Need help from other Fake Media Liberals

@SumKindaMunster But the Koch brothers are simply businessmen.

@Graylight Uh huh. Thanks for proving my point Graylight. Point the finger at some other people doing the same thing, as if I support that. At least the Koch brothers are American Citizens. So you agree with all my criticisms against Soros then? You're fine with a foreigner using his money to influence our elections?

@SumKindaMunster Soros was born in 1930, are you saying he worked for the Nazi's as a toddler?

@SumKindaMunster Worked for the Nazis...when he was 13 years old, handing out deportation notices. Wow. If that makes him complicit I wonder what can be said of Neville Chamberlain and his appeasement strategy which allowed Germany to occupy Czechoslovakia, or Henry Ford's anti-Semitic views and receiving the Grand Cross of the German Eagle by the Nazi Party?

Moving on.
Shady financial dealings, do you really want to go there?
Lobbying for his own personal political desires, unless he is the only one (which we know he isn't) what is your point?

And finally yes, I will mercilessly mock your conspiracy theories regarding possible influence from a minor player as you ignore all the evidence regarding Russian influence.

@independentone didn't you know Stewie Griffin is based on George Soros?

@independentone As a teenager actually. He used to hand out deportation notices on behalf of the Nazis.

@SumKindaMunster Please explain in detail how he worked for the Nazis.

Because as far as I know he's Jewish, was 13 years old when the Nazis occupied Hungary in 1944, and is a worldwide target for antisemitic conspiracy theories.

So I'm very interested to see how you thread that particular needle.

@EuphoricTurtle He worked for the Nazis. You can spin it all you want and bring up long dead individuals as a way to distract from that fact, but the fact remains. He worked for the Nazis.

[quote]Shady financial dealings, do you really want to go there?[/quote]

Yes I do actually, and the fact that you want to sweep over this is telling.

He's been accused of currency manipulation by multiple governments including the UK, and France.

The company he worked for in 1997 was directly responsible for a Financial Crises in Asia, and he admitted as such.

He has been involved in currency shorting, insider trading, and financial manipulations for years. He has ruined the lives of countless people in countries he does not live in by using his money to short their currencies for profit.

He was convicted of insider trading by France.

He routinely gives money to left wing and Democrat candidates even though he is not an American citizen. He has donated money to defeat special prosecutors in America because he didn't like the way they interpret the law.

He was HRC's biggest individual donor.

His "Open Societies" is one of BLM's biggest donors, to the tune of around $220 million

https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/newsroom/open-society-foundations-announce-220-million-for-building-power-in-black-communities

As far as "ignoring" evidence of Russian influence, I have no idea what you are talking about. Did we discuss that before? You don't seem familiar to me...

@CountScrofula He worked for the Nazis as a teenager. He used to hand out deportation notices on behalf of the Nazis.

[quote]Now came the fulcrum of Soros’s life and career. The bureaucrat who housed teenage György was assigned the task of confiscating Jewish land and property. With the boy in tow, he went from house to house, making inventories for Nazi officers. It’s unfair sweepingly to condemn those individuals, Jewish and Gentile, who, willingly or unwillingly, sometimes participated in evil in order to survive[/quote]

https://www.city-journal.org/html/connoisseur-chaos-14954.html

@SumKindaMunster
I'm not spinning anything. I questioned your definition of "working for the Nazis". And asked you to qualify how Neville Chamberlain and Henry Ford would stand under that definition. Still waiting on that.

As for the shady dealings, I'm more than happy to go there. I just wanted you to be sure that you were going to go there. Just like the Nazi equivalencies I hope you'll be able to enlighten me how they are worse than any other.

Currency manupilation, check. He was responsible for Black Wednesday of 1992, or better put, he took advantage of the UK's position relative to the European Exchange Rate Mechanism. As for the 1997 Asian Financial Crisis, his company did recognize the frailty of the market with Thailands attempt to support its currency peg to the US dollar and other factors and effectively did take advantage of the situation. Was he right to do so? Frick no. Did he admit to being directly responsible like you said? Equally Frick no. But I'll be happy to be corrected by any source you have (youtube links excluded).

Has he been convicted of insider trading? Yes.

Does he routinely give money to causes he supports, even though he is not a America citizen? Yes..and your point is?
Just in 2019 alone 3.47 billion dollars was spent on lobbying in the united states. Are you proposing that all this money comes from left wing foreign citizens? International companies?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/257337/total-lobbying-spending-in-the-us/#:~:text=In%202019%2C%20the%20total%20lobbying,to%203.47%20billion%20U.S.%20dollars.&text=Since%20the%20turn%20of%20the,States%20has%20more%20than%20doubled.


