It has been quite exhaustively questioned for several years now by some of the most highly motivated people you'll find anywhere, and none of this "questioning" has turned up anything that anyone remotely impartial considers grounds for suspicion.
I also like to mention at this point that Trump was the president at the time of the 2020 election. When Obama was president, and when Biden was president, Trump won, and those elections were apparently free and fair... but when Trump himself was president, i.e. head of the executive branch of the government, it was by his own account rigged and rotten. What does that say about him as president?
Also note that Trump himself appointed Krebs as a trustworthy figure. For Trump to attack him now as the opposite is essentially an admission that he, Trump, is a terrible judge of character and has absolutely zero reliable expertise, either his own or hired from elsewhere, in any relevant sphere.
As for Trump "trying to stop the invasion in Ukraine" (interesting choice of words there, most people would have said "invasion of Ukraine"), he's "trying to stop" it the same way he "stopped" the war in Afghanistan: by surrendering. Unfortunately it doesn't seem to have dawned on him that since it's not the US army that's actually fighting this war, he doesn't get to give that order.
"Weaponisation of the state vs Trump" - neither Biden nor Obama attempted any such thing. Biden let the law take its course in prosecuting violent criminals. Obama let federal agencies make their own operational decisions, with the result that the FBI director torpedoed Clinton's campaign. Trump is the one who is politicising and abusing those powers.
@veti
"The 2020 election is "questionable" in the sense that you can ask questions of anything. It has been quite exhaustively questioned for several years now by some of the most highly motivated people you'll find anywhere, and none of this "questioning" has turned up anything that anyone remotely impartial considers grounds for suspicion."
Of course, dont look and there is no problem. Lucky for Joe all those extra voters turned up for that one election before vanishing into the void again.
"I also like to mention at this point that Trump was the president at the time of the 2020 election. When Obama was president, and when Biden was president, Trump won, and those elections were apparently free and fair... but when Trump himself was president, i.e. head of the executive branch of the government, it was by his own account rigged and rotten. What does that say about him as president?"
It says a lot, the lawfare and determination not to question the result to throw Trump out has been noticed. Under Obama the dems seemed very surprised Hillary lost (she certainly seemed to be). Under Biden people were in such disbelief at the 2020 election (and subsequently seeing the actual rigging in the wild with evidence) that 2024 was under a microscope. Again those magic voters just seemed to vanish. Yet as President there was so much resistance to actually allowing Trump ensure free and fair in the election. Interesting that.
"he's "trying to stop" it the same way he "stopped" the war in Afghanistan: by surrendering."
You have the wrong President. Biden surrendered Afghanistan and left them lots of shiny kit while getting US soldiers killed in a mess of a withdrawal. That was Bidens show. Biden changed the leave date and it was Bidens way. The 'story' of Trumps negotiation was to tell directly the Taliban leader that there will be a conditional withdrawal and if any US service member is harmed he will be the first target.
As for the Ukraine war, it was Obama and Biden that accepted a loss of Ukraine territory and the invasion. It paused under Trumps first term and Trump is trying to clean up the mess again now.
"neither Biden nor Obama attempted any such thing."
The Steele Dossier was paid for by the Dems. Bidens pardons to protect those such as the J6 committee. Obama was accused of being involved in the IRS targeting of Republicans. So on.
>” Or that Trump is actually trying to stop the invasion in Ukraine”
Err no the invasion has already happened, nothing Trump has said and done since suggests he wanting to restore the pre October 2022 boarders. Likewise there is no suggestion that any of Trumps actions are trying to stop a further invasion and annexation of Ukraine by Russia.
You really have been suckered.
@AC
"Err no the invasion has already happened, nothing Trump has said and done since suggests he wanting to restore the pre October 2022 boarders."
To stop the invasion would be to stop further incursion by the Russians. Stopping the invasion and the fantastical desire to restore pre-Oct 2022 or even 2014 boarders are two very different things. Obama accepted the loss of Crimea and Biden accepted further invasion by the Russians but it paused under Trumps first term and Trump is trying to make it stop now.
"Likewise there is no suggestion that any of Trumps actions are trying to stop a further invasion and annexation of Ukraine by Russia."
That makes no sense against the reality of Trump getting the two sides talking even though they previously ruled that out as possible.
