|
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 03:29 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:26 plated.rawr wrote:On July 28 2016 03:20 GGTeMpLaR wrote:On July 28 2016 03:16 plated.rawr wrote:On July 28 2016 03:00 xDaunt wrote:Now that U.S. authorities are confident Russian intelligence agencies are behind the hack of Democratic Party emails, political operatives and cybersecurity experts tell NBC News they are bracing for an "October Surprise" -- a release of even more potentially damaging information timed to influence the outcome of the presidential election and the course of the next administration.
The big question isn't whether more information will be disclosed, they say, but how destructive it might be to Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton and to broader U.S. foreign policy efforts.
Democratic Party and Clinton campaign officials are now doing an urgent "damage assessment" to determine what kind of information might have been stolen and the impact its release might have on a tight presidential race.
"That is a nightmare scenario, and let's hope we don't see that as an October Surprise -- emails from Hillary Clinton's server that have either been in the press or worse, the classified ones that no one in the public has seen," said retired Adm. James Stavridis, who as the former Supreme Allied Commander for NATO is familiar with Russian information operations.
"I think it is a nightmare for all of us because it shows the degree to which our systems have been penetrated by Russian hackers potentially operating under the rubric of the Russian government," said Stavridis, who was vetted as a possible Clinton running mate.
Julian Assange, whose WikiLeaks organization leaked more than 19,000 DNC emails last Friday, has promised to leak more in an effort to damage Clinton. Source. So, if this comes to pass, and the october releases cause Trump to win the presidency, I guess we could technically say that Russia put Trump into power. Neat. That's like saying the security cameras put someone in jail who was got away from the scene of the crime but was caught on video recording. Sure I guess it's technically true to say that they're causally responsible, but who is morally responsible? Poor analogy. A very central part here is that if the russian has damaging data, and they release it at the most opportune time to damage one of your presidental candidates, it's deliberately to do damage to that candidate to the advantage of another. I find it worrying, of course, that this is happening and there's not much reaction. I mean, the fappening, which released tons of private images, was met with, well, faps, but also outrage, lawsuits and legal action. This, which is a much grander scale injury, is being ignored because it helps someone's fantasy football team against the other team. At the same time, however, I do enjoy the irony in the US being injected with a puppet ruler. I think it's something you have to look at on a security level. In the future practice safer handling of your materials through government encrypted servers for example. Should you be less inclined to vote for Trump because it seems to be in Russia's interests for one candidate to get elected over another? Many countries would stand to benefit more from one candidate over the other. Did people make this much ruckus over David Cameroon effectively endorsing Clinton and condemning Trump? Is it okay for the U.K. to try to influence our election but not Russia? This entire attack against Trump is just a deflection off the DNC corruption. Show nested quote +The hacking itself is not even the greatest part here, although yes, that's a dire breach of both international diplomacy and of security. The big issue here, is that it's deliberately being used to manipulate the US voting population to serve a foreign power. Do you know how many foreign politicians have condemned Trump? Is that not attempting to manipulate the U.S. voting population to serve the interests of a foreign power? Why do people all of a sudden care about this now? This is classic media blowing something up out of proportion to push their narrative, and now we actually have factual evidence that they are corrupt and biased.
It what world is
"voicing an opinion that a foreign country's candidate is bad to influence an election"
Equal to
"Illegally stealing political documents and releasing them to influence another country's election"
I really think this is the gap you need to bridge. Equate "voicing a personal opinion" to "committing espionage".
|
As a Programmer who has worked with the Library of Congress on the frontend, I don't care for the hacks... I don't care for Hillary having a private server, you know why? The fucking government has the worst process in implementing newer technologies to be much safer. A LOT of things are still written in Java (understable to try and work across platforms, but we're in a new day and age), C++, and old programming languages that have so many security issues at this point.
The hacks go to show that they need to get their shit together if not, we're all victims to the hackings in general and it will only get worse. The corruption has been there, and will always be there; greed is part of human nature, but what I want for myself and the fellow person next to me is to be able to live a happy life.
