Is Breitbart a legitimate news site?
-
Clinton was investigated - for Whitewater, for Lewinsky, for Benghazi, for emails, etc. It’s not like her and former President Bill Clinton’s dealings were not looked into. They very much were. That’s what I don’t understand. It seems like people are saying Clinton got a free pass, when I can name four things off the top of my head that were investigated and that had Congressional hearings on. You’re at least as old as I am, so I can’t imagine you don’t remember those investigations, particularly the last two since they were both talked about quite a bit over the last 18 months.
As for Obama being investigated, trust me when I say, there are people in the GOP that hate him enough that they would investigate him for anything if they thought they could make it stick. There was a GOP Congress for six of the eight years Obama was in office. Perhaps if they hadn’t spent time on over four dozen attempts to repeal legislation that opened up health insurance for over 20 million people, they could have found time to investigate him for something (not sure what you have in mind here - no one has ever pointed to a scandal within the Obama White House, not even conspiracy sites can point to anything with legs).
And all of this fails to address the key point. Trump and his associates have continually denied any contact with Russians. If it was legal, that’s great for the country, there’s no scandal and we can all move along with our daily lives. But they denied it. Up until last week, they said it didn’t happen at all. That’s the issue here. Regardless of if you think this meeting was legal or illegal, there’s no question that the Trump team denied that it happened when its clear that it did occur. If the meeting was legal (and for the good of the country, I hope that there was no collusion between Trump’s campaign and the Russians) then why not just admit it happened, say that you met to get oppo research, she pulled the switcheroo and wanted to talk sanctions, you walked away with nothing helpful and moved on with the campaign. If you do that, the story is in the news for a day or two, then fades away as irrelevant.
The meeting is not the story. THE COVER-UP IS THE STORY
-
@justanotherfan Thanks scoop, now stick to sports talk & let all this other useless horseshit
go.
-
@justanotherfan “As for Obama being investigated, trust me when I say, there are people in the GOP that hate him enough that they would investigate him for anything if they thought they could make it stick.”
Let’s not forget how our current President, now claiming a 7 month investigation is the greatest witchhunt in history, promised for 5 years to provide evidence he claimed his investigators had uncovered proving that Obama was not born in the US.
As to the Clintons, don’t forget Hillary’s commodity trading. I spent almost three days reviewing tens of thousands of pages of investigative records of her trading advisor to determine (at the behest of GOP senators) whether any of her trades were involved in some of the things he had done. They weren’t, but my agency alone spent about $25,000 just answering the fruitless fishing expedition. Hillary is literally the most investigated politician in history.
For all the crying by the right wing about resources sidetracked by this investigation, I urge a jump into the wayback machine to that urgent GOP-led impeachment trial about 18 years ago. Yep, certainly saved our country from clear and present danger there. What’s a little foreign interference with our elections compared to that?
-
The most neutral place I’ve found is NY Times or USA today. WSJ has moved very far left. DJT deserves most things coming to him. But the man can’t even eat without WSJ writing and article on how his diet is bad for America.
NY Times, for the most part, simply states facts and lets you form your own opinion. WSJ tries, but their headlines are all clickbait at this point. So you go in with a preconceived notion before you even have read the article.
-
So you’re ok with Hillary selling 20% of US uranium to Russia, and then receive millions from Russians into her and Bills foundation? If you are ok with that then I guess you’re ok with the Dems fixing their election, and Hillary destroying and bleaching her illegal server. You know the one she refused to turn over to the FBI. And what about taking a hammer to all those cell phones?
Yet your upset that Russians tried to effect the US elections? And you blame Trump. So are you ok with Obama trying to effect the Jewish nation elections with American Tax payers money?
So let me get this straight. Our intelligence agencies have said Russia has tried many time to effect our elections over many years and decades. Yet here we have Hillary selling 20% of the US uranium to Russia. So if Russia is so evil and so wrong for trying to effect the US election process. Why is Hillary selling 20% of US uranium to Russia and then gladly receives millions donated to the Clinton foundation from Russians that benefited from the uranium deal?
I also have to ask if Hillary is willing to sell America to the Russians then why would they not want her president versus a wild card like Trump?
OK my friend lets fry those Republicans and give the Dem party a free pass. Cuz you know those Dems really care.
Also by the way Bill got impeached because he was getting blow jobs and bonking the interns. Maybe your ok with that?
