Trump tells anxious tech leaders: 'We're here to help'

Actions speak louder than words. If Trump wants Silicon Valley to believe him, maybe he ought to quit prancing around at self-indulgent circle-jerk rallies and get off of Twitter and instead take some concrete actions to show us he's something other than a narcissistic kleptocrat.

Don't worry, I won't hold my breath.

The new age of robber barons has come.

“You’ll call my people, you’ll call me."

Spoken like a true Don

"We have no formal chain of command around here.”

Just a bunch of egos.

especially when they see bigger tax breaks coming their way

And the ensuing slashes in education and higher restrictions on talented non-Americans entering the country, both of which will slowly starve these companies of the highly-educated workforce that is their lifeblood. What's not to like?

bass

just Trump. He's the only person that has made politics a laughing joke.

For once, I mostly agree with your statement. I would say though that Trump alone is not responsible for the lunacy in American political life.

They have more money than Trump so he changed his tone.

One day he's against trade deals, the next day he's for them. one day he's against immigration, the next day he's for it. reporting on what meathead is for or against is pointless, he says whatever suits his purposes on any given day. the one constant is that he will always be promoting his own interests, with the help of his kids and sycophants. the nation will be not be better for it.

so he can reach more followers and tell his side of the story

Like claiming that millions voted illegally without any evidence? The MSM might distort (just look at Fox) but it's not allowed to lie outright. The fake news sites that Trump seems to frequent on the other hand have no such restrictions.

You're going to turn purple, I'd highly advise against it.

He said he wouldn't hold his breath... Your reading comprehension skills are really something...

Why doesn't this story mention that Sacca was a fundraiser for the Clinton campaign?

It does say "No industry was more open in its contempt for Trump during the campaign." You can kind of infer that they were big Clinton donors.

He is not even president yet. What concrete actions do you expect from a private citizen?

Listening to daily intelligence briefings instead of retweeting fake news headlines from 16-year-olds is what we should all expect from a president elect.

@turbostat

There are still standards of practice and journalistic ethics that established media have to at least appear to follow. They may stray once in a while, but attempts at maintaining reputations and integrity is still way more evident in established media than newer media sources. The MSM may be overly critical of Trump, but I have yet to see them lie about him.

Trump seems to prefer fake news sources that offer zero evidence for their wild claims.

@hokkaidoguy

The intentional omission of this information by the press is outright dishonest, and the accidental omission is incompetence. Which one is it?

Please... Everyone knows high-profile supporters give money to their chosen candidates and holding fundraisers is an obvious, well-known means. This article makes it painfully obvious that Silicon Valley was massively for Clinton. If an article says that oil companies are backing some candidate, I know what that means.

Just because an article expects basic deduction skills from its readers, it doesn't make it dishonest or incompetent.

Tex,

The Trump Train continues to roll over the democrat clown car. . . .

For once, I mostly agree with your statement. I would say, though, that "democrat clown car" with a small "d" refers to American democracy; that is quite different from the Democratic clown car.

Trump is helping improve the tech sectors' defense systems by encouraging people to hack, lol

It gives the impression that he is speaking for the industry as a whole first and foremost

No, it doesn't. "Some in Silicon Valley think the industry’s best move would be to keep its distance." "Chris Sacca, now a tech investor, argues that industry leaders should have steered clear." Seems to pretty clearly differentiate him from the other industry leaders that did attend the meeting.

instead of speaking for the failed Clinton campaign

That wouldn't exactly be the truth either. He's just one man in the industry with opinions. Some of those opinions match with those of the party he strongly supports. Does an article have to spoon feed you common sense to be considered completely honest and transparent?

you guys on the left keep droning the Russian narrative

So now the CIA, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Paul Ryan are all lefties? And are patriotic Americans now expected to defer to Russian claims over their own intelligence agencies? (And no, it's not like Saddam's WMDs. This time it's a clear concensus, not cherry picking by a warmongering VP.)

As you said, bass, Trump supporters sure are a loony bunch.

The CEO of IBM has pledged to invest $1 billion in “training and development” for IBM’s America employees and add 25,000 more jobs for Americans over the next four years.

Heheheh, IBM does that every year. It's nothing new.

In 2013, IBM pledged $1 Billion for Linux effort:

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2013/09/16/ibm-again-pledges-1-billion-to-a-linux-effort/

In 2014, IBM invests $1 Billion for the Watson AI cloud:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-ibm-watson-idUSBREA0808U20140109

In fact, people in the industry know this:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3149720/techology-business/ibm-already-planned-to-hire-25000-us-workers.html

I hope ya congratulated IBM in those past years too, lol

Trump tells anxious tech leaders: 'We're here to help'

OURSELVES

Good luck for all Silicon leaders, your judgement day is near!

outsider: Another day of MSM bs.