On July 28 2016 03:41 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:36 Falling wrote:Do you know how many foreign politicians have condemned Trump? Is that not attempting to manipulate the U.S. voting population to serve the interests of a foreign power? Why do people all of a sudden care about this now? And I think it was bad form for foreign politicians to condemn Trump- such as Mexico's president. I think keeping mum like Trudeau is the way to go and just sort out what to do with whoever Americans decide to put in power. Of course Canada wasn't accused of sending down our rapists... But you have to admit hacking into one party's emails and leaking one party's emails in order to influence the election to another party is orders of magnitude worse than we don't like one of your candidates. We don’t get to see Trumps tax returns, but apparently we get to see all the DNC’s emails. Not the RNC’s emails, which I am sure are a bastion of angel like behavior. Nothing but nice things said about everyone.
Of course, because the RNC would be much worse, they're already a shit show... And I feel that Trump is really trying to use his leverage in trying to tarnish the DNC, which of course, I'm happy cause it's showing how badly things are, but the RNC is already ruined - they don't even need to release emails to know that.
|
On July 28 2016 03:24 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:19 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 03:01 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:57 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:51 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:39 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:34 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:28 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:18 Doodsmack wrote:
[quote]
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. My general opinion is my specific opinion. The latter is an issue of the DNC and how fucking bad it is at protecting its own servers. I have mentioned this in the past and the hackee matters more than the hacker. LegalLord: Obama is not a FP president. I assess actions in terms of foolish or not foolish. LegalLord: The above clarifies whether I think Obama's reaction to Crimea was foolish or not foolish. Alrighty, so let's just answer this simply and specifically. Getting involved in Ukraine and encouraging the situation that led to the Crimean referendum was foolish and short-sighted. His response to the situation as it arose, was pretty garden variety for US FP: sanctions and posturing. He didn't start a war, which is a good benchmark for "not John Rambo McCain." He didn't do a good job of defusing the situation, but honestly I don't think that's a task that would happen within his presidency anyways, so I have little to comment about in that regard. I take it from you giving credence to the "referendum" that you think Putin's invasion wasn't that bad of a thing (after all, Obama got involved in Ukraine so we can't really blame Putin for invading). Now, Trump should let Russia have Crimea. I guess those are at least consistent positions, if surprisingly approving of Russia's ambitions w/r/t sphere of influence. I just hope you aren't adopting a Russia apologist stance to downplay the DNC hacking itself. The referendum was about as legitimate as a hastily organized event like that can be. At the very least only a clueless moron would doubt that the result was the favored result of a straight majority of the entire (voting and nonvoting) population. Anyone with at least a high school understanding of Russian history would realize that Russia was never going to give up Crimea, ever. If not for the Ukraine situation right now, Russia would have gotten it back through more diplomatic means, eventually. The US FP actors knew this and pushed forward anyways as a deliberate provocation. That sort of provocation is most consistent with the Wolfowitz Doctrine approach to foreign policy (preserve the US as the one and only superpower in the world) but it's ultimately short-sighted because no empire has ever been able to do that throughout all of human history, and it's a fool's errand to think this case will be any different. We're getting far away from the DNC hack argument here but I'm seeing a good bit of leniency from you on letting Russia have what it wants and hacking the DNC. On Russia: Call it political reality. FP is influenced strongly by what you can expect other nations to do if you try to mess with them. On the hacks: I'll give you another story that will perhaps show you why I say "the DNC fucking up matters more than Russia doing the hacking." I have a few friends who work in a nuclear power plant here in the US - an obvious target for foreign influence for perhaps extremely obvious reasons. They work specifically in cyber security, and they deal with at least 40 credible foreign every single day - most from China but plenty from all over the world. A lot of clever ones too that almost slipped through the radar. It's not that that plant is so important, it's just that they just keep pecking for weaknesses to see if they can get something. I don't blame the Chinese or anyone else for trying, it's just how the game works. Hell, they themselves once hacked into the control panel for the entire Ukrainian power grid as part of a research project. The only one who is really at fault for being constantly under siege by security threats and failing to properly address them is the hackee. Because they should know damn well that they are under siege and take proper security measures. The DNC is probably a bigger target than some nuclear power plant. Or maybe not, it's honestly hard to tell because science is about as big as politics in terms of hacker efforts. I at least am admitting the DNC corruption is a big issue. You are downplaying the release of espionage information during an election and instead shifting the focus to whether the hack should have been prevented. BTW, I'll bet attacks have gotten by your friends at the plant. Foreign espionage, it happens. It's a fact of life, and everyone does it to everyone if they can. Allies do it to each other too. Leaking it is, as I said, rare but not unheard of. Obviously some hacks get by, but they're mostly small scale - one document, maybe one project, a single email chain, one computer. Getting your email servers hacked is a fuckup that is massive in scope and I'm pretty sure they never had that happen. Getting your power grid hacked is even worse - if they were terrorists they literally could have turned off Ukraine and cost the government a few billion dollars worth of damages.