-
Well lets uncover the story? It appears that the Russian lawyer that met with Trump Jr. had received special treatment from Obama and Lynch. UMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
Makes one think.
Yet I get it we don’t investigate Dems we fry Reps.
-
@DoubleDD LOL …Cigar anyone ? After 8 years of you know who, we probably even have some authentic Cuban Cohibas in the desk? So lets have the intern check on that … Now ya best lay off DD you mangy dog - these guys will just bite you in the ass when your backside gets turned …
-
@globaljaybird
For you I’ll drop it. I feel better anyway.
-
There’s always the Financial Times or the BBC… but some would say they slant. Economist is well written but considered on the conservative side. Then there’s Al Jazeera if you want to look at another view. Switching between Fox and CNN is interesting, but they are both virtually caricatures of ‘news’ providers.
In the last 20 years, the work required to have a balanced information diet has increased dramatically. And confidence that the ‘truth’ is identifiable in what is published has nearly evaporated.
-
Ay yi yi.
-
The 3 most controversial topics that are bound to create arguments are politics, abortion and religion…we really should avoid all of them.
Should we get back to KU basketball?
-
@JayHawkFanToo It’s in the general discussion section. It was a controversial topic to begin with. I kind of think it should just be allowed to play out.
Not like people are throwing F-Bombs (unless I missed something). I like getting people’s political views only to see how different their basketball views are. These are the types of threads we get to know everyone better.
Plus, its the summer time. Not much basketball to talk.
-
This post is deleted!
-
This post is deleted!
-
This post is deleted!
-
@DoubleDD Why would you put something like this on a KU Basketball fan website? Is this the venue that you’d like to use to promote a political vent? Please, for the love of God, keep this to your other web sites.
-
Sorry I didn’t start this topic. The person that started this topic owns and runs this sight.
Go talk to him.
-
I will throw this out there. If there is a group of people with a spectrum of political opinions that runs the gamut capable of engaging in amiable productive discourse about the topic, this group is it. There are many indications in our society that our unwillingness to discuss our differences is in fact the greatest of problems we face. I believe in you all as individuals and as a group to be able to bridge the divide with people of dissenting opinions and find common ground, not only by blissfully losing ourselves in the passions we share (rock chalk) but also in forging new middle ground in areas where there is none. That ability to find a new and better way together is something this country desperately needs to embrace.
-
@approxinfinity If you want all Americans to get along you need a powerful enemy threatening our safety. When things are too good we tear ourselves apart…Win 13 straight conference championships but only one National Championship and one other final four in that run…fire the coach. Win 2-3 in a row and flame out in the tourney every stinking year…cry when that coach leaves… smh
-
Respect. That and remembering that we are all on the same side in the end. Those are the two things that strengthen a country. Those are really the only ideologies that matter. Not right. Not left. Not conservative or liberal or libertarian or red or blue or whatever other descriptions are out there.
Do I agree with our current president - not on many things. I want America to be great, but I also recognize that his idea of what is great doesn’t line up with my idea of great. I don’t want him to be an enormous failure, just like I didn’t want the current governor of our great state to fail. I just fear that some of his policies are likely to end in disaster.
I am especially wary of what’s going on now because the president has effectively de-legitimized any criticism of him. That’s very dangerous because, no matter how good he is as president (and we all have our various opinions on that) the ability to criticize is foundational to a democratic society. Throwing away that disagreement as illegitimate undermines the principles on which democracy is built. That doesn’t mean, of course, that President Trump will ruin the country. That’s hyperbole. What it means is that it could erode some of that foundation, in the same way that blindly following a leader (any leader, whether it be a politician, or a coach, or a pastor, or anyone) erodes the healthy skepticism that leads to the best choices.
I’m a boss at work. I manage a small staff. I tell everyone when they are hired that they are always allowed to respectfully question the decision making, provided that they can provide a reason for their questions (I just don’t like it doesn’t count). Sometimes, based on that criticism, we change paths. Sometimes, we don’t because on further review, that criticism isn’t as big a worry as they may have thought. But each criticism helps ensure that we cover every angle and that we don’t get a “herd” mentality right off a cliff. Sometimes it shows that my original idea wasn’t the best one. That doesn’t undermine my leadership. It enhances it because I have the confidence to lead to the best solution, not just my solution.