As far as ignoring evidence of Russian influence. the answer is simple, you are floating a conspiracy theory with no evidence because "you're concerned with his undo influence in American Politics" when in fact the only susbstantiated influence that has been found in your political system from abroad (which incidently supported the right) has been completely ommited from your list of concerns.

But please, go on. Tell me how you're worried how this conspiracy theory has impacted your life.

@EuphoricTurtle I'm happy to respond to your snarky post with sincerity. Not sure why you've chosen to adopt this tone of suspicion and skepticism.

So we agree he worked for the Nazis. Yes, I acknowledge he was young and probably didn't know any better. Lore states his father, who had some influence, got him out of that job.

I already responded to your comparisons to Neville Chamberlin and Henry Ford. I feel they are irrelevant and that is as much time as I am willing to put into that.

[quote]Does he routinely give money to causes he supports, even though he is not a America citizen? Yes..and your point is?
Just in 2019 alone 3.47 billion dollars was spent on lobbying in the united states. Are you proposing that all this money comes from left wing foreign citizens? International companies?[/quote]

My point being that I strongly and firmly believe that a non American should not be permitted to donate to political causes in a country of which they are not a citizen.

And yes, that goes for left wing, right wing whatever. If you are not a citizen, you should not have a seat at the table, and you should not be able to buy a seat at the table because you have money.


[quote]As far as ignoring evidence of Russian influence. the answer is simple, you are floating a conspiracy theory with no evidence because "you're concerned with his undo influence in American Politics" when in fact the only susbstantiated influence that has been found in your political system from abroad[/quote]

Conspiracy theory? He funds and runs the Open Societies foundation which routinely gives money to left wing causes. I already noted that, why are you overlooking it? He straight up says he does this on his own website. How the hell is that a conspiracy theory?

I was not the one who brought up Soros. That would be you. This is [i]your[/i] post. It's highly disingenuous you claim otherwise.

@SumKindaMunster
There you go, was that so hard?In your view a thirteen year old Jewish boy, upon being referred to work at a puppet jewish Council by an ocupying force is determined to have WORKED for the Nazis. Meanwhile a political leader who sanctioned the invasion of a sovereign country and an Industrialist who was awarded a medal on behalf of the Nazis are in your words....irrelevant.

As for your opinion that non Americans should not be permited to donate to political causes, your view is essentially flawed by one simple point....George Soros is an American citizen.

Anything else?

@EuphoricTurtle Yeah he is a "naturalized citizen" of the US and the UK. He is also Hungarian.

Perhaps I should have said individuals who have single citizenship should only be allowed to vote/contribute to American politics. I don't think having dual citizenships serves American interests.

Yes, something else.

Why the smug hostility? I think we both know Soros is shady as fuck, but you don't have a problem with him purposefully donating to causes that serve to disrupt the American way of life.

Why the childish provocations about being "paid" by Soros when it would seem you know damn well that isn't what is happening?

@SumKindaMunster Okay I'll accept that at face value. I don't think it matters.

Here's my deal with George Soros.

Billionaires are an international class and their citizenship is irrelevant. They influence politics all over the world and constantly. Political interference in sovereign nations is their bread and butter. Hell where do we think the term 'banana republic' comes from?

So the idea that America should somehow be protected from the political influence of capitalists when it is the primary architect of these practices is kind of rich.

What makes Soros stand out to me is not that he spends money on liberal causes. It's that he's a target of insane anti-semitic white replacement conspiracy theories and attacks on him at the exclusion of other billionaires feeds that narrative, even unknowingly.

I'm sure you know the narrative. Super-wealthy Jews who really run the world are trying to destroy the white race and do so by coordinating the mass replacement of whites by "lesser" races.

So much dialogue around Soros leads to conspiracy theories about him trying to flood countries with unwelcome non-white immigrants. Is he above criticism because of that? No. Fuck him, he's a billionaire and his money should be seized by those he stole it from.

But I don't consider him a greater social threat than any of the rest of them.

@SumKindaMunster

[quote]Do Naturalized Citizens Have Different Rights?
Holders of both naturalization certificates and citizenship certificates have the same rights, such as the right to receive a US passport and the right to vote.