Can you at least admit that releasing stolen informatioN during an election is very bad? I admit that the DNC corruption is very bad.
|
Actor and martial artist Chuck Norris penned his support for Donald Trump in a new op-ed, in which he also takes a few jabs at Democrat Hillary Clinton. Norris, who has starred in several movies and the popular TV show "Walker, Texas Ranger," writes for WND.com he is backing Trump for president. "This weekend, as I sat watching Dinesh D'Souza's new documentary, 'Hillary's America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party,' a must-see for all patriots across our country, I was thinking again about the monumental consequences of another Clinton presidency," Norris writes. "I also thought: If reluctant Republicans and other freedom-loving citizens don't rally now behind GOP nominee Donald Trump, we could elect Hillary by default, or by those who merely stay at home on Election Day." Breaking News at Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Chuck-Norris-Announces-Support-Trump/2016/07/25/id/740401/#ixzz4FdVGG4gW Urgent: Do You Back Trump or Hillary? Vote Here Now!
Source
I guess that settles it. Sorry Clinton supporters but Chuck Norris has spoken xD
|
On July 28 2016 03:41 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:36 Falling wrote:Do you know how many foreign politicians have condemned Trump? Is that not attempting to manipulate the U.S. voting population to serve the interests of a foreign power? Why do people all of a sudden care about this now? And I think it was bad form for foreign politicians to condemn Trump- such as Mexico's president. I think keeping mum like Trudeau is the way to go and just sort out what to do with whoever Americans decide to put in power. Of course Canada wasn't accused of sending down our rapists... But you have to admit hacking into one party's emails and leaking one party's emails in order to influence the election to another party is orders of magnitude worse than we don't like one of your candidates. We don’t get to see Trumps tax returns, but apparently we get to see all the DNC’s emails. Not the RNC’s emails, which I am sure are a bastion of angel like behavior. Nothing but nice things said about everyone.
I'm sure if someone were to hack Trumps tax returns it would be perfectly fine.
The RNC tried to influance the Republican primaries and failed miserably, its establishment is already paying the price.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
given that Jill Stein is starting to gain steam due to the DNC convention results, should she get added to the OP picture?
|
On July 28 2016 03:45 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:41 Plansix wrote:On July 28 2016 03:36 Falling wrote:Do you know how many foreign politicians have condemned Trump? Is that not attempting to manipulate the U.S. voting population to serve the interests of a foreign power? Why do people all of a sudden care about this now? And I think it was bad form for foreign politicians to condemn Trump- such as Mexico's president. I think keeping mum like Trudeau is the way to go and just sort out what to do with whoever Americans decide to put in power. Of course Canada wasn't accused of sending down our rapists... But you have to admit hacking into one party's emails and leaking one party's emails in order to influence the election to another party is orders of magnitude worse than we don't like one of your candidates. We don’t get to see Trumps tax returns, but apparently we get to see all the DNC’s emails. Not the RNC’s emails, which I am sure are a bastion of angel like behavior. Nothing but nice things said about everyone. I'm sure if someone were to hack Trumps tax returns it would be perfectly fine. The RNC tried to influance the Republican primaries and failed miserably, its establishment is already paying the price.
To me it wouldn't, so you can project your own double standards elsewhere.
|
On July 28 2016 03:45 Doodsmack wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:24 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 03:19 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 03:12 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 03:01 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:57 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:51 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:39 LegalLord wrote:On July 28 2016 02:34 Doodsmack wrote:On July 28 2016 02:28 LegalLord wrote:
[quote]
My general opinion is my specific opinion.
The latter is an issue of the DNC and how fucking bad it is at protecting its own servers. I have mentioned this in the past and the hackee matters more than the hacker.