But that only works if there is a channel for respectful dissent.
The major problem in today’s politics (both sides are to blame here) is that there is a lot of absolutism and villainization without any room for the type of respectful dissent and discourse that promotes problem solving. My way or the highway is no way to lead.
-
In a country of 321 million people, we ultimately all have to choose between 2 people. Absolute lunacy.
-
New subtopic if anyone has any thoughts: Would you rather have had Obama introduce subsidized education or healthcare during his tenure?
Personally, I think Obamacare was a huge mistake simply because it was rushed and not thought out. Between that and Social Security, millennials are so screwed when we retire…
-
subtopic, Zone or Man-to-Man.
-
" Is Breitbart a legitimate news site?l –@approxinfinity
No, it does not appear to be.
But none of the others appear to be either. Not one.
The moment our information systems fully migrated to digital, and the Pentagon and National Security State committed to full spectrum dominance after 9/11, news was unfeasible and so effectively extinct.
There is no way to tell what is true and what is not. There are only narratives that seem more probable, or less probable.
All “news,” and “information” are hackable in untraceable ways by all sides. Even news that starts as factually verified and confirmed by two sources is useless, because it can be hacked untraceably inside a reporters lap top, or phone, wifi or cloud locations. Hence, a reporter can only prove what is reported by producing the sources in a room full of witnesses and cameras. But the moment the witnesses and cameras reduce appearances to digital content everything becomes hackable again.
It’s going to take decades, maybe centuries, for human beings to understand and compensate institutionally for the loss of verifiability.
Everything broadcast, cabled, printed, or internetted by an incorporated entity using digitalization at any step of its processes is agenda driven propaganda by definition.
No exceptions.
The effect is now normalizing, too.
Getting caught digitally red handed at anything now means nothing, because every case starts out with reasonable doubt.
Hilary and Podesta getting caught for all the apparent criminality in the leaked emails means zero, because in court the jury would be shown how easily the emails could have been substantially altered before during and after they were sent. It doesn’t matter that she apparently also destroyed 30k+ emails. There are explanations justifying that, too.
Almost nothing digitally is likely to be successfully actionable with deep enough pockets. ALMOST NOTHING.
Unverifiability is the new “true” among private oligarchies and their governments and their captive media oligopolies. They have for centuries been able to lie in analog more than is good for most of us. Now they can lie with impunity all the time, even when they don’t need to. And appear to do so.
The next step is for the accreting lying to finally lead to a population that can recall nothing but lies.
That’s where this is all heading, until cultures institute strict, enforceable standards, like US GRADE A PRIME INFORMATION, or something. And that will bring the peril of censorship.
-
Intelligence organizations themselves appear no longer in the business of discovering the truth about opponents. I suspect this is because they concluded long ago that whatever they find is not trustworthy at a digital level. I suspect the realize nothing they store digitally, no matter how encrypted, is trustworthy.
Intelligence organizations now appear effectively 100% focused on creating illusions to fool others with, not seeking truthful intelligence. They apparently lost faith in the truth. If they were actually looking for truth, the last thing they would do is run torture prisons to try to extract it. Torture prisons are apparently strictly for terror and intimidation of domestic and foreign adversaries, especially, we citizens. The function of torture prisons is apparently to experiment in mind control, terrorize us all, and to recruit dirty informants with coercion.
All is not lost. Many before us in totalitarian countries have had to learn to operate on an Orwellian diet of private oligarchic lies.
The news in our world is apparently strictly for driving agendas, not for providing an objective summary of what happened that day.
The only room for discussion on this point appears to be the start date of when ALL news became totally agenda driven propaganda pretending to be news. I hypothesize 9/11, because that is the day that our media told us everything had changed, and since then I find no evidence of anything but agenda driven propaganda on most events. But I am open to other start dates.
-
If one is to understand “the great mystery” one must study all its aspects, not just the dogmatic narrow view of one political party.
I guess that makes me a Sith Lord…
-
I was looking at the pew research stats re: state of news media here
Did you know that cable news viewership was up 55% for CNN / FOX / MSNBC in 2016? See here. I guess it is to be assumed that it will always go up being an election year, but it seems that there is an increased hunger for political news that is finding its way to a pantry full of junk food journalism.
Thats a combined $600 million increase in profit for CNN / FOX / MSNBC year over year.