So where do you get your news from? I've asked this a dozen times to the "anti-MSM" types and not a single person has answered. I'll ask again: what are your acceptable, non-biased sources?

But you guys on the left keep droning the Russian narrative, that's ok?

You don't see the difference between the President elect spreading completely baseless stories and people discussing intelligence reports?

Funny, CNN and msnbc ratings are deep in the toilet, I think the numbers are proving who the fake news tellers are.

Your fixation on ratings reveals your outdated thinking. Sure, Fox has great ratings, but what's their demographic? The younger generation doesn't get their news from TV. And since when does high ratings equal quality?

I hope you know a big portion of libs get their news from Facebook...God help this nation!

Our president elect gets his news from Facebook...and random 16-year-olds on Twitter... Quit relying on God, and chose better leaders.

Humor can set your mind free.

Maybe it's you that's lacking humor in life then?

And the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Um, no. Not in this case. Trump's claim that millions voted illegally is based on nothing. The Russian hacking thing is conjecture based on government intelligence opinions (which is at least something) and the truth is still being investigated.

you have to be fixated with ratings otherwise no one will watch you, you will be off the air and you won't have a career.

This is kind of what's wrong with TV news today. Fixation on ratings and ad revenues over quality journalism and informing viewers. I think all the networks are guilty of this, although some more than others...

If it didn't, it wouldn't have the great ratings as you said.

Its average viewer is over 68 years old. I admit it's still doing better than the other networks, but that just means they're better at pandering to the lowest common denominator to attract viewers (e.g., having attractive female personalities show their legs) and says nothing about quality. In fact, Fox viewers are statistically the least informed. You're actually better off not watching any news at all than Fox News.

http://www.businessinsider.com/study-watching-fox-news-makes-you-less-informed-than-watching-no-news-at-all-2012-5

Can you prove and confirm that?

http://mashable.com/2016/11/29/donald-trump-tweetstorm/#6R3f_0d6v5qA

To be precise, he retweeted the teen to attack CNN for accurately pointing out that Trump's claim of millions of illegal voters was completely baseless. A grown man and president elect retweeting a 16-year-old in a twitter feud... because he got called out on a lie...

@turbostat

I read the NYT piece and read/watched the women's reactions. The article used direct quotes from them describing Trump's sleazy behavior. The fact that the women themselves didn't find the behavior sleazy, doesn't mean their words were "twisted." That stuff still happened according to their own accounts. Having an angle and lying are two different things.

Also, did you seriously reference The Daily Mail and The Blaze in a discussion about honest journalism? The Daily Mail is a tabloid that has been successfully sued many times for lying.

The Blaze's Glenn Beck...

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/glenn-beck/

...and Tomi Lahren

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F2xv4fba65U

already businesses are flocking back to America, drawn by the promises he made on the campaign trail to make this country competitive again.

Yea, even to this day do I remember the many promises to make America great again. And I believe them all.

Then Donald Trump stretched out his hand over the sea; and THE UNFETTERED POWER OF THE BILLIONAIRE CAPITALISTS caused the sea to go back, and made the sea into dry land, and the waters were divided. So the people of America went into the midst of the sea on the dry ground, and the waters were a wall to them on their right hand and on their left. And the Liberals pursued and went after them into the midst of the sea, all Obama's Lamestream Media toadies, his Washington insiders, his environmental wackos, and his death panels (remember those?).

Then THE UNFETTERED POWER OF THE BILLIONAIRE CAPITALISTS said to Donald Trump, “Enough with this PC crap. Science and facts are for schmucks. Stretch out your hand over the sea, that the waters may come back upon the Liberals, on their Lamestream Media toadies, and on their Washington insiders, and on their environmental wackos, and on their death panels (remember those?).”

Breitbart 14:21-26

Texas: The CEO of IBM has pledged to invest $1 billion in “training and development” for IBM’s America employees and add 25,000 more jobs for Americans over the next four years. Donald Trump isn’t even president yet...

Almost as if those two events are unrelated? Did you think they "threw something together" in the last few weeks or something? Heh. Look, I commend you for trying to bring information into the discussion for a change...but...maybe you should stick to posts mocking liberals and leave the analysis to others.

MrBum: You don't see the difference between the President elect spreading completely baseless stories and people discussing intelligence reports?

They do.