LegalLord: Obama is not a FP president. I assess actions in terms of foolish or not foolish. LegalLord: The above clarifies whether I think Obama's reaction to Crimea was foolish or not foolish. Alrighty, so let's just answer this simply and specifically. Getting involved in Ukraine and encouraging the situation that led to the Crimean referendum was foolish and short-sighted. His response to the situation as it arose, was pretty garden variety for US FP: sanctions and posturing. He didn't start a war, which is a good benchmark for "not John Rambo McCain." He didn't do a good job of defusing the situation, but honestly I don't think that's a task that would happen within his presidency anyways, so I have little to comment about in that regard. I take it from you giving credence to the "referendum" that you think Putin's invasion wasn't that bad of a thing (after all, Obama got involved in Ukraine so we can't really blame Putin for invading). Now, Trump should let Russia have Crimea. I guess those are at least consistent positions, if surprisingly approving of Russia's ambitions w/r/t sphere of influence. I just hope you aren't adopting a Russia apologist stance to downplay the DNC hacking itself. The referendum was about as legitimate as a hastily organized event like that can be. At the very least only a clueless moron would doubt that the result was the favored result of a straight majority of the entire (voting and nonvoting) population. Anyone with at least a high school understanding of Russian history would realize that Russia was never going to give up Crimea, ever. If not for the Ukraine situation right now, Russia would have gotten it back through more diplomatic means, eventually. The US FP actors knew this and pushed forward anyways as a deliberate provocation. That sort of provocation is most consistent with the Wolfowitz Doctrine approach to foreign policy (preserve the US as the one and only superpower in the world) but it's ultimately short-sighted because no empire has ever been able to do that throughout all of human history, and it's a fool's errand to think this case will be any different. We're getting far away from the DNC hack argument here but I'm seeing a good bit of leniency from you on letting Russia have what it wants and hacking the DNC. On Russia: Call it political reality. FP is influenced strongly by what you can expect other nations to do if you try to mess with them. On the hacks: I'll give you another story that will perhaps show you why I say "the DNC fucking up matters more than Russia doing the hacking." I have a few friends who work in a nuclear power plant here in the US - an obvious target for foreign influence for perhaps extremely obvious reasons. They work specifically in cyber security, and they deal with at least 40 credible foreign every single day - most from China but plenty from all over the world. A lot of clever ones too that almost slipped through the radar. It's not that that plant is so important, it's just that they just keep pecking for weaknesses to see if they can get something. I don't blame the Chinese or anyone else for trying, it's just how the game works. Hell, they themselves once hacked into the control panel for the entire Ukrainian power grid as part of a research project. The only one who is really at fault for being constantly under siege by security threats and failing to properly address them is the hackee. Because they should know damn well that they are under siege and take proper security measures. The DNC is probably a bigger target than some nuclear power plant. Or maybe not, it's honestly hard to tell because science is about as big as politics in terms of hacker efforts. I at least am admitting the DNC corruption is a big issue. You are downplaying the release of espionage information during an election and instead shifting the focus to whether the hack should have been prevented. BTW, I'll bet attacks have gotten by your friends at the plant. Foreign espionage, it happens. It's a fact of life, and everyone does it to everyone if they can. Allies do it to each other too. Leaking it is, as I said, rare but not unheard of. Obviously some hacks get by, but they're mostly small scale - one document, maybe one project, a single email chain, one computer. Getting your email servers hacked is a fuckup that is massive in scope and I'm pretty sure they never had that happen. Getting your power grid hacked is even worse - if they were terrorists they literally could have turned off Ukraine and cost the government a few billion dollars worth of damages. Can you at least admit that releasing stolen informatioN during an election is very bad? I admit that the DNC corruption is very bad.
I don't understand what your end game is here though. That the thief should have had the goodwill to wait until after the election to release the information?
|
On July 28 2016 03:45 zeo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:41 Plansix wrote:On July 28 2016 03:36 Falling wrote:Do you know how many foreign politicians have condemned Trump? Is that not attempting to manipulate the U.S. voting population to serve the interests of a foreign power? Why do people all of a sudden care about this now? And I think it was bad form for foreign politicians to condemn Trump- such as Mexico's president. I think keeping mum like Trudeau is the way to go and just sort out what to do with whoever Americans decide to put in power. Of course Canada wasn't accused of sending down our rapists... But you have to admit hacking into one party's emails and leaking one party's emails in order to influence the election to another party is orders of magnitude worse than we don't like one of your candidates. We don’t get to see Trumps tax returns, but apparently we get to see all the DNC’s emails. Not the RNC’s emails, which I am sure are a bastion of angel like behavior. Nothing but nice things said about everyone. I'm sure if someone were to hack Trumps tax returns it would be perfectly fine. The RNC tried to influance the Republican primaries and failed miserably, its establishment is already paying the price.
