|
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. |
On July 28 2016 01:43 Cowboy24 wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:41 Plansix wrote:On July 28 2016 01:33 Cowboy24 wrote:On July 28 2016 01:29 Gorsameth wrote:On July 28 2016 01:27 Cowboy24 wrote:On July 28 2016 01:21 Mohdoo wrote:On July 28 2016 01:19 Cowboy24 wrote:
NATO is the United States defending people so they don't have to defend themselves. They should pay for all of it. It's not our borders we're defending. In your eyes, why was NATO created? Probably to counteract whatever international alliances the Soviets were building and to create a nice fat buffer zone between Russia and Western Europe. It just isn't very good policy now, in my opinion. Getting involved in European land-wars happened and I'm not going to re-litigate the past and say it was a mistake then, but going forward it would be a mistake to continue. What do I care if Eastern Europe is too weak to protect their own borders? If Putin wants it and he can take it, let him. None of my business. Hell, if he wants Western Europe, none of my business and besides, he'd probably do better than most of the current fools who run things over there. Europe should either start paying for our defense or paying for their own defense. I'm tired of sending American boys to die protecting European socialists. Which is funny since none of the conflicts in which Americans are dying were initiated by Europe. They were all done by America. You realize that the number of European soldiers dying in American conflicts is infinitely greater right? Not that hard tho since you need a number greater then 0... 600,000 US soldiers died in WW2. Now, granted, some of those were in the Pacific, however... On July 28 2016 01:28 m4ini wrote:Europe should either start paying for our defense or paying for their own defense. I'm tired of sending American boys to die protecting European socialists.
bah, not worth it No, go ahead keep it up. Here's my response: When your country loses six-hundred thousand men fighting in Utah to save us from robo-Hitler, you can talk. Until then, I don't care. Impressive. Did you serve in the military? Fight in a war? Get deployed? Or you just one of these standard Americas who shit’s on the rest of the world when that came to help us during our totally bullshit war? And maybe stop dredging up WW2 like you had anything to do with it. My grandfather served in that war and worked with Germans for years after. Seriously, you are sort of an embarrassment right now. Yep. Anyway, they were the ones who brought it up by saying "0 soldiers die in European wars" which is patently false. They meant "recently" but I meant "ever." Like I said, you all need to grow up and realize not everyone automatically agrees with your political, social, or economic views. Just because you're on the internet and I can't respond physically to really nasty insults and tone doesn't mean you should engage in that type of behavior. edit: the "How dare you! I won't argue, I'm just gonna use shame tactics and insults to shut you up!" tactic is so 2015...
We sort of limited the discussion to wars that were fought within this generation and when NATO, the topic of discussion, existed. But you seem comfortable going back through all of US history.
|
On July 28 2016 01:46 biology]major wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:42 Mohdoo wrote:On July 28 2016 01:36 zeo wrote:On July 28 2016 01:31 Falling wrote:
So I see Trump looped in the Bernardino and Orlando shootings as examples of bad people coming into our country... except those were their parents that immigrated to the country. The shooters were first generation immigrants, sure, but how do you vet for when children who are born and bred in America go bad? What you are seeing is Trump answering questions from reporters, something Clinton hasn't done in 235 days and counting. I would really love to hear her say anything about anything, hell even planted questions! Barely anyone voting Hillary has heard her talk about any issue. The first debate is on September 26th, thats way too far away to wait for her to answer questions. I'd say she'll probably wait until a week or so after the convention. Assuming there isn't another huge email blowup, I think dust will finally settle and allow her to pretend nothing bad ever happened. It also depends on how well the DNC can frame the email hack as the DNC being a victim to Russian aggression. If the story can get spun into Russian aggression, Obama can make a lot of grand posturing that supports it. When this issue ends up getting framed as Russian aggression, it minimizes what the leaks actually showed. It's all about managing to have Russia be framed as the bad guy. The media is doing a lot to help that and I think that's where the conversation is headed. Trump gained media exposure by calling for Russia to release her emails. But he also helped build the narrative that foreign powers are interfering with and attacking our political system. Clinton being female helps build a narrative of her being a victim. Russia being involved helps extend that to it being an attack on our country. In the end, the content of the emails may be the last thing the media is talking about. Yes that is called dishonest reporting, instead of focusing on what we DO know which is the content of the emails, media will focus on conspiracy theories. I think Russia is a very real suspect in this, but it doesn't mean shit if they did. The media will spin it as if Putin and Trump are secretly bffs.