2015: $2,071,300,000 2016:$2,670,400,000
-
@approxinfinity That seems to prove Trump is entertaining if nothing else. I personally cut cable a couple of years ago and don’t miss it one bit. Esp. all the manufactured news. As an added bonus the print paper doesn’t yell at me every 8 minutes to buy something I don’t need. (Not a big commercial fan)
-
Being born and raised in a family where politics and all controversial subjects were encouraged to be discussed, and in a state that was born in the most politically controversial period of American history, II thoroughly enjoy political, media, religious, abortion, conspiracy, et al, discussion and welcome it at our site.
But I also understand that others do not, and do not want their joy of KU Basketball discussion diluted by shunting into other tracks of subject matter.
I think we already have the solution at hand. We have created Royals and Chiefs categories that have nothing to do with KU Basketball, other than being sports.
Why not create a category called politics, too? It would be just like the Royals and Chiefs categories. No one that was not interested in the category would go to it. I rarely, if ever, go to the Royals, or Chiefs, categories, and it does not bother me that all kinds of opinions are being expressed there. A political category seems similarly benign.
One more thing I would suggest, based on what has been learned (at least by me) over the years by our online community. It might be good to institute up front that the point of the discourse is to “discover” and “learn” about issues, rather than to argue to be right, and so engage in to marginalizing and smearing others. Simply agree to ban all the techniques of thread cracking and smearing and trying to be the one that is right. In fact, AGREE TO ELIMINATE THE VERY POSSIBILITY OF DECLARING ONE POV IS RIGHT. This would completely eliminate 99% of contentiousness from the git-go. These kinds of discussions never get anywhere and are a waste of everyone’s time. If I have learned anything from this web site it is that I never change anyone else’s mind, and neither does anyone else. Each persons changes his own mind here when he/she is good and ready to change it. And they do so when they have participated in gathering information and processing it on their own. Individuals change their own minds. Thus it is fruitless and naive to waste time “winning” arguments. The object of discourse is to come away with more knowledge than what one started with. This new knowledge can include: facts, logics, hypotheses and assumptions about the topic being discussed. Anytime someone enters the realm of “I’m right because,…”, or asserts class prejudices like “All liberals are…(fill in the blank),” or “All Republicans are…(fill in the blank),” then participants simply respond with “That’s the I’m Right fallacy,” and continue introducing and discussion the meaning and utility of new facts, new logics, hypotheses, and assumptions.
This way we actually come away from discussions knowing more and more, rather than being bored and assaulted and disrespected by dolts endlessly engaging in the vanity of trying to show everyone else they don’t know what they are talking about. Everyone knows something worth knowing, or else the only point to communicating is pulling the wool over their eyes with propaganda and the current 25-30 techniques for thread cracking and site destabilization and smearing to try to proselytize for one stupid agenda, or another.
Why talk politics in a subcategory of a basketball web site? Because it is a group of aliases one already has a frame of reference with and knows to some degree their genuineness in discourse and their ways of communicating. What more reason does one need? It could be very fruitful to discuss politics with such aliases. We have become a very knowledgeable community about KU basketball and college basketball and the college sports industry by exploring and learning. Wouldn’t it be marvelous if we were able to create a model for talking about politics similarly. We keep getting better at talking about sports. Why not start getting better at talking about politics? It seems to me that our nation needs to rediscover how to talk about politics, after the long assault on political discourse by the propagandists and mind controllers with unlimited Federal Reserve funny money budgets.
-
@jaybate-1-0
. I have been thinking about starting a political version of this board, but I keep coming back to the fact that we know each other, have history here, and it would be nice to keep it a one stop shop for fruitful discussion with a small group of friends. I’m excited at that possibility. I might also look at a bigger picture site, but I think your idea makes perfect sense and jives with what I was hoping for as well. Looking into it now.
-
@approxinfinity I agree with you. Im open to discussing any topic. Nothing wrong with conversing amongst people you know and appreciate.
-
@wrwlumpy From Joe Diffie’s “My Give a Damn’s Busted” "Well, maybe Oprah’s got time to listen … ? "
-
“I’m against cats in the house !”
-
@globaljaybird we need to take this cat thing to the other site! I had to take care of a few last week, they are gross! I gagged.
-
Do monkeys fly out of my ass?