"Sure, so as I said- the 2020 election WAS AND IS questionable,"
And yet, a Republican supporter personally appointed by Trump and tasked with proving the 2020 election was "fixed" came back said, "no, it's all fine, there were no, or at least not enough, voter fraud to make any difference to the outcome".
Or do you think Krebs was "got at" and paid to "turn traitor" or something? FFS!
As for "weaponising the State", or the DoJ etc, depiste Trumps protests and accusations, he seems to have now turned that "bad thing, a very bad thing" up to ELEVEN now the shoe is on the other foot.
Also interesting is that out of all those claiming the election was rigged, they all said it wasn't rigged when questioned under oath in court.
THEY know the narrative is bollocks, but but repeating it, they get the gullible to believe it. What was that you were saying, codejunky?
Incidentally, there was fraud - by Trump and his fake elector minions who were prosecuted for it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_fake_electors_plot
Every accusation is a confession...
> You know that it isn’t bullying to point out that someone is a Nazi if they’re being an actual Nazi don’t you?
Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. It's not libel/slander if it's factually correct; however, if it's unrelated to the issues and brought up apparently as attempt at character assassination, then it's defamation.
If someone is trying to apply for a bank loan and you protest outside the bank because they've expressed nazi ideals, then you're going to find yourself in court -- and your outcome will likely not be positive.
Maybe it's related to the issue, maybe it's not. The point of this reply it to say: like most everything in life, it's not so simple.
You’re right. Your post wasn’t relevant to the issue. The fact of the matter is that the Republican Party, in the guise of Trumps personal play thing, are pretty much ripping off the playbook of the early stage Nazi party. And at this point that’s not even something you can argue about.
It is remarkably how thin skinned all these far right weirdos are though. Quick to point fingers at anyone highlighting a social injustice and call them snowflakes, and the moment anyone points to the actual crimes they’re committing and calls them out for it? Serious tantrum time!
Pathetic.
"If someone is trying to apply for a bank loan and you protest outside the bank because they've expressed nazi ideals, then you're going to find yourself in court -- and your outcome will likely not be positive."
And yet, just above, you said if it''s true, it's not libel/slander. Same applies to defamation. If it's true, then it's not defamation.
The White House page from the link describes accusations, as yet unproven, against Chris Krebs. The facts are that none of the people who physically counted votes in the 2020 presidential election where Biden was declared the winner, has come forward to claim that votes were rigged, miscounted or otherwise allege misconduct. Not one. In her book about her experiences in NAZI Germany, 'The Past is Myself', Charitable Bielenberg* describes her husband's experience observing the vote counting the numerous referenda on issues concerning the oppression of the Jews. All of the counters knew that the public was 99% against the NAZI legislation, but the result announced was 99% in favour. Now, that must have given the opposition great comfort, knowing that the NAZIs were hated by the vast majority of the German people.
You could claim that no one would dare to criticise the result while Biden was President, but now that Trump is President, there is nothing to stop any vote counter with evidence of impropriety in the 2020 election coming forward. No one has, we know this because the Trump supporting media (Fox News, for example) would be putting them on every broadcast, they would be literally world famous. And then there would be an avalanche of others confirming their statements. There are literally thousands of individuals who counted the votes. Their complete failure to criticise the result shows that the previous election was, as Mr Krebs stated, the most secure in American history.
The idea that every single one of the vote counters is either a conspirator or has been silenced in some way would imply a degree of coercive control and a conspiracy so powerful that Trump could never have won the 2024 election.
Learning to recognise when a conspiracy theory is nonsense, and not credible is something I would advise everyone to try. If you think that the 2020 election really was stolen from Trump, please look through my argument and explain why the thousands of vote counters who actually know what happened, and are now able to come forward without fear of retribution, have remained silent. (Because I really do want to know, but, being a mathematician, I am only interested in facts and reality, not allegations, suppositions or guesses.)
One other issue. The requirement by Trump is to comply with the presidential Executive Order 14149 of January 20, 2025 . It is generally considered that laws are not retroactive. I don't know about the USA, but Suspect that even President Trump cannot enforce retrospective orders, experts on the US constitution please advise.
I await your esteemed reply.
* My copy is pub by Corgi, ISBN 0-552-99065-5
@Eclectic Man
"The White House page from the link describes accusations, as yet unproven, against Chris Krebs."
Yes hence investigation.
