EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 4430
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 25 2016 08:45 IgnE wrote: So is Trump a child rapist or not? Maybe? Who knows? One thing is for sure, God help the woman that is bringing the case. If she is telling the truth, she is braver than me. If she is lying to trying to extort money or some shit, she is the dumbest person alive. | ||
|
IgnE
United States7681 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On July 25 2016 08:52 IgnE wrote: Seems like an important question. We can't know yet. The case has not progressed far enough yet. | ||
|
cLutZ
United States19574 Posts
On July 25 2016 08:00 ticklishmusic wrote: wasnt there proof that the DNC hackers were russian? Yes, but that is about where it ends. Even Vox says: Still, it’s worth being clear that there’s zero evidence that Trump or Manafort have ties to the Russian government. Also, we don’t know for sure that Russian hackers leaked the DNC emails — and if they did, what their motivations were. Indeed, so far it doesn’t seem like any of the emails is likely to hurt Hillary Clinton in this fall’s election. So if the hackers’ goal was to help Trump get elected, it may not accomplish that purpose. Also, it was Guccifer 2.0, not the Russians that provided the info to Wikileaks, which makes for several, much more plausible scenarios. 1. Guccifer is a single or small group of agents in Cozybear or Fancybear who independently leaked this. 2. Guccifer also hacked the DNC servers, but was able to stay far more under the radar because of the bears gallavanting around. 3. Guccifer is not, in fact, a hacker, but is a leaker from within the DNC. There are also other scenarios that are about equally plausible as the "Trump-Putin-Super-Conspiracy" such as: A) Guccifer is a hacker who was busy hacking Cozybear/Fancybear and stumbled upon this. A2) Guccifer is an agent monitoring the bears that stumbled upon this. B) Partial, intentional, leak to obfuscate something else. C) Koch Brothers. | ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9491 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23621 Posts
Then again, people did scoff at the idea that the convention would have significant interruptions. Hasn't even started yet and the Head of the DNC went from prime time to leaving her chair at the DNC and officially into Hillary's camp. What's really funny though is how Hillary supporters are in full "nothing to see here" mode, if not silent. The real question is what happened to Kwiz (banned?)? He was on top of any post critical of Hillary right up until Hillary's superPAC stopped paying out for online trolls... + Show Spoiler + j/k probably just busy with rl | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15736 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23621 Posts
On July 25 2016 09:09 Mohdoo wrote: I can't believe Clinton is taking DWS into her campaign. How blindly arrogant. Oh lord. But I mean why wouldn't we want to support her right? This is wholly unsurprising in every way. The only thing close to surprising is that they had enough sense not to let DWS on stage in front of cameras and Bernie delegates. I told you they were threatening people to take their credentials if they boo'd. It appears they realized they might end up with a half empty arena and an even bigger protest outside. Tennis Court anyone? | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Nevuk
United States16280 Posts
I'm not sure I would rather vote for Trump than Clinton, but they're both soooo awful. No one besides Clinton could lose to Trump, and no one besides Trump could lose to Clinton. On July 25 2016 07:00 Plansix wrote: "Honorary chair" sounds like a position they made up to give her the job of "Please deal wit the Democrats who still want to deal with you." She is well connected and there are members of the DNC who like her still. They can't just boot her, someone who matters will get grumpy. She isn't part of the official Clinton Election campaign. She is part of some nation wide group that is coordinating efforts to get other democrats elected. That's why you move her to a different position within the DNC itself. Putting her directly into the campaign is just an idiotic move. I would have been fine with her being moved to a position within the DNC that still had actual power rather than a made up, totally powerless position in the Clinton Campaign. Moving her directly to the Clinton campaign is the stuff of rightwing fantasies - they were talking about it for months, how the Clintons were going to reward DWS directly with a high paying job after Clinton got the nomination in return for making it impossible for anyone to beat her in the primaries. Of course that trickled over some into the progressive campaign who now see proof that Clinton is very much a quid pro quo candidate. On a tangential note, I'm sure DWS is a nice enough person, as every seems to like her, but it doesn't change the fact that she was a complete and total failure by any metric as the DNC chair. Compare the focus and allocation of resources under Dean and you'll notice that Dean's focus on every race returned significant rewards, rather than the flailing about helplessly impression that the Dems gave under DWS. For that reason alone I'm glad that anyone is replacing her, as I'm not sure that anyone would be a step down. | ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9491 Posts
On July 25 2016 09:20 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/757369719771033600 Quite apparent they didnt search wikileaks for Brazile | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
| ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23621 Posts
On July 25 2016 09:31 zlefin wrote: Agree on it being a stupid move by Clinton; terrible optics. I expect better. The optics were intentional. The message was the same as the entire campaign. On July 25 2016 09:30 CorsairHero wrote: Quite apparent they didnt search wikileaks for Brazile So dumb.She's been on CNN pretending to be neutral the whole campaign too. | ||
|
xDaunt
United States17988 Posts
On July 25 2016 09:20 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/757369719771033600 Hahaha, what a shitshow. This is making the faux pas of the republican convention seem cute by comparison. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15736 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On July 25 2016 09:06 GreenHorizons wrote: The real question is what happened to Kwiz (banned?)? He was on top of any post critical of Hillary right up until Hillary's superPAC stopped paying out for online trolls... + Show Spoiler + j/k probably just busy with rl He's mostly stopped posting in recent months. A few posts in other threads recently, but not here. A few other long-winded supremely biased agenda-pushers sprung up in this thread to fill the void though. On July 25 2016 09:43 Mohdoo wrote: Are we at the point where we hope Bernie makes a big enough fuss? I'm almost there. This is seriously bad. What can change at this point? Reneging on that chair position won't change the fact that the offer was extended in the first place. Obviously doesn't mean anything, but I saw this response from Guccifer talking about how incompetent the DNC is and it amused me. A lot of people are concerned if I have any links to special services and Russia? I’ll tell you that everything I do I do at my own risk. This is my personal project and I’m proud of it. Yes, I risk my life. But I know it’s worth it. No one knew about me several weeks ago. Nowadays the whole world’s talking about me. It’s really cool! How can I prove this is true? I really don’t know. It seems the guys from CrowdStrike and the DNC would say I’m a Russian bear even if I were a catholic nun in fact. At first I was annoyed and disappointed. But now I realize they have nothing else to say. There’s no other way to justify their incompetence and failure. It’s much easier for them to accuse powerful foreign special services. Source | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15736 Posts
On July 25 2016 09:44 LegalLord wrote: He's mostly stopped posting in recent months. A few posts in other threads recently, but not here. A few other long-winded supremely biased agenda-pushers sprung up in this thread to fill the void though. What can change at this point? Reneging on that chair position won't change the fact that the offer was extended in the first place. No I mean Bernie making enough fuss to just kick her ass out. My god. How in the WORLD does it make sense for her to give DWS an "honorary" (!?!?!??!?!!!) position? Who knows, what if enough people are willing to jump? What if GH gets the biggest boner in history as Bernie is named the nominee? I wouldn't complain at this point. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23621 Posts
On July 25 2016 09:43 Mohdoo wrote: Are we at the point where we hope Bernie makes a big enough fuss? I'm almost there. This is seriously bad. You're just a crazy Bernie Bro. The only right choice for left leaners is to continue to support the candidate which openly lied to us the whole campaign, was extremely careless with classified info, had her staff conspire with the DNC to undermine her competition, planted her minion at the head of the DNC, and when that minion was exposed, she praised and gave her a position on her "campaign". No but seriously, the validation does feel good though. | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://www.redstate.com/uploads/2016/07/HILLARY-EMAIL.jpg)
