|
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 02:10 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 02:04 LegalLord wrote:
It's not the Russians' fault that the emails contain what they do. Spinning this as if it were is in fact blaming the Russians.
You're conflating blaming the Russians for the hack and blaming them for the content of the emails.
Out of curiosity, which do you think is more important for this election: the content of the e-mails or the fact that they could have been uncovered via Trump condoning Russian espionage? I honestly don't think as many people care about how they were uncovered, if the content paints Hillary in a negative light.
|
Influencing other countries politics is common practice.
Didn't Obama recommend the people in England to vote against brexit.
Trump is trolling a bit when asking rusia for the release of 30k emails. Its a bold and somewhat risky move but I think he can get away with it. Is there anyone who would not like to see those emails released one way or the other?
The Russia spin from the democrats on the emails was a weak diversion from the actual problem anyway. Trump clearly is not afraid of it.
"if russia or any other country or person has Hillary Clintons 33.000 illegally deleted emails, perhaps they should share them with the fbi!!"
Dunno,doesnt seem like treason to me.
|
On July 28 2016 02:07 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 02:04 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:02 zeo wrote:On July 28 2016 01:51 CobaltBlu wrote:
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? The emails are interesting. Debbie Wasserman Schultz worked on Hillary's campaign in 2008 and the emails show she clearly worked to rig the system in Clinton's favor. Why is this important? Because if you want to plant the next chairman of the Democratic National Committee you need the referral and support of the last chairman, and you do this by offering favors/bribes/positions. And who was the chairman before DWS (disregarding the interim period before the next chair)? Thats right, Tim Kaine So Russian involvement is a conspiracy theory but this post isn't? There is clear evidence that Debbie Wasserman Schultz rigged the Democrat primaries, there is no evidence of Russia's involvement other than unnamed 'experts' and Democrat politicians. Tim Kaine is only getting what was obviously promised to him in exchange for letting Hillary rig the primaries. The RNC also tried to rig their primaries but they failed miserably, politicians involved with rigging the Republican primaries are already being punished while the DNC establishment is rolling in their kickbacks.
Keep sticking your head in the sand.
WASHINGTON — American intelligence agencies have told the White House they now have “high confidence” that the Russian government was behind the theft of emails and documents from the Democratic National Committee, according to federal officials who have been briefed on the evidence.
Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/27/us/politics/spy-agency-consensus-grows-that-russia-hacked-dnc.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=a-lede-package-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
Influencing other countries politics is common practice.
Didn't Obama recommend the people in England to vote against brexit.
Trump is trolling a bit when asking rusia for the release of 30k emails. Its a bold and somewhat risky move but I think he can get away with it. Is there anyone who would not like to see those emails released one way or the other?
The Russia spin from the democrats on the emails was a weak diversion from the actual problem anyway. Trump clearly is not afraid of it.
"if russia or any other country or person has Hillary Clintons 33.000 illegally deleted emails, perhaps they should share them with the fbi!!"
Dunno,doesnt seem like treason to me.
Treason? No.
Just as bad, if not worse than, anything that Hillary Clinton has done? Absolutely.
It's both amusing and sad that we consistently ignore all of the horrendous things that Trump has done (the litany of blatantly racist and sexist things he's said, the decades of sheer hypocrisy and flip-flopping, constantly screwing the working class out of money with his business ventures, refusing to release his tax returns, probable influence by Russian investors, actively encouraging foreign entities to hack into an American politician's private files) while berating Clinton for every little thing that she's done.
|
On July 27 2016 22:16 WhiteDog wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2016 21:46 farvacola wrote:
Hillary won't balance the budget on the backs of the poor and she won't nominate SC justices who'll do things like try and overturn Roe v. Wade. That's all I really need, and believe me, there's plenty more, particularly with regards to federal agency direction. Don't be so sure of that tho. In France, we elected a socialist in 2012 who argued that his ennemy was "finance" and who promised to tax up to 75 % every bit of income above 1 million euro. In the end, he forgot all his promises and pushed forward a neoliberal agenda like any right wing president.