I do now skip the likes of christian amanpour

That still leaves hours and hours of daily CNN watching. Sounds like you really love that network. Because even with my favorite TV networks there are shows that i hate so I don't just watch them. It sounds reasonable.

@turbotsat

You think Breitbart is non-biased? I don't even think Breitbart claims to be non-baised.

Sorry, after what Comey did, no one is buying that.

First of all, it's not Comey making the claims, it's the CIA. Second, what about after Trump's countless lies? Why does he get a pass?

No, it's always been like that

Uh, no. It hasn't always been like that. You should really read up on the history of the industry you claim to work in.

I do agree, Trump shouldn't be picking fights with 16 year olds and be more careful about who and what he's tweeting.

He was actually using the 16-year-old's support as defense, but whatever... At least we kind of agree that his Twitter habits need work.

you ever given thought that maybe Putin hates Hillary with a passion and wanted payback because of her involvement trying to meddle in the Russian election in 2011?

Yeah... Duh... This is probably why the CIA suspects Putin is responsible. That makes it OK for a foreign entity to actively influence US elections? And did she meddle or simply echo accusations from within Russia about their rigged elections? You know that some journalists who criticize the ruling party in Russia are straight-up assassinated right?

you think that they were responsible for turning the tide in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania?

There are a lot of reasons why Clinton lost. I admit, a lot of the blame lies with mistakes and corruption on the establishment Democrat party side, but in such a close race, I have no doubt completely one-sided email leaks played a role.

I think most of the lies are overly exaggerated by a bunch of angry pissed of liberals.

I was only pointing out how you discounted Comey for a single action, yet continue to give Trump a pass on pulling "facts" out of thin air.

I do think I know after 12 years on the network, but nice try.

Seriously, for your own sake, look a bit further than 12 years. You might see what real TV journalism is supposed to look like.

SuperLib: So where do you get your news from? I've asked this a dozen times to the "anti-MSM" types and not a single person has answered. I'll ask again: what are your acceptable, non-biased sources?

IIRC, I said Breitbart, and that Fox was too weak, and that Snopes and Politico are baseless as sources because of their practice of BenSmithing, and of ignoring salient points that trash their conclusions (didn't word that last phrase exactly that way, but there it is).

Under the Rules of Progressive Discourse, having made the claim that no one answered, it's incumbent upon you to go back into the threads and prove it. How do you know you didn't just wander away without checking back?

First of all, it's not Comey making the claims, it's the CIA.

Same thing and oh, by the way, have you ever given thought that maybe Putin hates Hillary with a passion and wanted payback because of her involvement trying to meddle in the Russian election in 2011? I believe that is the real basis for this and even if the Russians hacked our political system, you think that they were responsible for turning the tide in Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania? Even in Kentucky more than 80% voted for Trump. As I said, the Dems should look right under their noses at their flawed candidate that was so overly corrupt.

Second, what about after Trump's countless lies? Why does he get a pass?

I think most of the lies are overly exaggerated by a bunch of angry pissed of liberals. Look, I wasn't happy that Obama won twice, but I didn't suffer from hissy fits and needed a dog to pat and a latte to calm down.

Uh, no. It hasn't always been like that. You should really read up on the history of the industry you claim to work in.

I do think I know after 12 years on the network, but nice try.

He was actually using the 16-year-old's support as defense, but whatever... At least we kind of agree that his Twitter habits need work.

Indeed.

Some in Silicon Valley think the industry’s best move would be to keep its distance until Trump changes his tone. Former Google executive Chris Sacca, now a tech investor, argues that industry leaders should have steered clear of the meeting altogether.

Why doesn't this story mention that Sacca was a fundraiser for the Clinton campaign?

If an article says that oil companies are backing some candidate, I know what that means.

but that's not what the article is saying.

The article is presenting Chris Sacca as a spokesman for the part of the industry opposed to Trump. It doesn't say that he was a frequent visitor to Clinton campaign HQ. You need to check his twitter for that. Nor does it mention his fundraising efforts - you need to check the hillary clinton webpage for that information.

It's about proximity. He is close enough to the Clinton campaign to be considered part of it. He was also part of the past two Obama campaigns, in a more official role.

He is beyond being a donor level supporter. He has spoken on behalf of the Clinton campaign in the past, and printing his remarks without that caveat is simply poor journalism. It gives the impression that he is speaking for the industry as a whole first and foremost, instead of speaking for the failed Clinton campaign.

If you want to know why he's not representative of the tech industry as a whole, look up H-1B visa on any tech forum. Might be eye opening.