"The facts are that none of the people who physically counted votes in the 2020 presidential election where Biden was declared the winner, has come forward to claim that votes were rigged, miscounted or otherwise allege misconduct."
But the 'magic votes' are a serious irregularity, An emergency session was called to confirm Biden without questions being on record (who placed those pipe bombs?) and since the 'interesting' 2020 election people actually observing and recording elections have found such interference leading to an election being disqualified AND in the 2025 election illegal votes were counted against a supreme court ruling causing a recount! AND Democrats have seriously opposed efforts to clean up the ballot lists. Maybe at the time this should have been taken more seriously.
"there is nothing to stop any vote counter with evidence of impropriety in the 2020 election coming forward."
There is a requirement of overwhelming evidence needed to get a judge to accept that. Such as evidence found since with people recording more due to the 2020 'miraculous Biden win'.
"Learning to recognise when a conspiracy theory is nonsense, and not credible is something I would advise everyone to try"
So back to Covid was natural, Bidens laptop was a lie, Steele dossier, etc. Recognise them. Go on.
"If you think that the 2020 election really was stolen from Trump"
I honestly dont know. I would like to think it was honest and fair but it gets harder as we actually have the very behaviour happening and only being seen beyond reasonable doubt because of the 2020 election. People found 2020 so beyond belief that they started recording and watching the very people trusted (or not) to carry out the election integrity.
"(Because I really do want to know, but, being a mathematician, I am only interested in facts and reality, not allegations, suppositions or guesses.)"
Factually we know that the state has been used as a weapon against Trump. Even having illegal votes counted in 2025 (senate seat) and a previous election rejected because of public worker misbehaviour!
"It is generally considered that laws are not retroactive"
Cool, but is acceptable to block and revoke his security clearance due to it. The new gov can choose not to work with him.
Me: "there is nothing to stop any vote counter with evidence of impropriety in the 2020 election coming forward."
You: "There is a requirement of overwhelming evidence needed to get a judge to accept that."
I was not referring to getting Judge to accept anything, merely the fact that not one person who actually counted votes in the 2020 presidential election has come forward to allege in any way impropriety in that election. Not one. Yet you seem to accept the allegations without any supporting evidence at all (a link to what you claim to be the evidence reported by a reputable site please, I haven't found any. But maybe I'm not looking in the right places, your help is politely requested.)
You: "So back to Covid was natural, Bidens laptop was a lie, Steele dossier, etc. Recognise them. Go on."
Covid-19 was real, whether it was purely natural or partially generated in a Chinese laboratory, or natural and leaked from said laboratory (the city in question, Wuhan, does have a major virus research institution, so that is not beyond possibility), I have no idea. The answer to your issue with Covid-19 is only relevant if you consider that the disease that killed millions was designed as a weapon or not. The fact that literally hundreds of thousands of Americans died because Trump did not take it seriously is not conspiracy theory, and does matter.
I believe that Hunter Biden had a laptop, but that the failure to ensure a secure custody chain potentially invalidated any data thereon. Any competent lawyer could argue that without a clear and secure custody chain, the laptop could have been tampered with to implicate Hunter Biden in criminal activity. I worked briefly with the Digital Forensics Group at HMRC, they are sticklers for secure and provable custody chains.
Steele dossier: I have no idea, doesn't seems have had much effect.
Frankly I think you need to get out more, meet some people in real life who will tell you when you are being a twit and don't always just support whatever you say. And yes, I do mean face to face conversations where you and they are in the same place, not web sites like this.
@Eclectic Man
"Yet you seem to accept the allegations without any supporting evidence at all"
Hope this is good enough for you-
https://penncapital-star.com/justice-the-courts/pennsylvania-casey-mccormick-supreme-court-orders-counties-not-to-count-undated-mail-ballots-senate-recount/
https://edition.cnn.com/2023/11/09/politics/how-a-nullified-election-in-connecticut-became-a-rallying-cry-for-trump-supporters/index.html
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-68025894
Again I would like to believe that the 2020 election was above board but it isnt easy to hold on to that belief.
"The answer to your issue with Covid-19 is only relevant if you consider that the disease that killed millions was designed as a weapon or not."
No. I dont say it was designed as a weapon, it was however gain of function research to make it more lethal and spread easier through humans. Do you remember the lies that it certainly didnt come from the lab and Trump was lying? That was the conspiracy, the facts show it was almost certainly from the lab and the only lack of certainty being the Chinese ensured nobody could investigate and have the definitive proof of the source! The virus had features not found in nature and were used in the labs for the research.