If there is something in the emails it will come out regardless of how much distracting the 'liberal media' is doing.
If nothing actually bad is coming out of them then it is not in there.
|
On July 28 2016 01:40 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:39 silynxer wrote:On July 28 2016 01:33 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:17 silynxer wrote:On July 28 2016 01:13 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:10 farvacola wrote:On July 28 2016 01:10 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:05 Mohdoo wrote:This is what happens when Trump can't stand someone else being on the spotlight:
DORAL, Fla. — Donald J. Trump said Wednesday that he hoped Russia had hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, essentially sanctioning a foreign power’s cyberspying of a secretary of state’s correspondence.
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, staring directly into the cameras. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Source And just like that, he has hijacked the newscycle and deprived Hillary of some of the oxygen that she needs to get a convention bounce. That's one way to look at it lol, it could also prove very dumb for Trump. It could, but history strongly suggests otherwise. Teflon Don is a real thing. Can't stump the Trump! If Russia would release the deleted emails tomorrow, as per his request, what would your reaction be? I certainly wouldn't be surprised. Again, let's be real. Every major country has its own cyber-espionage unit that actively fucks with foreign countries. So the implications really don't bother you at all... What implications? That Hillary stupidly exposed national security secrets to hostile interests? That hostile interests actively seek to hack our stuff? Both are clearly already true.
The man running for commander and chief of this nation is active asking a foreign power to commit espionage against his political opponents. Not only is this unprecedented, it once again shows his deep lack of maturity to lead this country.
Treason is only a problem when Hillary might have done it, eh?
|
But the content of the emails aren't that interesting. The DNC certainly misbehaved but nothing really extraordinary in there. Russian government directly attempting to interfere in an American election is big news though. zeo going full press on the emails isn't convincing me otherwise either lol
Hasn't Trump's campaign been caught attempting to tap foreign politicians for funds?
|
On July 28 2016 01:49 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:46 biology]major wrote:On July 28 2016 01:42 Mohdoo wrote:On July 28 2016 01:36 zeo wrote:On July 28 2016 01:31 Falling wrote:
So I see Trump looped in the Bernardino and Orlando shootings as examples of bad people coming into our country... except those were their parents that immigrated to the country. The shooters were first generation immigrants, sure, but how do you vet for when children who are born and bred in America go bad? What you are seeing is Trump answering questions from reporters, something Clinton hasn't done in 235 days and counting. I would really love to hear her say anything about anything, hell even planted questions! Barely anyone voting Hillary has heard her talk about any issue. The first debate is on September 26th, thats way too far away to wait for her to answer questions. I'd say she'll probably wait until a week or so after the convention. Assuming there isn't another huge email blowup, I think dust will finally settle and allow her to pretend nothing bad ever happened. It also depends on how well the DNC can frame the email hack as the DNC being a victim to Russian aggression. If the story can get spun into Russian aggression, Obama can make a lot of grand posturing that supports it. When this issue ends up getting framed as Russian aggression, it minimizes what the leaks actually showed. It's all about managing to have Russia be framed as the bad guy. The media is doing a lot to help that and I think that's where the conversation is headed. Trump gained media exposure by calling for Russia to release her emails. But he also helped build the narrative that foreign powers are interfering with and attacking our political system. Clinton being female helps build a narrative of her being a victim. Russia being involved helps extend that to it being an attack on our country. In the end, the content of the emails may be the last thing the media is talking about. Yes that is called dishonest reporting, instead of focusing on what we DO know which is the content of the emails, media will focus on conspiracy theories. I think Russia is a very real suspect in this, but it doesn't mean shit if they did. The media will spin it as if Putin and Trump are secretly bffs. If there is something in the emails it will come out regardless of how much distracting the 'liberal media' is doing. If nothing actually bad is coming out of them then it is not in there.
Fox news would be all over that shit. But its mostly just nasty inter-office email, which is pretty common.
|
On July 28 2016 00:27 xDaunt wrote:
The media is truly apoplectic about this Russia hacking the DNC thing. The reporters won't leave it alone during this press conference.
It's a time-honored strategy to, when all else fails, blame the Russians. McCarthy did it. That British MP who said Russia bombed Syria to encourage Brexit did it. The DNC did it. Great way to pretend you aren't responsible for the circumstances that led people to oppose your policies.