I’m guessing no on that one
-
@approxinfinity There are no legitimate news sites. Nazi Germany spewed less propaganda than I have seen in the last two years. Very sad!
-
@Barney I think it’s probably possible to assemble a rough facsimile of the truth by comparing all the various spin engines. But who had the time for that?
-
approxinfinity said:
@Barney I think it’s probably possible to assemble a rough facsimile of the truth by comparing all the various spin engines. But who had the time for that?
If Facebook didn’t collect so many eyeballs all day long, most people would have plenty of time to find and peruse a few sites to get a variety of opinions.
-
@approxinfinity The other side of the coin is that we live in a soundbite society now where no one checks out the truth behind the statements. Carver & Stephanopolis were the first to my knowledge to take great advantage of this for Bill Clinton. That is a deep rabbit hole, I won’t go there.
My point is that the American people are as much to blame for the mess, by not caring enough to get a little more information on a subject than the “soundbite”.
Okay, I am off my soapbox…Rock Chalk everyone!
-
I don’t think we Americans have a problem finding and understanding the truth. I believe the problem is the fairness that is giving to the that truth. As I said once before (I think). We humans or persons will gravitate to what fits our belief system. If you lean left your not watching Fox news, and if you lean right well you’re not watching CNN. I mean why would anybody watch a news channel that would only bash your party and what you believe to be the truth?
I think the interesting part is this movement to the information age. No longer are the masses forced to ingest a ginned up spin by some leaning Media outlet that has strings attached. I see it everyday as I cruise the this thing we call the Web. There are a plethora of bloggers with connections that are reporting on stories that the media outlets wont touch because it doesn’t fit with their narrative. Many Americans instead of being brainwashed on what to think about this party or president have found a new source with unlimited information to tap into. They get to hear and read the other side of the story the side the Media doesn’t want to share or air. Sadly I think the days of the Media’s stronghold over the masses is coming to an end. I remember when I was a growing up if it was on the news then it had to be true. This is not the case anymore. The media outlets have an axe to grind and an accord to fool the masses.
You know its funny and sad at the same time. Yet if a person would really think about it. The US media has done way more trying to effect the results of our elections, than Russians could ever dream of. I’ll never forget the last presidential election. Oh my. In the end the media is losing it’s grip and control over the American viewer, and they don’t like it. I believe that is why are seeing a 24 hour hit campaign on Trump. The media is desperate to hang unto their control over the masses. Even the millennials are even going as far to cutting the cable cord altogether.
The next midterm and presidency elections will go a long way to telling how much power the media will wield over the masses. At this point I’m thinking not much.
-
We no longer have a reliable press corps with pervasive access to sources, as well as access to a broad audience to which they are reporting simply the facts. It seems in talking to the older generations, that we had something that resembled that before the era of Fox and CNN.
- With a pervasive access to sources, a press corps can dig in and do real reporting. No armchair blogger is going to have that.
- With access to a broad audience, sources know they can go to the media to release information. It becomes an outlet for whistleblowing to keep organizations honest.
- By reporting just the facts, the news allows people to have their own bias. That’s what news should do. Report the facts and let their audience make sense of it.
If the day of big media is over, we lose another watchdog. Now all you have is spin agents in a line of cascading regurgitation. While on one hand, the price of democracy is eternal vigilance, on the other, it should not require eternal vigilance simply to peel enough of the BS off of your news to be able to approach the facts with an honest and open mind.
-
The thing is the news outlets have become like big business they have a controlling interest in what our government does.
It appears just posting the truth or shinning the light in a dark corner doesn’t pay the bills or makes the controlling persons of such Media outlets very happy. There has to be an agenda and a purpose instead of just showing things and issues for what they are.
There was a time in my life I put a lot of stock in what the News Media journalists had to say. Yet it has become clear to me what a journalists used to represent is no longer the code of the modern day journalists. Really very few care about truth yet most have an angle and an axe to grind.
It might be frightening to think that so many Americans are turning to internet bloggers to find their news. Yet is that really any different than getting your information from these news outlets of today? Each one has an agenda. At least with a blogger you know what you’re getting. The Media is supposed to be fair and balanced. Sadly something it no longer partakes in.