"I believe that Hunter Biden had a laptop"
Not exactly something you need 'belief' for. Its factual reality.
"Steele dossier: I have no idea, doesn't seems have had much effect."
Really? Still idiots on here like to make claims against Trump based on it.
"Frankly I think you need to get out more, meet some people in real life who will tell you when you are being a twit and don't always just support whatever you say. And yes, I do mean face to face conversations where you and they are in the same place, not web sites like this."
Your assumption that I dont talk to people is amusing. I guess you have to pretend I dont so as not to think about your own posts and opinions. Maybe try some self reflection as you asked me to recognise conspiracy theories and you just demonstrated a lack of doing so. Maybe you need to get out more.
The first link you provided show that Pennsylvania has a mess in its electoral legislation that the politicians seem unable or unwilling to resolve. The second and third show that voting irregularities were caught and the authorities took action. In particular the interviewee in the video on the CNN link specifically rejects your claim of mass voting irregularities having had any material effect on the election. You have not provided any reference to allegations of voting fraud tax have not already been subject to judicial scrutiny.
Regarding Covid-19. I am not an expert geneticist, but the claim that there was "gain of function research to make it more lethal and spread easier through humans" is serious and does really need to be supported with evidence from some competent authority, but you did not supply a link for that.
However, this:
"In conclusion, all these specific features observed in SARS-COV-2 helps scientists to rule out the idea that this pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus is the result of a man-made action that could be either engineered in the laboratory or further created as a bioweapon out of conspiracy."
from: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7982270/#:~:text=In%20conclusion%2C%20all%20these%20specific,a%20bioweapon%20out%20of%20conspiracy.
Which goes on to say: "Recent discoveries revealed evidence of the presence of the virus around the world before it emerged in Asia. There is growing evidence of its true origin as a global organism that was waiting for favorable conditions to emerge instead of originating in China. "
indicates that your claim is not supported by the science.
You omit the conclusion to my sentence of what I believe regarding Hunter Biden's laptop. The full sentence (I have put in bold the part you left off) is:
"I believe that Hunter Biden had a laptop, but that the failure to ensure a secure custody chain potentially invalidated any data thereon."
The part you left off is the crucial bit (is that why you omitted it?). Preserving a secure chain of custody for evidence is essential in legal proceedings. There was a case years ago where a School employee was accused of having child pornography on his laptop. He denied any knowledge and would have been convicted of a serious offence, except that his accuser, had had access to the accused's laptop, and had the same illegal pornography (plus a lot more) on his own PC. As the chains of custody for both computers were preserved, it was clear who the perpetrator was, and who the innocent party was.
Whether or not I am an idiot is probably for others to judge, but I have never referred to the Steele dossier as a way of disparaging President Trump. Personally I believe that any speculation as to whether Putin has 'Kompromat' on Trump is pointless.
As for talking to people, I expect you do, but do you listen to them? How often do they say that you are talking nonsense? And would you take any notice if they did? The most important thing to know about anyone is how they react to being told they are wrong. I hope the above demonstrates that I reacted appropriately: I read the links you provided, listened to the video, have corrected your abbreviated quotation of what I wrote and pointed out where I believe you are wrong and why, with rational argument and logic. Hopefully you will agree that it was in a polite and clear manner. Sorry to say that you, on the other hand, produced links that contradict your argument, and selectively quoted me omitting the crucial part of a sentence. Which is not so good. Sorry.
@Eclectic Man
"You have not provided any reference to allegations of voting fraud tax have not already been subject to judicial scrutiny."
So you want reference to allegations which have been rejected??? Thats an odd position to take, almost like you want me to make your argument for you instead of demonstrating two instances of the 'irregularities' actually happening and with enough evidence the judicial system stepped in. Prove your own case.
"Regarding Covid-19. I am not an expert geneticist, but the claim that there was "gain of function research to make it more lethal and spread easier through humans" is serious and does really need to be supported with evidence from some competent authority, but you did not supply a link for that."