France isn't an independent nation, whitedoge, it's governed by financial technocrats in the troika. Gary Johnson couldn't completely turn his state into a libertarian utopia anymore than France can turn its back on financial liberalization.
|
On July 28 2016 02:10 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 02:07 m4ini wrote:I don't think it's really that. I see it as the fact that no one really wants another Cold War and that being so, you have to normalize relations with Russia eventually. Even Hillary said as much in one debate or other. The real question is, when and how.
Oh i don't disagree that the relations with russia have to and will normalize eventually. That can and will happen, without recognizing crimea as russian, though. edit: see israel as an example. It might take 2 years, it might take 30 like it took to recognize the USSR. It will happen eventually, probably in a big "it's time to accept political realities" moment.
Possible. I should've said "forseeable future". With the current political climate etc, no way. I obviously can't tell what's going on in 30 years. I won't say it's never gonna happen either, but again: that'll be at least decades out, if nothing outstanding happens.
Oh of course, everyone is spying on everyone, especially us on others. But it's rather brazen and cavalier to so causally condone it on our own government, which is what Trump is doing.
Yeah that's what i meant. Asking for it is kinda.. bold. If he did it, though, considering that there's apparently two different things out there: one is saying "get the information", the other is "if you have it, release it". To me, big difference. It's dumb to say either way, but one could actually be considered treason, the other one a political move.
|
On July 28 2016 02:12 pmh wrote:
Influencing other countries politics is common practice.
Didn't Obama recommend the people in England to vote against brexit.
Trump is trolling a bit when asking rusia for the release of 30k emails. Its a bold and somewhat risky move but I think he can get away with it. Is there anyone who would not like to see those emails released one way or the other?
The Russia spin from the democrats on the emails was a weak diversion from the actual problem anyway. Trump clearly is not afraid of it.
"if russia or any other country or person has Hillary Clintons 33.000 illegally deleted emails, perhaps they should share them with the fbi!!"
Dunno,doesnt seem like treason to me.
It's not treason, but espionage is illegal and I think that's much worse than when world leaders voice their opinions of others' elections.
|
honestly, who gives a shit that russia was behind the hack? (if they were)
like, why does it matter..?
|
On July 28 2016 02:10 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 02:04 LegalLord wrote:
It's not the Russians' fault that the emails contain what they do. Spinning this as if it were is in fact blaming the Russians.
You're conflating blaming the Russians for the hack and blaming them for the content of the emails. Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 02:04 LegalLord wrote:
My opinion of Obama is that he is not an FP president and he chose a pretty terrible advisor in Hillary Clinton. That is what it would be regardless of the Ukraine situation. Beside the point of whether you'd criticize him for being weak on Crimea.
Blaming the Russians for the hack is an attempt to sidestep the issue of the contents of the hack. Foreign governments hacking your servers is neither unusual nor suspicious because everyone does it to everyone. Leaking the contents, a bit less so, but also not something all that out of the ordinary. Still no conclusive proof that it is Russia either.
I gave you my thoughts on Obama's FP. That is hardly beside the point. I don't really think in terms of "weak or strong" but more in "foolish or well-planned" action.
|
On July 28 2016 02:12 pmh wrote:
Trump is trolling a bit when asking rusia for the release of 30k emails.
I was waiting for that "interpret Trump's words to alter their plain meaning and make them seem agreeable" moment. It appears to be a necessary rationalization by Trumpets.
|
On July 28 2016 02:15 travis wrote:
honestly, who gives a shit that russia was behind the hack? (if they were)
like, why does it matter..?