Yea I'd actually be all for RNC files all being released as well.
I think that would actually help Trump even more based on how hard everyone in the republican political base fought against him. Who knows what kind of crazy shit strategies they were coming up with to try to stop Trump like the DNC was trying to stop Sanders.
If hackers want to release hidden information on governments acting in criminal ways, I'm not going to be upset with the hackers.
|
The Democratic attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts are refusing to comply with House Republicans’ subpoena over their climate change investigations.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey wrote letters to House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) Tuesday saying that the subpoenas issued this month fall outside of the panel’s authority and violate their states’ rights.
In a letter to Smith, Schneiderman’s counsel Leslie Dubeck called his subpoena an “unprecedented effort to target ongoing state law enforcement” operation and said that if enforced, it would “would have the obvious consequence of interfering” when Schneiderman’s investigation into whether Exxon Mobil Corp. illegally lied about what it knew about climate change.
“The subpoena brings us one step closer to a protracted, unnecessary legal confrontation, which will only distract and detract from the work of our respective offices,” Dubeck said.
She offered to meet with Smith or his staff to discuss the committee’s requests, though she asked that representatives of the Democrats on the panel, led by Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), be present as well.
Richard Johnston, chief legal counsel to Healey, wrote that she “objects to the subpoena as an unconstitutional and unwarranted interference with a legitimate ongoing state investigation,” and “a dangerous overreach by the committee and an affront to states’ rights.”
He said that Smith and his colleagues ignored Healey’s offer to discuss the issue, as well as her objections to his authority and assertions that the documents are privileged.
“This sequence of events suggest that the majority had no intention of considering the substance of Attorney General Healey’s objections.”
Wednesday is the deadline Smith gave Schneiderman, Healey and numerous environmental groups to respond to wide-ranging subpoenas about their Exxon investigations.
Source
|
Of course the RNC is corrupt as all hell and has plenty of shit on its email servers. You have to keep in mind why the DNC leaks are important: they show collusion against Bernie and in favor of Hillary, which is driving democrats away from Hillary. If similar emails came out from the RNC, they'd show collusion against Trump, which would merely drive more republicans to Trump.
|
On July 28 2016 03:51 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:Show nested quote +The Democratic attorneys general of New York and Massachusetts are refusing to comply with House Republicans’ subpoena over their climate change investigations.
New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman and Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey wrote letters to House Science Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) Tuesday saying that the subpoenas issued this month fall outside of the panel’s authority and violate their states’ rights.
In a letter to Smith, Schneiderman’s counsel Leslie Dubeck called his subpoena an “unprecedented effort to target ongoing state law enforcement” operation and said that if enforced, it would “would have the obvious consequence of interfering” when Schneiderman’s investigation into whether Exxon Mobil Corp. illegally lied about what it knew about climate change.
“The subpoena brings us one step closer to a protracted, unnecessary legal confrontation, which will only distract and detract from the work of our respective offices,” Dubeck said.
She offered to meet with Smith or his staff to discuss the committee’s requests, though she asked that representatives of the Democrats on the panel, led by Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), be present as well.
Richard Johnston, chief legal counsel to Healey, wrote that she “objects to the subpoena as an unconstitutional and unwarranted interference with a legitimate ongoing state investigation,” and “a dangerous overreach by the committee and an affront to states’ rights.”
He said that Smith and his colleagues ignored Healey’s offer to discuss the issue, as well as her objections to his authority and assertions that the documents are privileged.
“This sequence of events suggest that the majority had no intention of considering the substance of Attorney General Healey’s objections.”
Wednesday is the deadline Smith gave Schneiderman, Healey and numerous environmental groups to respond to wide-ranging subpoenas about their Exxon investigations. Source
roflmao, the irony of state AGs telling Congress a subpoena is outside Congress's authority when their entire investigation is an illegitimate affront to the first amendment, an attempt to use the coercive power of government to stop the expression of opinions the government does not like. because the issue is just TOO IMPORTANT.
what other issues are TOO IMPORTANT to allow people and organizations to exercise free speech regarding them?