That isnt the claim, that is what they were working on and publicly proud of. I am guessing you missed the highly entertaining Rand Paul vs Fauci where Fauci was destroyed for the cover up-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBqXYpO1QpE
I honestly recommend watching it because even if you wanted to tell yourself it was natural, this is the virus that caused the pandemic and they were making it. So the conspiracy to claim it certainly came from nature and certainly not from the lab was a conspiracy- https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/has-the-lab-leak-theory-really-been-disproved/
"However, this:"
You quote from the NIH. The very people involved in covering it up, including Fauci!
"You omit the conclusion to my sentence of what I believe regarding Hunter Biden's laptop. The full sentence (I have put in bold the part you left off) is:"
The conspiracy theory is that it isnt Hunter Bidens laptop- https://abc3340.com/news/nation-world/the-laptop-was-real-doj-confirms-in-new-court-filing-it-indeed-belonged-to-hunter-biden-capitol-hill-deposition-investigation-business-deals-james-comer-house-oversight-committee-computer-repair-shop-new-york-post-article-special-counsel-david-weissi
"Whether or not I am an idiot is probably for others to judge, but I have never referred to the Steele dossier as a way of disparaging President Trump. Personally I believe that any speculation as to whether Putin has 'Kompromat' on Trump is pointless."
Your opinion is irrelevant, The Steele Dossier was a conspiracy. I know we have strayed from the conversation here but you said something very important- "Learning to recognise when a conspiracy theory is nonsense, and not credible is something I would advise everyone to try". Do YOU recognise when the conspiracy is nonsense? I am throwing 3 at you that have been very clear in the public eye but are still banded about by some as if real.
"As for talking to people, I expect you do, but do you listen to them? How often do they say that you are talking nonsense? And would you take any notice if they did?"
A regular group I talk to of varied opinions from extreme left, a few more moderate and one absolutely on the right. Some of them who are able to not like Trump but detach that from his good and bad. The one on the right able to detach his positive view of Trump from problems from his administration. Note we are all in the UK and talk UK politics as well (only the extreme lefty seems happy with our lot right now). One thing we do however (this is the important bit) is update each other on the facts even if we disagree in opinion. Being able to realise the facts is the important part, and where on here facts are ignored, rejected and downvoted because it upsets someones opinion.
Back to the point we were originally talking about however- "Cool, but is acceptable to block and revoke his security clearance due to it. The new gov can choose not to work with him." do we agree?
Umm, well, thanks for that.
Regarding voting fraud. If allegations have been tested in court, then they have been dealt with. I was actually asking you to explain the absence of any newly revealed claims of voter fraud from the 2020 election, specifically by vote counters, which have yet to be tested in court. The point being that none of the court cases against the result has succeeded, yet Trump persists in claiming the 2020 election was 'stolen' from him. In order to prove that, there need to be new revelations and for them to be tested in court.
The link of Rand Paul attacking Fauci, who was being polite and rejecting everything Paul accused him of, was interesting, but, frankly, not supportive of your case. Nowhere does Fauci accept the virus was engineered, rather than natural. Rand Paul's questions were designed to attack and humiliate Fauci, rather than elicit information, which is what politicians tend to do when they want to make a point or look strong to their 'voter base' rather than learn something.
I suggest you watch it again and listen to what Fauci said, and consider the possibility that he might be right. And try posting a link to a reputable health web site that does claim the virus was 'artificially enhanced', and explains why and what modifications there were, if you can find one.
Then you claim: "Being able to realise the facts is the important part, and where on here facts are ignored, rejected and downvoted because it upsets someones opinion."
Yup, being confronted with reality can be painful, embarrassing even. As for downvotes, well, someone (and I suspect that it is just the one person) seems to be downvoting almost every post in some threads which point out where Trump or his administration is wrong, mistaken or being foolish. (I will doubtless get a downvote for this post.). But that is no reason to avoid posting. People are literally being blown up in Ukraine, Gaza, Yemen, in comparison a few downvotes seems a small price to pay for advocating peace and freedom for all.
BUT, the next important part is logical reasoning from 'the facts' to a conclusion. Your claim that Fauci was 'destroyed' by Rand Paul is incorrect, he was attacked, verbally, and defended himself. Rand Paul was aggressive and rude. Your conclusion was incorrect, not supported by the recording of the exchange, so your reasoning was illogical. And Trump's team, in his first term claimed to use "alternative facts" after it was pointed out that Obama's inauguration was far better attended than Trump's.
The Trump administration can work with whomsoever it chooses, but we can argue their choice of sycophantic loyalists over competence is bad for American and the world.