That card has sort of been overplayed in recent years though, so more and more people start not really caring. However there is definitely a core of people who really desperately want the hate to go on. Madeleine Albright is a good example of that.
On July 28 2016 01:51 CobaltBlu wrote:
Russian government directly attempting to interfere in an American election is big news though.
No, it really isn't. Big governments interfere in elections in other countries all the time. US interfered in the Russian elections 4-5 years ago too.
|
On July 28 2016 01:49 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:46 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 01:43 Cowboy24 wrote:On July 28 2016 01:41 Plansix wrote:On July 28 2016 01:33 Cowboy24 wrote:On July 28 2016 01:29 Gorsameth wrote:On July 28 2016 01:27 Cowboy24 wrote:On July 28 2016 01:21 Mohdoo wrote:On July 28 2016 01:19 Cowboy24 wrote:
NATO is the United States defending people so they don't have to defend themselves. They should pay for all of it. It's not our borders we're defending. In your eyes, why was NATO created? Probably to counteract whatever international alliances the Soviets were building and to create a nice fat buffer zone between Russia and Western Europe. It just isn't very good policy now, in my opinion. Getting involved in European land-wars happened and I'm not going to re-litigate the past and say it was a mistake then, but going forward it would be a mistake to continue. What do I care if Eastern Europe is too weak to protect their own borders? If Putin wants it and he can take it, let him. None of my business. Hell, if he wants Western Europe, none of my business and besides, he'd probably do better than most of the current fools who run things over there. Europe should either start paying for our defense or paying for their own defense. I'm tired of sending American boys to die protecting European socialists. Which is funny since none of the conflicts in which Americans are dying were initiated by Europe. They were all done by America. You realize that the number of European soldiers dying in American conflicts is infinitely greater right? Not that hard tho since you need a number greater then 0... 600,000 US soldiers died in WW2. Now, granted, some of those were in the Pacific, however... On July 28 2016 01:28 m4ini wrote:Europe should either start paying for our defense or paying for their own defense. I'm tired of sending American boys to die protecting European socialists.
bah, not worth it No, go ahead keep it up. Here's my response: When your country loses six-hundred thousand men fighting in Utah to save us from robo-Hitler, you can talk. Until then, I don't care. Impressive. Did you serve in the military? Fight in a war? Get deployed? Or you just one of these standard Americas who shit’s on the rest of the world when that came to help us during our totally bullshit war? And maybe stop dredging up WW2 like you had anything to do with it. My grandfather served in that war and worked with Germans for years after. Seriously, you are sort of an embarrassment right now. Yep. Anyway, they were the ones who brought it up by saying "0 soldiers die in European wars" which is patently false. They meant "recently" but I meant "ever." Like I said, you all need to grow up and realize not everyone automatically agrees with your political, social, or economic views. Just because you're on the internet and I can't respond physically to really nasty insults and tone doesn't mean you should engage in that type of behavior. edit: the "How dare you! I won't argue, I'm just gonna use shame tactics and insults to shut you up!" tactic is so 2015... To be fair, you are probably the most extreme Trump supporter ITT. Although xDaunt seems to be moving closer and closer to Trump. I didn't think that my preference was still in doubt. I'll be voting for Trump this year.
I didn't have a doubt as to voting, but it seems to be closer and closer to "I actually like Trump wholeheartedly".
|
On July 28 2016 01:49 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:43 Cowboy24 wrote:On July 28 2016 01:41 Plansix wrote:On July 28 2016 01:33 Cowboy24 wrote:On July 28 2016 01:29 Gorsameth wrote:On July 28 2016 01:27 Cowboy24 wrote:On July 28 2016 01:21 Mohdoo wrote:On July 28 2016 01:19 Cowboy24 wrote:
NATO is the United States defending people so they don't have to defend themselves. They should pay for all of it. It's not our borders we're defending. In your eyes, why was NATO created? Probably to counteract whatever international alliances the Soviets were building and to create a nice fat buffer zone between Russia and Western Europe. It just isn't very good policy now, in my opinion. Getting involved in European land-wars happened and I'm not going to re-litigate the past and say it was a mistake then, but going forward it would be a mistake to continue. What do I care if Eastern Europe is too weak to protect their own borders? If Putin wants it and he can take it, let him. None of my business. Hell, if he wants Western Europe, none of my business and besides, he'd probably do better than most of the current fools who run things over there. Europe should either start paying for our defense or paying for their own defense. I'm tired of sending American boys to die protecting European socialists. Which is funny since none of the conflicts in which Americans are dying were initiated by Europe. They were all done by America. You realize that the number of European soldiers dying in American conflicts is infinitely greater right? Not that hard tho since you need a number greater then 0... 600,000 US soldiers died in WW2. Now, granted, some of those were in the Pacific, however... On July 28 2016 01:28 m4ini wrote:Europe should either start paying for our defense or paying for their own defense. I'm tired of sending American boys to die protecting European socialists.