-
@DoubleDD you’re absolutely right, but the answer imo is not to accept the new reality of the media, and justify the blogs as legit news because big media has deteriorated in quality. The answer is to demand fixing the quality of big media or if it’s decline is to be inevitable, ensure that it’s critical functions have been accounted for elsewhere. It seems difficult to imagine a freelance model of investigative journalism that could work, without very strong bias and factual subversion straight off the tap.
-
I agree and understand.
I just don’t know if fixing the big media is possible. It seems that profits and viewership aren’t as important as trying to control and fixing the message.
Big media has become no different than Wall Street. When you have journalist signing multi million dollar contracts. Fair and balanced goes out the window and is replaced with an hidden agenda. They’re no longer to be trusted.
It’s the typical propaganda war. Control the consumption of information to the masses and you control the masses.
I wouldn’t underestimate the typical internet blogger. I’m assuming we’re about one more generation away of making national media somewhat obsolete. I know it’s hard for cats like us to fathom such a notion. Yet it is really a movement to cut the cord. Millennials are really the fire starters of this movement. They are leading the movement away from being force fed an ideology that doesn’t fit their views of government and the world.
And lets face it the big media is more about forcing an ideology than they are reporting the facts.
-
“Just when ya think you’re out they pull ya back in …”
approxinfinity said:
@DoubleDD you’re absolutely right, but the answer imo is not to accept the new reality of the media, and justify the blogs as legit news because big media has deteriorated in quality. The answer is to demand fixing the quality of big media or if it’s decline is to be inevitable, ensure that it’s critical functions have been accounted for elsewhere. It seems difficult to imagine a freelance model of investigative journalism that could work, without very strong bias and factual subversion straight off the tap.
So I have to say that Breitbart contributor Mr Schilling seems to have a legit point on the latest major espn screw-up. With the key words of your post being “demand fixing”, kick this can around & see how far it goes before the hub cap falls off.
-
@globaljaybird
Let’s look at why Schilling was fired. He posted a meme about the transgender bathroom issue that depicted the following:
an overweight man in a too-small t-shirt with holes cut out of the chest with the following caption - “LET HIM IN! to the restroom with your daughter or else you’re a narrow-minded, judgmental, unloving racist bigot who needs to die."
Now, this meme is outright factually incorrect. Cross dressing is not transgendered. Being gay is not transgendered. There’s outright no factual basis that Schilling can stand on to say that his post was based in anything other than mocking a group of people (or several groups, in this case). Prior to that, Schilling had previously been disciplined by ESPN for the following incidents:
In 2015, he posted a meme comparing Muslims to Nazis. He was suspended briefly for that.
In February 2016, he had a post that said Hillary Clinton should be “buried under a jail.”
The meme about the bathrooms was his third incident in less than twelve months.
If you had an employee that violated a policy three times in less than twelve months, despite the fact that they had been suspended and admonished about their previous actions, would you keep them or can them? Schilling got fired because he was a repeat offender. If Jemele Hill has another incident in the next few months, I wouldn’t be surprised if ESPN suspends or even fires her.
Schilling wants to play the victim. I guess he’s too much of a snowflake to realize that being a repeat offender always brings more harsh discipline.
-
Breitbart is based on “white majority” morals, white supremacy morals. They have no place in main stream society. They are better kept under a rock, tons of rock, in the desert, stark raving mad and dying of thirst. That’s where they belong as does anyone who takes news from that POS website.
Better not be any KU fans on here that actually believe that shit. If so, you’re a disgrace to KU culture.
-
Are we still in America? Have we lost are rights to visit certain sites?
So a few KU fans get to decide where KU fans get their news?
OK, So please do tell us where we can get our news from?
I mean none of us want to disgrace the KU nation, Oh great one.
-
@Lulufulu that’s pretty harsh. Can we find moderate again in these firery times?
-
@justanotherfan I must say your post really surprises me. But, it is what it is. Have always respected your balance with almost uncanny knowledge in most all board discussions through the years… Now there’s way too much name calling in & catchphrases in your post-so much for moderation on this after only 4 additional comments. Hubcap hell, the wheel’s off. That’s even more swiftly than I anticipated. None of this opinionated garbage belongs in a sports chat in the first place in many people’s opinions. . Frankly that’s no longer what it is. Espn & cbs have their own crap pages for this type stuff. Who ever it was that once said “buckets is my facebook”, I don’t know if I’d trust them as a “friend” or not. They might want to play a victim too-or trick one here to be one of theirs. Over & out.