Oh, but, according to you: "Your [i.e., my] opinion is irrelevant".
@Eclectic Man
"Regarding voting fraud. If allegations have been tested in court, then they have been dealt with. I was actually asking you to explain the absence of any newly revealed claims of voter fraud from the 2020 election, specifically by vote counters, which have yet to be tested in court."
Have yet to be tested when the 2020 election is not to be questioned? Why would new ones come out when doing so puts you in the same bucket as those who already spoke up? I am hammering home the actual factual and undeniable proof of it happening even though it apparently never happens so dont ask questions.
"In order to prove that, there need to be new revelations and for them to be tested in court."
Hey look you point to the problem. 2020 must not be revisited, it is set in stone, any revelations would be considered Trump lying and so on. Yet the facts stand that following increased scrutiny IT HAS BEEN CAUGHT. There isnt any denying that hence the 2020 election is questionable. We might like to BELIEVE it wasnt rigged but likelihood is pushing against that belief very hard. And where did those magic voters go?
"The link of Rand Paul attacking Fauci, who was being polite and rejecting everything Paul accused him of, was interesting, but, frankly, not supportive of your case"
Rewatch it. You may want to lie to yourself but it doesnt stand in the real world. Fauci wasnt being polite, he was stuck buried under his bull.
You asked- "gain of function research to make it more lethal and spread easier through humans" is serious and does really need to be supported with evidence from some competent authority so you are answered. You dont need to hide behind "I am not an expert geneticist" this isnt 'what is a woman'. Paul caught him out changing the meaning of gain of function.
"I suggest you watch it again and listen to what Fauci said, and consider the possibility that he might be right."
I did. And he was caught in the lies. Go on, watch it. You wont have a smoking gun because if you remember the Chinese blocked entry and jailed those who leaked information about the virus. Information necessary in fighting it!
"And try posting a link to a reputable health web site that does claim the virus was 'artificially enhanced', and explains why and what modifications there were, if you can find one."
Not that you are seriously asking for any information about this but for a laugh-
https://www.politifact.com/article/2021/oct/28/ask-politifact-what-does-nih-letter-say-about-gain/
https://www.congress.gov/117/meeting/house/114270/documents/HHRG-117-GO24-20211201-SD004.pdf
https://theintercept.com/2021/09/06/new-details-emerge-about-coronavirus-research-at-chinese-lab/
So the conspiracy that it definitely occurred in nature and not a lab was bull. It absolutely is not definite. Even the CIA moved from neutrality to leaning toward the lab work as the cause.
"And Trump's team, in his first term claimed to use "alternative facts" after it was pointed out that Obama's inauguration was far better attended than Trump's."
And bull is bull wherever it is from. I am keeping with this discussion because where you seemed to think I needed to see conspiracies as nonsense and I am checking if you do.
"Oh, but, according to you: "Your [i.e., my] opinion is irrelevant"."
Well done misquoting badly. -
Personally I believe that any speculation as to whether Putin has 'Kompromat' on Trump is pointless."
Your opinion is irrelevant, The Steele Dossier was a conspiracy.
As I am checking your vision when it comes to conspiracy or reality your personal belief about the bull is irrelevant, it was conspiracy bollocks and has been proven so. I am giving you easy and obvious examples to work with but you want to squirm and avoid. And Krebs is accused of being involved in the misinformation (conspiracy) bull over the laptop and covid as well as his comments about the 2020 election.
Re "gain-of-function" - Fauci was trying to point out to Rand Paul that it is an imprecise term and there is a more accurate one in use. This is what happens in science, we learn, improve and refine. That is not Fauci redefining it himself but the whole relevant scientific community being more precise, over several months. And Paul was bullying Fauci, talked over him and would not let him explain where Paul was incorrect. That is not Fauci being 'buried under his bull'. Frankly as a former ophthalmologist, Paul should know better about medical science than that.
Your fist link (none of which are to health websites btw) includes the statement in the digest:
"There is still no direct evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab."
As for misquoting you (actually it was an accurate quote), I expanded the context to see your reaction. You see, you misrepresented what I had posted by ignoring the point of my statement concerning the chain of custody of Hunter Biden's laptop (which you claim to address by a link to 'the real Biden laptop conspiracy'). If you are so unhappy about misrepresentation, please try not to do it again.