Because blame the Russians and the contents of those emails go away!
|
On July 28 2016 02:09 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 02:07 zeo wrote:On July 28 2016 02:04 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:02 zeo wrote:On July 28 2016 01:51 CobaltBlu wrote:
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? The emails are interesting. Debbie Wasserman Schultz worked on Hillary's campaign in 2008 and the emails show she clearly worked to rig the system in Clinton's favor. Why is this important? Because if you want to plant the next chairman of the Democratic National Committee you need the referral and support of the last chairman, and you do this by offering favors/bribes/positions. And who was the chairman before DWS (disregarding the interim period before the next chair)? Thats right, Tim Kaine So Russian involvement is a conspiracy theory but this post isn't? There is clear evidence that Debbie Wasserman Schultz rigged the Democrat primaries, there is no evidence of Russia's involvement other than unnamed 'experts' and Democrat politicians. Tim Kaine is only getting what was obviously promised to him in exchange for letting Hillary rig the primaries. There is no evidence of election fraud in those emails.
lol, you must have a very different definition of fraud than the rest of the World. And I'm sure its just the right definition to make Hillary and DWS seem like victims.
- There is evidence of a plot designed to smear Bernie Sanders and to hand the Democratic nomination to Hillary
- There is evidence of repeated collusion and shady dealings between the DNC and the media
- There is evidence of questionable fund-raising for both Hillary Clinton and the DNC
And thats just the first batch.
On July 28 2016 02:15 travis wrote:
honestly, who gives a shit that russia was behind the hack? (if they were)
like, why does it matter..?
It doesn't, they are desperate to slide and bury the emails.
|
On July 28 2016 02:15 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 02:10 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:04 LegalLord wrote:
It's not the Russians' fault that the emails contain what they do. Spinning this as if it were is in fact blaming the Russians.
You're conflating blaming the Russians for the hack and blaming them for the content of the emails. On July 28 2016 02:04 LegalLord wrote:
My opinion of Obama is that he is not an FP president and he chose a pretty terrible advisor in Hillary Clinton. That is what it would be regardless of the Ukraine situation. Beside the point of whether you'd criticize him for being weak on Crimea. Blaming the Russians for the hack is an attempt to sidestep the issue of the contents of the hack. Foreign governments hacking your servers is neither unusual nor suspicious because everyone does it to everyone. Leaking the contents, a bit less so, but also not something all that out of the ordinary. Still no conclusive proof that it is Russia either. I gave you my thoughts on Obama's FP. That is hardly beside the point. I don't really think in terms of "weak or strong" but more in "foolish or well-planned" action.
Can you name other relevant examples? Preferably done to the US by another Government.
|
On July 28 2016 02:16 zeo wrote:
And thats just the first batch.
And just the stuff that someone was stupid enough to commit to writing.
As the saying goes, everything you write starts with "ladies and gentlemen of the jury" and someone fucked up by putting that in an email.
|
On July 28 2016 02:15 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 02:10 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:04 LegalLord wrote:
It's not the Russians' fault that the emails contain what they do. Spinning this as if it were is in fact blaming the Russians.
You're conflating blaming the Russians for the hack and blaming them for the content of the emails. On July 28 2016 02:04 LegalLord wrote:
My opinion of Obama is that he is not an FP president and he chose a pretty terrible advisor in Hillary Clinton. That is what it would be regardless of the Ukraine situation. Beside the point of whether you'd criticize him for being weak on Crimea. Blaming the Russians for the hack is an attempt to sidestep the issue of the contents of the hack. Foreign governments hacking your servers is neither unusual nor suspicious because everyone does it to everyone. Leaking the contents, a bit less so, but also not something all that out of the ordinary. Still no conclusive proof that it is Russia either. I gave you my thoughts on Obama's FP. That is hardly beside the point. I don't really think in terms of "weak or strong" but more in "foolish or well-planned" action.
"It happens all the time, therefore it isn't a problem!"
This is actually the entirety of your argument. Is that really the path you want to go down?
|
On July 28 2016 02:15 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 02:10 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:04 LegalLord wrote:
It's not the Russians' fault that the emails contain what they do. Spinning this as if it were is in fact blaming the Russians.