bah, not worth it No, go ahead keep it up. Here's my response: When your country loses six-hundred thousand men fighting in Utah to save us from robo-Hitler, you can talk. Until then, I don't care. Impressive. Did you serve in the military? Fight in a war? Get deployed? Or you just one of these standard Americas who shit’s on the rest of the world when that came to help us during our totally bullshit war? And maybe stop dredging up WW2 like you had anything to do with it. My grandfather served in that war and worked with Germans for years after. Seriously, you are sort of an embarrassment right now. Yep. Anyway, they were the ones who brought it up by saying "0 soldiers die in European wars" which is patently false. They meant "recently" but I meant "ever." Like I said, you all need to grow up and realize not everyone automatically agrees with your political, social, or economic views. Just because you're on the internet and I can't respond physically to really nasty insults and tone doesn't mean you should engage in that type of behavior. edit: the "How dare you! I won't argue, I'm just gonna use shame tactics and insults to shut you up!" tactic is so 2015... We sort of limited the discussion to wars that were fought within this generation and when NATO, the topic of discussion, existed. But you seem comfortable going back through all of US history.
Well otherwise his dumb looking posting would've looked idiotic, so obviously you have to change what we're talking about in the first place to butt in with a complete pointless argument.
That arguments gets even funnier if we go 200 years back, or did we set a limit as to where the argument becomes dumb in regards to the NATO?
|
On July 28 2016 01:50 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:40 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:39 silynxer wrote:On July 28 2016 01:33 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:17 silynxer wrote:On July 28 2016 01:13 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:10 farvacola wrote:On July 28 2016 01:10 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:05 Mohdoo wrote:This is what happens when Trump can't stand someone else being on the spotlight:
DORAL, Fla. — Donald J. Trump said Wednesday that he hoped Russia had hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, essentially sanctioning a foreign power’s cyberspying of a secretary of state’s correspondence.
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, staring directly into the cameras. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Source And just like that, he has hijacked the newscycle and deprived Hillary of some of the oxygen that she needs to get a convention bounce. That's one way to look at it lol, it could also prove very dumb for Trump. It could, but history strongly suggests otherwise. Teflon Don is a real thing. Can't stump the Trump! If Russia would release the deleted emails tomorrow, as per his request, what would your reaction be? I certainly wouldn't be surprised. Again, let's be real. Every major country has its own cyber-espionage unit that actively fucks with foreign countries. So the implications really don't bother you at all... What implications? That Hillary stupidly exposed national security secrets to hostile interests? That hostile interests actively seek to hack our stuff? Both are clearly already true. The man running for commander and chief of this nation is active asking a foreign power to commit espionage against his political opponents. Not only is this unprecedented, it once again shows his deep lack of maturity to lead this country. Treason is only a problem when Hillary might have done it, eh?
This is treason? 
He's been saying this for weeks btw
|
On July 28 2016 01:52 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 00:27 xDaunt wrote:
The media is truly apoplectic about this Russia hacking the DNC thing. The reporters won't leave it alone during this press conference. It's a time-honored strategy to, when all else fails, blame the Russians. McCarthy did it. That British MP who said Russia bombed Syria to encourage Brexit did it. The DNC did it. Great way to pretend you aren't responsible for the circumstances that led people to oppose your policies. That card has sort of been overplayed in recent years though, so more and more people start not really caring. However there is definitely a core of people who really desperately want the hate to go on. Madeleine Albright is a good example of that.