Naturalized citizens may never be deported or have their citizenship revoked. In other words, the end result is the same—it’s only the path to citizenship that differs.[/quote]
https://www.monumentimmigration.com/blog/2017/august/what-s-the-difference-between-naturalization-and/#:~:text=A%20United%20States%20citizenship%20certificate,citizen%20via%20our%20naturalization%20process.&text=USCIS%20permits%20foreign%20nationals%20who,to%20naturalize%20as%20US%20citizens.

Please explain your distinction of "naturalized citizen".

And even if your second filter of forbidding people with dual citizenship from participating in the political process would be implemented (although they preserve the right to vote) how would that in any way prevent his foundation (based in New york) from supporting these causes? Would the second filter be the CEO of said foundation? The sahreholders of the foundations? Which lobbying company would end up being able to lawfully lobby and support political causes?

I couldn't care less about George Soros and his shady dealings. What I do care is how you label his foundations 220 million dollar grants for racial justice groups, criminal justice reform and civic engagement as

[quote]but you don't have a problem with him purposefully donating to causes that serve to disrupt the American way of life.[/quote]

And what I still don't understand is how this man is your focus in the light of Russian interfereance.

@CountScrofula That's a fair counterpoint. My response to that though is why the initial skepticism when I dived into this issue? It sounds like we are on the same page. I don't care for any foreign billionaires spending their money on pet causes in America.

My intent here was to disrupt the smug condescension about people who rightly question his influence.

We both know he's not paying supporters directly, why participate in promoting that viewpoint even in jest?

@EuphoricTurtle Naturalized citizens were not born in this country, and anyone who gets their citizenship here, while also maintaining citizenship in other countries has a conflict of interest. Their sincerity to the nation they chose to buy their citizenship in should be met with great skepticism.


[quote]how would that in any way prevent his foundation (based in New york) from supporting these causes? Would the second filter be the CEO of said foundation? The sahreholders of the foundations? Which lobbying company would end up being able to lawfully lobby and support political causes?
[/quote]

All great questions, and I don't have a pat answer for you. However, I am a strong supporter of getting money out of politics and promoting campaign finance reform. So perhaps we should consider these points. Perhaps we should prevent these types of loopholes. I would be in favor of legislation baring Soros and other billionaires from spending their money on pet politics in the US.

[quote]And what I still don't understand is how this man is your focus in the light of Russian interfereance.[/quote]

I've offered plenty of reasons why this man should be barred from American politics.

Why do you keep bringing up Russian interference? Are you suggesting I don't believe the Russians are and have been using dirty political tricks to unfairly influence our elections?

Of course they did and still do. Just like the Chinese. Just like the Israelis, just like the North Koreans. Just like our own CIA interferes in other elections. Just like NGOs and PACs who use their money to influence American elections.

Soros is yet another example of this, and if you have a problem with the Russians unfairly influencing our society/elections, Soros should also be on your list.

@SumKindaMunster If that would be applied, contradicting what is established as rights for those who adquire citizenship, wouldn't that make it ilegal for a someone who aquired citizenship to become first lady? And more, wouldn't that by all means create a segregation of citizens? Efectively creating second-class citizens in terms of constitutionaly afforded rights?

Regarding lobbying, I am all for a much closer restriction on the way political power is/can be influenced by corporations/foundations.

You have offered no reason why George Soros should be barred from American Politics. No reason which wouldn't excluded almost anyone else.

You can't claim that his actions should exclude them and then fail to apply the same reasoning to the rest of the playing field.

I keep bringing up Russian interference because it was proven to have occured and to be Ilegal. You keep making claims as to why it should be ilegal in George Soros' case but seem to be completely at ease with what has been proven to be ILEGAL influence in your political system by a foreign Government. We're not even talking by a foreign national, a foreign power to no consequence. It's like discussing the dangers of icebergs when the ship is on fire.

@EuphoricTurtle [quote]If that would be applied, contradicting what is established as rights for those who adquire citizenship, wouldn't that make it ilegal for a someone who aquired citizenship to become first lady?[/quote]

No, the first lady is largely a ceremonial position and this would have no impact on that.

[quote]And more, wouldn't that by all means create a segregation of citizens? Efectively creating second-class citizens in terms of constitutionaly afforded rights?[/quote]

Maybe. We already do something similar with convicted felons so the precedent is there.

[quote]You have offered no reason why George Soros should be barred from American Politics. No reason which wouldn't excluded almost anyone else.[/quote]

Hmm, I have. I mentioned his multiple instances of financial malfeasance and manipulations that caused multiple financial crises that should bar him from American political life. It would seem you don't agree...