The CEO of IBM has pledged to invest $1 billion in “training and development” for IBM’s America employees and add 25,000 more jobs for Americans over the next four years.

Donald Trump isn’t even president yet and already businesses are flocking back to America, drawn by the promises he made on the campaign trail to make this country competitive again.

Things are finally looking up here in the U.S. after eight long years of misery. . . .

Um, no. Not in this case. Trump's claim that millions voted illegally is based on nothing. The Russian hacking thing is conjecture based on government intelligence opinions (which is at least something) and the truth is still being investigated.

Sorry, after what Comey did, no one is buying that. You can believe it, a huge chunk of Americans don't.

This is kind of what's wrong with TV news today. Fixation on ratings and ad revenues over quality journalism and informing viewers.

No, it's always been like that, but since FOX has been peeling off viewers from CNN and msnbc, these networks are overly obsessed with trying to break ratings and move up into the number 1 slot.

I think all the networks are guilty of this, although some more than others...

To a certain degree, yes.

To be precise, he retweeted the teen to attack CNN for accurately pointing out that Trump's claim of millions of illegal voters was completely baseless. A grown man and president elect retweeting a 16-year-old in a twitter feud... because he got called out on a lie...

I do agree, Trump shouldn't be picking fights with 16 year olds and be more careful about who and what he's tweeting.

a few years ago a CNN regular on panel discussions - a republican - severed ties to the network complaining that there were times when he was sympathetic to the democrat point of view in discussions but would be instantly assailed by the producer through his ear piece and warned not to agree but to argue and create conflict. Look it up. You'll find plenty of other controversies and scandals too. Once you wake up to what a sham CNN is you begin to see right through it.

Personally, Even though I check CNN, among several other news sources, I do now skip the likes of christian amanpour, because her strident virtue signalling and marked tendency not to allow interviewees whom she doesnt agree with to answer the questions she puts to them.

It does say "No industry was more open in its contempt for Trump during the campaign." You can kind of infer that they were big Clinton donors.

That's the problem I have with this piece. Most readers would infer that he was simply a donor. You did, and so did I before a trip over to Google.

He was a fundraiser. He headlined events designed to raise funds for the Clinton campaign. Numerous high profile events, over a period if months.

There is a clear distinction between being a campaign donor and a fundraiser. Given the context and scale of his involvement, I would argue that his highly visible relationship to the Clinton campaign is at least as relevant as his tech background.

The intentional omission of this information by the press is outright dishonest, and the accidental omission is incompetence.

Which one is it?

You don't see the difference between the President elect spreading completely baseless stories and people discussing intelligence reports?

And the truth is somewhere in the middle.

Your fixation on ratings reveals your outdated thinking.

I worked in the TV news business for many years and yes, you have to be fixated with ratings otherwise no one will watch you, you will be off the air and you won't have a career.

Sure, Fox has great ratings, but what's their demographic? The younger generation doesn't get their news from TV. And since when does high ratings equal quality?

If it didn't, it wouldn't have the great ratings as you said.

Our president elect gets his news from Facebook...and random 16-year-olds on Twitter... Quit relying on God, and chose better leaders.

Can you prove and confirm that?

Maybe it's you that's lacking humor in life then?

Me? Never.

MrBum: The MSM might distort (just look at Fox) but it's not allowed to lie outright.

Who's stopping them? The libel laws require malicious intent on the part of the MSM if they lie. They can lie as much as they want. For even the rare case when someone goes through the long legal process of proving such intent, and possibly obtains a successful judgment, the penalty might be a dollar. Such judgments may even be tax deductible, so why should the outlets care greatly if they lose one occasionally?

http://blog.constitutioncenter.org/2016/10/can-presidential-candidates-sue-media-outlets-for-defamation/ - "Can presidential candidates sue media outlets for defamation?"

So now the CIA, John McCain, Lindsey Graham, and Paul Ryan are all lefties?

No, but they are a part of the Washington establishment, so go figure.

And are patriotic Americans now expected to defer to Russian claims over their own intelligence agencies? (And no, it's not like Saddam's WMDs. This time it's a clear concensus, not cherry picking by a warmongering VP.)

Who would that be? Funny, just because the Dems put up a flawed candidate with No economic message, calling Trump voters deplorable and irredeemable, not focusing on campaigning in the Blue stronghold states, wanting to continue Obama's disastrous policies, a habitual liar and unrepentant about her emails, lies about Benghazi, her lies about her foundation, Dems are deeply concerned about Russia being involved with Hillary's downfall? Hillary is responsible for Hillary losing, has nothing really do to with Russia.