|
United States43971 Posts
On July 28 2016 03:45 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +Actor and martial artist Chuck Norris penned his support for Donald Trump in a new op-ed, in which he also takes a few jabs at Democrat Hillary Clinton. Norris, who has starred in several movies and the popular TV show "Walker, Texas Ranger," writes for WND.com he is backing Trump for president. "This weekend, as I sat watching Dinesh D'Souza's new documentary, 'Hillary's America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party,' a must-see for all patriots across our country, I was thinking again about the monumental consequences of another Clinton presidency," Norris writes. "I also thought: If reluctant Republicans and other freedom-loving citizens don't rally now behind GOP nominee Donald Trump, we could elect Hillary by default, or by those who merely stay at home on Election Day." Breaking News at Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Chuck-Norris-Announces-Support-Trump/2016/07/25/id/740401/#ixzz4FdVGG4gW Urgent: Do You Back Trump or Hillary? Vote Here Now! SourceI guess that settles it. Sorry Clinton supporters but Chuck Norris has spoken xD
Do we think Chuck knows that Dinesh is not really an impartial source on the matter? I just finished watching Der Ewige Jude and I must say it really left me thinking about the real problems in our society.
|
On July 28 2016 03:53 xDaunt wrote:
Of course the RNC is corrupt as all hell and has plenty of shit on its email servers. You have to keep in mind why the DNC leaks are important: they show collusion against Bernie and in favor of Hillary, which is driving democrats away from Hillary. If similar emails came out from the RNC, they'd show collusion against Trump, which would merely drive more republicans to Trump.
But then that means Russia isn't trying to elect Trump or they would just reveal those too!
Unless that means the whole thing was a scam and the GOP was behind Trump from the beginning and planned all this!!
Deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole we go, where it leads not one of us knows
I'm tired of all this bullshit it's making me so jaded about politics
|
Can't imagine how frustrated Clinton is right now, so many years of planning, scheming for this moment. All the pieces were in place, and the corruption was real, only to be taken away by Russians of all people. That's gotta sting, karma basically
|
On July 28 2016 03:55 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:45 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Actor and martial artist Chuck Norris penned his support for Donald Trump in a new op-ed, in which he also takes a few jabs at Democrat Hillary Clinton. Norris, who has starred in several movies and the popular TV show "Walker, Texas Ranger," writes for WND.com he is backing Trump for president. "This weekend, as I sat watching Dinesh D'Souza's new documentary, 'Hillary's America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party,' a must-see for all patriots across our country, I was thinking again about the monumental consequences of another Clinton presidency," Norris writes. "I also thought: If reluctant Republicans and other freedom-loving citizens don't rally now behind GOP nominee Donald Trump, we could elect Hillary by default, or by those who merely stay at home on Election Day." Breaking News at Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Chuck-Norris-Announces-Support-Trump/2016/07/25/id/740401/#ixzz4FdVGG4gW Urgent: Do You Back Trump or Hillary? Vote Here Now! I guess that settles it. Sorry Clinton supporters but Chuck Norris has spoken xD Do we think Chuck knows that Dinesh is not really an impartial source on the matter? I just finished watching Der Ewige Jude and I must say it really left me thinking about the real problems in our society.
Dinesh is just as impartial as all of the media outlets parroting the "the republican convention was dark" talking point. The only difference is that Dinesh is up front with where he's coming from.
|
On July 28 2016 03:58 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:55 KwarK wrote:On July 28 2016 03:45 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Actor and martial artist Chuck Norris penned his support for Donald Trump in a new op-ed, in which he also takes a few jabs at Democrat Hillary Clinton. Norris, who has starred in several movies and the popular TV show "Walker, Texas Ranger," writes for WND.com he is backing Trump for president. "This weekend, as I sat watching Dinesh D'Souza's new documentary, 'Hillary's America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party,' a must-see for all patriots across our country, I was thinking again about the monumental consequences of another Clinton presidency," Norris writes. "I also thought: If reluctant Republicans and other freedom-loving citizens don't rally now behind GOP nominee Donald Trump, we could elect Hillary by default, or by those who merely stay at home on Election Day." Breaking News at Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Chuck-Norris-Announces-Support-Trump/2016/07/25/id/740401/#ixzz4FdVGG4gW Urgent: Do You Back Trump or Hillary? Vote Here Now! I guess that settles it. Sorry Clinton supporters but Chuck Norris has spoken xD Do we think Chuck knows that Dinesh is not really an impartial source on the matter? I just finished watching Der Ewige Jude and I must say it really left me thinking about the real problems in our society. Dinesh is just as impartial as all of the media outlets parroting the "the republican convention was dark" talking point. The only difference is that Dinesh is up front with where he's coming from.