Which is fine, but rather disingenuous to say I haven't provided reasons why he should be barred.

[quote]I keep bringing up Russian interference because it was proven to have occured and to be Ilegal. You keep making claims as to why it should be ilegal in George Soros' case but seem to be completely at ease with what has been proven to be ILEGAL influence in your political system by a foreign Government. We're not even talking by a foreign national, a foreign power to no consequence. It's like discussing the dangers of icebergs when the ship is on fire.[/quote]

Yeah and that's your opinion. My opinion is that this case was largely overblown and an attempt to pressure Trump to resign. The case was dropped once it was clear Trump wasn't going to resign. As already mentioned, I agree the Russians "interfered" in our election process with underhanded attempts to influence the election to their benefit.

But this is no different than China, Israel, North Korea, multiple NGOs and PACs, and probably some of our own "allies". Why are we not investigating them?

My take on this is that you aren't genuinely interested in discussing this. You seem to be interested in smug, lame "gotchas" in what I assume is an attempt to get me to shut up and go away.

I can appreciate why you might feel that way, but I think its telling you aren't truly interested in discussing this, rather it would seem you want to use Soros to put down conservatives who genuinely feel he is a threat and mock them for believing so.

@SumKindaMunster

1.
The fist lady is not only a cermonial position. During the 20th century it became common for first ladies to choose causes which they themselves promote.
Elenor Roosevelt - Women's Rights, Civil Rights
Betty Ford - Women's Rights
Nancy Reagan - Drug Awareness
Barbara Bush - Childhood literacy
Michelle Obama -Childhood Obesity
Melania Trump herself has the "Be Best" public awareness campaing which is funded with tax dollars.

And you say this is fine and ceremonial but when George Soros funds initiatives it's suddenly not fine. Please explain.

2.
I'm glad we got that out of the way and that you came out and said that you are fine with determining naturalized citizens as second class citizens by establishing a precedent with criminals. I guess Thomas Jefferson was wrong and not "all men are created equal".

3.
You are, I'm guessing by accident, not replying to the last part.
[quote]No reason which wouldn't exclude almost anyone else[/quote]
To make it clearer, which wouldn't exclude anyone else regardless of citizenship who is guilty of shady buisness dealings or conviction of financial crimes. Republican Chris Collins of New York ran on the House of Representatives elections in 2018 AFTER being accused of the very same insider trading George Soros was accused of. Later he pleaded guilty. he still won by the way.

4.
This isn't a matter of opinion. There was an inquiry, there were arrests, charges and convictions.
Rick Gates - Conspiracy+false = GUILTY
George Papadopoulos - false statements = GUILTY
Paul Manafort - Conspiracy, tax fraud, bank fraud = GUILTY
Micheal Flynn - false statements = GUILTY
Michael Cohen - false statements = GUILTY
Roger Stone - obstruction, false statements, witness tampering = GUILTY

I should be noted that there is a clear distinction between infuencing political power, say by lobbying like NGO's do, and influencing the result of an election by working with a policitac faction to smear another.

These aren't gotchas. Just facts. It's not my fault you feel caught out by them.

And I have no interest in shutting you up, just the conspiratory nonsense

And let me make this clear, I couldn't give two shits about George Soros or any other billionaire's political views and funding. If he wants to fund liberal agendas because he thinks it's the right thing fine, if some other obscenely rich jerk off wants to fund conservative agendas that's fine too. As long as they are legal and respect human dignity I have no problem with either.

@EuphoricTurtle 1. Yeah right. [quote]During the 20th century it became common for first ladies to choose causes which they themselves promote[/quote]

Yes, they spend some of their free time promoting feel good initiatives. Again, largely ceremonial.

2. Yes snarky. I am totally advocating specialized treatment for people I like. It's neat how you threw in a quote from Jefferson there as if that has anything to do with what I suggested.

3. Collins should be recalled. You only care about Republican crimes or are you assuming I am a Republican and would try to make excuses for this one guy?

4. None of those people have anything to do with the Russian troll farm you were previously mentioning and making so much hay over. Now you want to loop in these individuals? What exactly do they have to do with Russian troll farms? More discredited nonsense about them conspiring with the Russians during Trump's transition to President?

[quote]These aren't gotchas. Just facts. It's not my fault you feel caught out by them.[/quote]

No it's pretty clear you are highly partisan and promoting conspiracies that serve your political worldview, while diminishing others that serve your political desires.