@Eclectic Man
Your fist link (none of which are to health websites btw) includes the statement in the digest:
"There is still no direct evidence that SARS-CoV-2 was created in a lab."
And yet the conspiracy theory was that Covid was definitely natural and not from the Chinese labs. This was the conspiracy lie that was pushed and used to attack Trump until Biden was elected and then Biden admitted the lab leak was possible. Hence the point that it was a conspiracy that was exposed as a lie. The direct link to prove it was natural has not been found. The smoking gun has not been found for which lab it leaked from. This is due to the Chinese blocking access and prosecuting scientists who released any information. Yet as further information came out the lab leak looked increasingly likely.
"Re "gain-of-function" - Fauci was trying to point out to Rand Paul that it is an imprecise term and there is a more accurate one in use. This is what happens in science, we learn, improve and refine. That is not Fauci redefining it himself but the whole relevant scientific community being more precise, over several months."
Doing gain of function but claiming it isnt because even though it is they are using different words is precisely the bull that Rand Paul called Fauci out on.
Why is it not bullying?
bullying
noun:
1. An act of intimidating a weaker person to do something, especially such repeated coercion.
2. Persistent acts intended to make life unpleasant for another person.
Krebs announced that the 2020 election was legit.
Are you suggesting that DJT was in that circumstance a 'weaker person'? That Krebs was trying to intimidate DJT? That Krebs was persistently and repeatedly trying to make life unpleasant for Trump?
Bullying is commonly known to be people in a position of strength or great leverage (whether that be capability for physical, legal, or financial violence) using their position to extract something or just abuse those in weaker positions.
Regardless of one's position on the facts or probabilities of any of the questions, claims that DJT is being "bullied" at any time since maybe mid-2019 or so is just wishful thinking.
@IglooDame
"Are you suggesting that DJT was in that circumstance a 'weaker person'?"
DJT being a politician at the mercy of the vote count. Who's position relied on the outcome of the votes. And of course the political interference of playing down the Hunter Biden laptops existence and origins of covid.
I think that answers your whole comment
...it's undermining security
It might well be but as far as Trump is concerned that doesn't matter so long as it does not affect him.
As he said at the Oval on January 6th when they told him lots of his supporters would not go through the magnetometers as they were afraid that any weapons would be spotted, "They are not here to hurt me."
The man is a menace and a threat to the world.
It is merely there to 'encourage the others' to toe the line. The real damage is being done by seriously damaging the essential IT security infrastructure as described by The Register in https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/23/trump_us_security/ and the recent near closure of CVE.
Now, don't get me wrong, this is terrible for Mr Krebs, and it will be at best very difficult for him for at least the next 4 years, but it will serve very much as a warning to anyone who promotes reality that contradicts the Trump playbook. Trump has already done a great deal to silence the 'Global Warming' scientists, his attacks on Columbia and Harvard Universities is a serious attempt to stifle free speech. Defunding much of the USA's national science programmes and USAID is designed to silence any form of dissent, or, as most scientists call it 'evidence based decision making'.
Mr Krebs was just a prominent target who was a thorn in the side for speaking truth to the world. Anthony Fauci could well be next, even retirement may not spare him from Trump's ire.
Maybe its time the spineless republicans in congress began doing their job and reminding trumpty that its congress that sets, raises and lowers tariffs, not the president. and reminding him that the enemy aliens act can only be used at times of war and its congress that declares war and not the president.
But then what do I care? watching the US go down is certainly a popcorn moment... the end result will be Canada west coast/ Canada east coast, and the republic of Gilead
When they say they want to "expand the investigation" to target those who are speaking out against the Krebs investigation. Even if that investigation was 100% legit (hint, it isn't) that wouldn't justify investigating people who are calling it out. Should everyone who spoke out against the multiple criminal investigations into Trump have been "investigated" also, or are you a proper fascist who thinks only those who disagree with you should be targeted.
Because as a lot of people found out in Germany in the 1930s and Russia in the 2010s, even if you start out as part of the "in group" that's no guarantee you won't become a target later. Too bad Jeff Bezos didn't read his history books, or he might not have folded to Trump and kept with the plan to have Amazon tell people exactly how much the Trump tariffs are costing them. At least a lot of other places already are, so there's no way he can continue to fool his supporters into believing the ridiculous fantasy that other countries pay the tariffs instead of US consumers.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2025