As you said, bass, Trump supporters sure are a loony bunch.

Funny, I don't recall saying something that awful in a very, very long time.

maybe he ought to quit prancing around at self-indulgent circle-jerk rallies and get off of Twitter and instead take some concrete actions

He is not even president yet. What concrete actions do you expect from a private citizen? The strengthening of the dollar suggests a lot of optimism about what he'll do.

MrBum: @turbostat - There are still standards of practice and journalistic ethics that established media have to at least appear to follow. They may stray once in a while, but attempts at maintaining reputations and integrity is still way more evident in established media than newer media sources. The MSM may be overly critical of Trump, but I have yet to see them lie about him.

At least two women have said the NYT twisted their words trying to make a hit piece at Trump. One said (IIRC) something like the 'NYT tried to get me to say mean things about Trump', and she wouldn't, so they 'twisted her words'.

https://www.google.com/#q=carrie+prejean+nyt+trump

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3613798/Kissed-Runner-Miss-USA-Carrie-Prejean-swoons-Trump-rally-accused-New-York-Times-twisting-quotes-hit-piece-Donald.html

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2016/05/18/fed-up-miss-calif-usa-carrie-prejean-says-ny-times-totally-twisted-her-words-to-attack-trump/

seen the panel encounter between cnn' fareed zakara and putin? Zakara grandstands and qoutes putin and requests a response. Putin responds, " you know that i did not say that?". Zakara grind sheepishly and bows his head. Another day of MSM bs.

I'll ask again: what are your acceptable, non-biased sources?

I'll help you, son. There are no unbiased sources. You'll have to think for yourself and read behind the lines. In today's instant gratification and soundbite society, very few people bother to do that.

But as a hint: If you find yourself agreeing with everything the media says, or with everything your peers say, you are probably in an information bubble.

Hint number 2: When you can't be expected to do all the research needed to determine the validity of an argument on a complex subject, look at the messengers and their possible reasons for lying.

And the ensuing slashes in education and higher restrictions on talented non-Americans entering the country, both of which will slowly starve these companies of the highly-educated workforce that is their lifeblood. What's not to like?

That. Ignite not be a bad thing and would be a great incentive to push American students to study and work harder and to get rid of teachers that fall below the teaching standards and we can focus more on providing jobs to Americans first.

Like claiming that millions voted illegally without any evidence?

But you guys on the left keep droning the Russian narrative, that's ok?

The MSM might distort (just look at Fox) but it's not allowed to lie outright.

Funny, CNN and msnbc ratings are deep in the toilet, I think the numbers are proving who the fake news tellers are.

The fake news sites that Trump seems to frequent on the other hand have no such restrictions.

I hope you know a big portion of libs get their news from Facebook...God help this nation!

He said he wouldn't hold his breath...

And I was saying, do that and you turn purple, yes, I know libs are bad when it comes to humor, but enjoy life, it's not all that bad. Humor can set your mind free.

Trump ... convened a summit at Trump Tower for nearly a dozen tech leaders, whose industry largely supported Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. -- article

President Elect Trump should be applauded for setting differences aside by reaching out and communicating with his detractors (Romney, the Silicon Valley crowd, etc.).

But don't expect the temper tantrum throwing radical alt left to see this through their teary eyes, but PE Trunp is giving Obama a "teachable moment' with each new day about what true leadership looks like. . . .

Forbes magazine’s list of the world’s most powerful people has just been released and proves very interesting.

Last year, when PE Trump, who was one of a slew of Republican presidential candidates, checked in at No. 72 out of 73 people. Mrs. Bill Clinton was ranked 58th. Obama at that time was ranked No. 2 behind Vladimir Putin.

A year later, PE Trump replaced Obama in second place while America's organizer-in-chief dropped like a rock to 48th place, and Mrs. Clinton didn't even make the cut.

The Trump Train continues to roll over the democrat clown car. . . .

Actions speak louder than words. If Trump wants Silicon Valley to believe him, maybe he ought to quit prancing around at self-indulgent circle-jerk rallies and get off of Twitter and instead take some concrete actions to show us he's something other than a narcissistic kleptocrat.

Sooner or later, rather sooner they'll come around, especially when they see bigger tax breaks coming their way. Progress will move upward and excel regardless, but Trump will make the corporate environment more enjoyable to work in. As for Twitter at this point the the MSM has been beyond unfair to him, so he can reach more followers and tell his side of the story before the MSM has a chance to lie and distort facts surrounding him, that part I can't blame him.

Don't worry, I won't hold my breath.

You're going to turn purple, I'd highly advise against it.