The American intelligence community is saying it too, you know.
|
On July 28 2016 01:52 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 00:27 xDaunt wrote:
The media is truly apoplectic about this Russia hacking the DNC thing. The reporters won't leave it alone during this press conference. It's a time-honored strategy to, when all else fails, blame the Russians. McCarthy did it. That British MP who said Russia bombed Syria to encourage Brexit did it. The DNC did it. Great way to pretend you aren't responsible for the circumstances that led people to oppose your policies. That card has sort of been overplayed in recent years though, so more and more people start not really caring. However there is definitely a core of people who really desperately want the hate to go on. Madeleine Albright is a good example of that.
Trump just said he would recognize Crimea as Russian and lift sanctions. No one is making this shit up.
He also called Obama ignorant and then told reporters Tim Kaine was governor of New Jersey. The governor of New Jersey endorsed Trump already.
|
It certainly wouldn't be treason; there's a reason they specified the definition of treason in the constitution; to discourage people from throwing the word around (since it's a word people do love to throw around on their enemies).
|
Trump just said he would recognize Crimea as Russian and lift sanctions. No one is making this shit up.
Maybe i was wrong, he might be literally as much an idiot as he seems to be.
|
On July 28 2016 01:55 zlefin wrote:
It certainly wouldn't be treason; there's a reason they specified the definition of treason in the constitution; to discourage people from throwing the word around (since it's a word people do love to throw around on their enemies).
Agreed. Right now it is just wildly improper and not in line with anything the GOP, let alone the US, is on board for.
|
On July 28 2016 01:55 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:52 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 00:27 xDaunt wrote:
The media is truly apoplectic about this Russia hacking the DNC thing. The reporters won't leave it alone during this press conference. It's a time-honored strategy to, when all else fails, blame the Russians. McCarthy did it. That British MP who said Russia bombed Syria to encourage Brexit did it. The DNC did it. Great way to pretend you aren't responsible for the circumstances that led people to oppose your policies. That card has sort of been overplayed in recent years though, so more and more people start not really caring. However there is definitely a core of people who really desperately want the hate to go on. Madeleine Albright is a good example of that. The American intelligence community is saying it too, you know.
I'm not saying the Russians didn't do it. It's plausible, and it's also plausible that they didn't. My point is it doesn't matter.
Note that the DNC didn't contest the contents of the emails. The emails themselves are genuine.
|
On July 28 2016 01:54 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:50 On_Slaught wrote:On July 28 2016 01:40 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:39 silynxer wrote:On July 28 2016 01:33 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:17 silynxer wrote:On July 28 2016 01:13 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:10 farvacola wrote:On July 28 2016 01:10 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:05 Mohdoo wrote:This is what happens when Trump can't stand someone else being on the spotlight: [quote] Source And just like that, he has hijacked the newscycle and deprived Hillary of some of the oxygen that she needs to get a convention bounce. That's one way to look at it lol, it could also prove very dumb for Trump. It could, but history strongly suggests otherwise. Teflon Don is a real thing. Can't stump the Trump! If Russia would release the deleted emails tomorrow, as per his request, what would your reaction be? I certainly wouldn't be surprised. Again, let's be real. Every major country has its own cyber-espionage unit that actively fucks with foreign countries. So the implications really don't bother you at all... What implications? That Hillary stupidly exposed national security secrets to hostile interests? That hostile interests actively seek to hack our stuff? Both are clearly already true. The man running for commander and chief of this nation is active asking a foreign power to commit espionage against his political opponents. Not only is this unprecedented, it once again shows his deep lack of maturity to lead this country. Treason is only a problem when Hillary might have done it, eh? https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/758335147183788032This is treason? He's been saying this for weeks btw
It's calling for espionage against his own country. I shouldn't have to connect the dots here.
|
Canada11607 Posts
On July 28 2016 01:46 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:41 Falling wrote:On July 28 2016 01:36 zeo wrote:On July 28 2016 01:31 Falling wrote:
So I see Trump looped in the Bernardino and Orlando shootings as examples of bad people coming into our country... except those were their parents that immigrated to the country. The shooters were first generation immigrants, sure, but how do you vet for when children who are born and bred in America go bad? What you are seeing is Trump answering questions from reporters, something Clinton hasn't done in 235 days and counting. I would really love to hear her say anything about anything, hell even planted questions! Barely anyone voting Hillary has heard her talk about any issue. The first debate is on September 26th, thats way too far away to wait for her to answer questions. Just saying words to reporters isn't commendable! One needs to say something truthful and intelligent. Backing up your claims with relevant evidence is what I'm looking for. There's no award for participation here... Not risking or being scared of going in front of reporters that would be mostly planted and paid for says a lot more about a persons character, so does going out and answering questions from hostile reporters looking for their next 'gotcha!'