@SumKindaMunster
1. Once again, if they are the ones choosing which initiatives to promote, then they cannot be considered ceremonial, that's an executive task in policy and use of tax payer money.

2. Once again, I’m stating a fact. You are advocating something that goes against your very constitution. Your example of convicts doesn’t equate, because supposedly they LOSE certain rights based on their actions. What you’re advocating is for a certain class of citizens who do not have access to certain rights irrespective of their actions. So yes, the Thomas Jefferson quote “all men are created equal” does have a relevance.

3. I don’t care what party you support. I don’t even care that you’re American. This George Soros conspiracy isn’t solely american issue. For the record, the reason I chose Collins wasn’t because he’s Republican. I gave Collins as an example because he was accused (and eventually convicted) exactly on the same charges as George Soros (insider trading)

4. You’re right, none of those people have anything to do with Russian troll farms. Those were never brought to justice. Those people were accused and convicted of something far worse, soliciting/accepting aid from a foreign government entity during an election. Unless you are suggesting they were convicted based on conspiracy therories?

And finally, like I’ve repeated. I couldn’t give two shits about partisan politics. A two party system is insane for this very reason, but that’s another discussion. To my knowledge I have not promoted a SINGLE conspiracy theory, unlike you. I have substantiated everything and asked you repeatedly to substantiate your claims. So please tell me what conspiracy theories I have promoted.

As a reference, this is what a conspiracy theory is (just so we’re clear)

[b]conspiracy theory[/b]
noun
1.a belief that some covert but influential organization is responsible for an unexplained event.
"they sought to account for the attacks in terms of a conspiracy theory"

And in the end, I’ll say this.I'm not trying to shut you up, I actually enjoy these discussions. Looking forward to hearing from you

@EuphoricTurtle 1. You're example of First ladies was entirely irrelevant to my point and I am not sure why we are arguing about their duties and who pays for it. Move on already.

2. I am advocating making it more difficult for naturalized citizens to be able to unfairly influence American politics. That's all. You're example of this being similar to convicts is irrelevant, move on already.

3. K.

4. [quote]Those people were accused and convicted of something far worse, soliciting/accepting aid from a foreign government entity during an election.[/quote]

Bullshit, they were convicted of lying to the government.

So right there is a conspiracy theory you are "promoting". That the Trump transition team was in league with a foreign government and accepted aid from them for assistance in his election campaign.

@SumKindaMunster 1.My exemple isn’t irrelevant. You’re calling for a naturalized citizen to not being to influence politics and/or endorse social causes. At this moment you HAVE a naturalized citizen who made the initiative “be best” advocating against cyberbullying and drug use. If she had instead advocated for an initiative on racial equality how would that in ANY way be less influential than another naturalized citizen funding organisations advocating for the same? I’ll move on when you finally answer the question.
2.Why should it be more difficult for naturalized citizens to advocate/promote/fund social causes and HOW is that unfair? Once again answer the question and I’ll gladly move on.
3.Was that so hard?
4.Those who were convicted of false statements, were convicted of lying about what? What did Flyn plead guilty to? "willfully and knowingly" making "false, fictitious and fraudulent statements" to the FBI regarding conversations with Russia's ambassador. How is that a conspiracy? Why on earth would he plead guilty to an accusation that could not be proved?

@EuphoricTurtle 1. Oooooh, this is about Trump and his wife in the White House. I gotcha now. I guess that upsets you huh?

[quote]If she had instead advocated for an initiative on racial equality how would that in ANY way be less influential than another naturalized citizen funding organisations advocating for the same? [/quote]
I don't know and neither do you. Anyway, who cares? My distinction was naturalized citizens who have dual citizenship being limited in their ability to unfairly influence American politics. This situation isn't relevant. As I already said.

2. Again I said naturalized citizens with dual citizenship should be limited in their ability to unfairly influence American politics.

3. No

4. [quote]Those who were convicted of false statements, were convicted of lying about what? What did Flyn plead guilty to? "willfully and knowingly" making "false, fictitious and fraudulent statements" to the FBI regarding conversations with Russia's ambassador[/quote]

That's not what you said initially. You said they were:

[quote]Those people were accused and convicted of something far worse, soliciting/accepting aid from a foreign government entity during an election.[/quote]

THAT'S the conspiracy you are promoting. That the Trump transition team was in league with a foreign government and accepted aid from them for assistance in his election campaign.