No, Dinesh's credibility is comparable to that of a Nazi. Keep up with the implications!
|
On July 28 2016 03:55 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:45 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Actor and martial artist Chuck Norris penned his support for Donald Trump in a new op-ed, in which he also takes a few jabs at Democrat Hillary Clinton. Norris, who has starred in several movies and the popular TV show "Walker, Texas Ranger," writes for WND.com he is backing Trump for president. "This weekend, as I sat watching Dinesh D'Souza's new documentary, 'Hillary's America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party,' a must-see for all patriots across our country, I was thinking again about the monumental consequences of another Clinton presidency," Norris writes. "I also thought: If reluctant Republicans and other freedom-loving citizens don't rally now behind GOP nominee Donald Trump, we could elect Hillary by default, or by those who merely stay at home on Election Day." Breaking News at Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Chuck-Norris-Announces-Support-Trump/2016/07/25/id/740401/#ixzz4FdVGG4gW Urgent: Do You Back Trump or Hillary? Vote Here Now! I guess that settles it. Sorry Clinton supporters but Chuck Norris has spoken xD Do we think Chuck knows that Dinesh is not really an impartial source on the matter? I just finished watching Der Ewige Jude and I must say it really left me thinking about the real problems in our society.
Oh I haven't seen it myself. The fact that he endorsed Huckabee in the past alone renders this endorsement largely meaningless I think.
I just wanted to make hype internet chuck norris joke sorry
|
On July 28 2016 03:45 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +Actor and martial artist Chuck Norris penned his support for Donald Trump in a new op-ed, in which he also takes a few jabs at Democrat Hillary Clinton. Norris, who has starred in several movies and the popular TV show "Walker, Texas Ranger," writes for WND.com he is backing Trump for president. "This weekend, as I sat watching Dinesh D'Souza's new documentary, 'Hillary's America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party,' a must-see for all patriots across our country, I was thinking again about the monumental consequences of another Clinton presidency," Norris writes. "I also thought: If reluctant Republicans and other freedom-loving citizens don't rally now behind GOP nominee Donald Trump, we could elect Hillary by default, or by those who merely stay at home on Election Day." Breaking News at Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Chuck-Norris-Announces-Support-Trump/2016/07/25/id/740401/#ixzz4FdVGG4gW Urgent: Do You Back Trump or Hillary? Vote Here Now! SourceI guess that settles it. Sorry Clinton supporters but Chuck Norris has spoken xD
I'm curious about his word choice of "another Clinton presidency". Adultery issues aside, do people really find Bill's presidency to have been that distasteful?
|
On July 28 2016 03:59 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Show nested quote +On July 28 2016 03:55 KwarK wrote:On July 28 2016 03:45 GGTeMpLaR wrote:Actor and martial artist Chuck Norris penned his support for Donald Trump in a new op-ed, in which he also takes a few jabs at Democrat Hillary Clinton. Norris, who has starred in several movies and the popular TV show "Walker, Texas Ranger," writes for WND.com he is backing Trump for president. "This weekend, as I sat watching Dinesh D'Souza's new documentary, 'Hillary's America: The Secret History of the Democratic Party,' a must-see for all patriots across our country, I was thinking again about the monumental consequences of another Clinton presidency," Norris writes. "I also thought: If reluctant Republicans and other freedom-loving citizens don't rally now behind GOP nominee Donald Trump, we could elect Hillary by default, or by those who merely stay at home on Election Day." Breaking News at Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Chuck-Norris-Announces-Support-Trump/2016/07/25/id/740401/#ixzz4FdVGG4gW Urgent: Do You Back Trump or Hillary? Vote Here Now! I guess that settles it. Sorry Clinton supporters but Chuck Norris has spoken xD Do we think Chuck knows that Dinesh is not really an impartial source on the matter? I just finished watching Der Ewige Jude and I must say it really left me thinking about the real problems in our society. Oh I haven't seen it myself. The fact that he endorsed Huckabee in the past alone renders this endorsement largely meaningless I think. I just wanted to make hype internet chuck norris joke sorry
Chuck Norris, like most celebrities, reminds us that actors are just normal dumbfucks who happen to be good at acting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