It may or may not... but that has nothing to do with the actual content that Trump spoke from his own mouth, unprompted by the reporters. That wasn't a back and forth where reporters were filling in blanks to make him look stupid. That was part of his rambling explanation of why they needed to tighten up their vetting process in immigration.
You have a reality TV guy that's not afraid of the camera and you have someone that likely hates press conferences as much as our former prime-minister Stephen Harper. It may be an irritating flaw in their character, but I don't judge you on the quantity of your words... I wasn't even comparing him to Clinton. I was judging his words that he said. Saying them in front of the camera doesn't make them any better if they are lies and rather dangerous ones at that.
|
On July 28 2016 01:50 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:40 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:39 silynxer wrote:On July 28 2016 01:33 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:17 silynxer wrote:On July 28 2016 01:13 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:10 farvacola wrote:On July 28 2016 01:10 xDaunt wrote:On July 28 2016 01:05 Mohdoo wrote:This is what happens when Trump can't stand someone else being on the spotlight:
DORAL, Fla. — Donald J. Trump said Wednesday that he hoped Russia had hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, essentially sanctioning a foreign power’s cyberspying of a secretary of state’s correspondence.
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said, staring directly into the cameras. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Source And just like that, he has hijacked the newscycle and deprived Hillary of some of the oxygen that she needs to get a convention bounce. That's one way to look at it lol, it could also prove very dumb for Trump. It could, but history strongly suggests otherwise. Teflon Don is a real thing. Can't stump the Trump! If Russia would release the deleted emails tomorrow, as per his request, what would your reaction be? I certainly wouldn't be surprised. Again, let's be real. Every major country has its own cyber-espionage unit that actively fucks with foreign countries. So the implications really don't bother you at all... What implications? That Hillary stupidly exposed national security secrets to hostile interests? That hostile interests actively seek to hack our stuff? Both are clearly already true. The man running for commander and chief of this nation is active asking a foreign power to commit espionage against his political opponents. Not only is this unprecedented, it once again shows his deep lack of maturity to lead this country. Treason is only a problem when Hillary might have done it, eh?
This is an absurd spin on what Trump said. You may want to take another look at what Trump said.
|
On July 28 2016 01:55 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:52 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 00:27 xDaunt wrote:
The media is truly apoplectic about this Russia hacking the DNC thing. The reporters won't leave it alone during this press conference. It's a time-honored strategy to, when all else fails, blame the Russians. McCarthy did it. That British MP who said Russia bombed Syria to encourage Brexit did it. The DNC did it. Great way to pretend you aren't responsible for the circumstances that led people to oppose your policies. That card has sort of been overplayed in recent years though, so more and more people start not really caring. However there is definitely a core of people who really desperately want the hate to go on. Madeleine Albright is a good example of that. Trump just said he would recognize Crimea as Russian and lift sanctions. No one is making this shit up.
And what's wrong with that? Ukraine is never getting Crimea back and most people were pretty much able to admit this about a month after the fact. And Europe has basically lost the appetite for further sanctions and will lift them as soon as they can politically save face to do so. It might be a solid policy to have better relations with Russia.
|
On July 28 2016 01:57 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 01:55 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 01:52 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 00:27 xDaunt wrote:
The media is truly apoplectic about this Russia hacking the DNC thing. The reporters won't leave it alone during this press conference. It's a time-honored strategy to, when all else fails, blame the Russians. McCarthy did it. That British MP who said Russia bombed Syria to encourage Brexit did it. The DNC did it. Great way to pretend you aren't responsible for the circumstances that led people to oppose your policies. That card has sort of been overplayed in recent years though, so more and more people start not really caring. However there is definitely a core of people who really desperately want the hate to go on. Madeleine Albright is a good example of that. The American intelligence community is saying it too, you know. I'm not saying the Russians didn't do it. It's plausible, and it's also plausible that they didn't. My point is it doesn't matter. Note that the DNC didn't contest the contents of the emails. The emails themselves are genuine.
Saying "It's a time-honored strategy to, when all else fails, blame the Russians" is not as neutral as "they may have done it in this instance, or they may not have."
And I question whether you'd be saying the same thing if the RNC or Trump campaign were hacked.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