You're conflating blaming the Russians for the hack and blaming them for the content of the emails. On July 28 2016 02:04 LegalLord wrote:
My opinion of Obama is that he is not an FP president and he chose a pretty terrible advisor in Hillary Clinton. That is what it would be regardless of the Ukraine situation. Beside the point of whether you'd criticize him for being weak on Crimea. Blaming the Russians for the hack is an attempt to sidestep the issue of the contents of the hack. Foreign governments hacking your servers is neither unusual nor suspicious because everyone does it to everyone. Leaking the contents, a bit less so, but also not something all that out of the ordinary. Still no conclusive proof that it is Russia either. I gave you my thoughts on Obama's FP. That is hardly beside the point. I don't really think in terms of "weak or strong" but more in "foolish or well-planned" action.
Stating a general opinion on Obama's FP is beside the point of a specific question on a specific issue.
Both the contents of the hack and the hack itself can be big issues. You are clearly downplaying the latter.
|
On July 28 2016 02:06 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 02:02 DarkPlasmaBall wrote:On July 28 2016 02:00 travis wrote:On July 28 2016 01:57 On_Slaught wrote:On July 28 2016 01:54 zeo wrote: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:
[quote]
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 It's calling for espionage against his own country. I shouldn't have to connect the dots here. What? No, it isn't at all. WTF are you guys talking about. You can't construe words to mean whatever you want them to mean so that it fits your narrative. It's asking Russia and other countries to infiltrate/ spy on our politicians to obtain secret information... isn't that espionage? Yes, but that's not what Trump did. Goddamned, you guys are going crazy!
Yoooooo the world is going fucking insane. Trump's press conferences are way too entertaining. I don't understand what's happening.
|
Saying that Russia should release the emails if it has them is no where close to encouraging espionage. Saying that he "hopes that Russia finds the missing emails" comes closer if you look at the statement in a vacuum with no context, but obviously Russia can't hack what's no longer there.
Let's just cut through the crap and identify what Trump has done: he has gloriously trolled Hillary and the democrats and hijacked the Democrat National Convention. He's running circles around the democrats and they're too stupid to understand why or how he's doing it, hence the faux outrage over these latest statements -- all of which just plays right into Trump's hand.
|
United States43538 Posts
On July 28 2016 01:27 Cowboy24 wrote:Show nested quote +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.
We live in a nuclear age in which very little can be done to prevent a sovereign state from developing their own independent nuclear deterrent within a few years. For small Eastern European nations a nuclear deterrent is the only meaningful way of resisting Russian expansionism alone. NATO has been an extremely powerful stabilizing force because it offers irresistible strength that surpasses threats by so far that it has yet to be challenged and probably never will be. NATO doesn't drag the US into wars for European socialists, it never has, no European nation has invoked it, even after Argentina invaded the United Kingdom. American boys don't die protecting European socialists, that's not a thing that has ever happened. NATO has established an American dominated postwar peace which has kept the world from spilling into nuclear war. That's the value you get out of NATO. Quarrels don't happen because the US ends them before they start.
|
On July 28 2016 02:15 travis wrote:
honestly, who gives a shit that russia was behind the hack? (if they were)
like, why does it matter..?
Trump is very pro-Putin. His son stated a couple years ago that Russian investors were a big part of the Trump business. Trump has said he will not automatically defend Baltic states if Russia attacked per the NATO agreement. Trump stated he would end sanctions and declare Crimea part of Russia, something that NATO opposes.
Trump also called on Russia or whoever to release Clintons emails if they have them. That is like putting a call out fo all other countries "Yo, if you got any dirt on Hillary, could you send that out so I win the election?"
|
On July 28 2016 02:19 xDaunt wrote:
Saying that Russia should release the emails if it has them is no where close to encouraging espionage. Saying that he "hopes that Russia finds the missing emails" comes closer if you look at the statement in a vacuum with no context, but obviously Russia can't hack what's no longer there.
Let's just cut through the crap and identify what Trump has done: he has gloriously trolled Hillary and the democrats and hijacked the Democrat National Convention. He's running circles around the democrats and they're too stupid to understand why or how he's doing it, hence the faux outrage over these latest statements -- all of which just plays right into Trump's hand.
That's not cutting the crap, that's shaping it into the visage of Trump while you blow it kisses. Associating Trump with Russia and the DNC are not mutually exclusive press events.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
