|
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 October 04 2016 22:11 Mohdoo wrote:
So, now that we've got that out of the way. Those of you who keep letting yourselves be convinced there are huge conspiracies and other nonsense (Bill's black kid, etc), have you begun to lose faith in Julian Assange? I can see the allure in wanting to believe Clinton will somehow be disqualified from running for president, but Assange isn't your hero. He's a joke. I can't help but have this wonderful grin on my face after how excited Trump supporters were.
Even r/thedonald is having doubts about assange. Kind of hilarious.
https://reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/55sssy/our_movement_is_no_more_or_less_justified_by/
|
On October 04 2016 22:17 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:11 Mohdoo wrote:
So, now that we've got that out of the way. Those of you who keep letting yourselves be convinced there are huge conspiracies and other nonsense (Bill's black kid, etc), have you begun to lose faith in Julian Assange? I can see the allure in wanting to believe Clinton will somehow be disqualified from running for president, but Assange isn't your hero. He's a joke. I can't help but have this wonderful grin on my face after how excited Trump supporters were. Even r/thedonald is having doubts about assange. Kind of hilarious. https://reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/55sssy/our_movement_is_no_more_or_less_justified_by/
My favorite part is how many conspiracies they have believed throughout the election. They have all gotten super riled up after each of these extremely sketchy conspiracy theories and they never pan out. It's like they remember being upset but don't remember nothing was ever actually true. Whatever. These people will always exist. Once Trump loses, it will be a lot less common. I hope this election is thoroughly studied. It is insane how many people I remember calling Trump a phony joke, only go support him once he secured the nomination. It's like some weird tribal thing where there is an intrinsic appreciation and admiration for "the leader" or some shit. It's weird and creepy.
|
Waiting for Assange like...
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/jzc9UkS.gif)
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Well if Assange really has been co-opted by the Russians Wikileaks probably don't have any documents that could sink Clinton because this was definitely the best time to release them because it would hugely draw attention away from the Trump meltdowns.
Also I wonder if Infowars will ever trust them again.
|
I don't understand the hate for Assange that Clinton supporters seem to have around here. The guy never took part in the conspiracy theories that Trump supporters bring up. He never put the US election at the center of his communication. He never declared his support for Trump. He never associated himself with the alt right. The same people who anxiously waited for him to nuke Clinton today were saying he was a terrorist that should get a military trial a few years/months ago. He honestly doesn't seem to give a flying fuck about the result of the US elections. He seems down to earth, especially considering the conditions he's lived in for quite some time now. Thus, why is he branded as a "joke"? Simply because he releases true information in his quest for transparency of the mighty?
|
Perhaps some of us are skeptical of the notion that Assange is motivated by a "quest for transparency of the mighty." His releases of information curiously privy a particular former world superpower, perhaps you can guess who?
|
On October 04 2016 22:50 OtherWorld wrote:
I don't understand the hate for Assange that Clinton supporters seem to have around here. The guy never took part in the conspiracy theories that Trump supporters bring up. He never put the US election at the center of his communication. He never declared his support for Trump. He never associated himself with the alt right. The same people who anxiously waited for him to nuke Clinton today were saying he was a terrorist that should get a military trial a few years/months ago. He honestly doesn't seem to give a flying fuck about the result of the US elections. He seems down to earth, especially considering the conditions he's lived in for quite some time now. Thus, why is he branded as a "joke"? Simply because he releases true information in his quest for transparency of the mighty?
I think people are just really skeptical of him being under Russia's thumb. Especially since they haven't leaked anything damaging to Russia for ages, even though it's been confirmed at least once they've had documents that made Russia look bad.
This is especially suspect when he's leaking these docs long after they could have made an impact in the primaries at a time when all they do is benefit someone who is increasingly looking like his campaign has some Russia ties and is willing to bury his head in the sand about Russian actions.
|
He also releases information rather indiscriminately, which has put a lot of people at risk.
Anyways, there's strong evidence that Putin's got some control over Assange after he quietly opted not to go through with releasing documents about Russia. The question if the Kremlin used bribery or intimidation, though it was probably both.
|
Zurich15348 Posts
On October 04 2016 22:25 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On October 04 2016 22:17 Nevuk wrote:On October 04 2016 22:11 Mohdoo wrote:
So, now that we've got that out of the way. Those of you who keep letting yourselves be convinced there are huge conspiracies and other nonsense (Bill's black kid, etc), have you begun to lose faith in Julian Assange? I can see the allure in wanting to believe Clinton will somehow be disqualified from running for president, but Assange isn't your hero. He's a joke. I can't help but have this wonderful grin on my face after how excited Trump supporters were. Even r/thedonald is having doubts about assange. Kind of hilarious. https://reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/55sssy/our_movement_is_no_more_or_less_justified_by/ My favorite part is how many conspiracies they have believed throughout the election. They have all gotten super riled up after each of these extremely sketchy conspiracy theories and they never pan out. It's like they remember being upset but don't remember nothing was ever actually true. Whatever. These people will always exist. Once Trump loses, it will be a lot less common. I hope this election is thoroughly studied. It is insane how many people I remember calling Trump a phony joke, only go support him once he secured the nomination. It's like some weird tribal thing where there is an intrinsic appreciation and admiration for "the leader" or some shit. It's weird and creepy.
/r/the_donald is a fascinating window into how people can collectively, without any top-down steering, decide to construct and live in their own alternate reality.
They observe reality as it is, don't like what they see, and then in a meme driven self perpetuating cycle of self-affirmation consciously built their alternate version.
Truly fascinating.
|
In a phone interview Sunday with CNN’s Poppy Harlow, businessman and Hillary Clinton supporter Mark Cuban said voters shouldn’t assume $916 million in business losses Donald Trump reported on his tax return in 1995 was simply the result of failed casinos.
"It's just as possible, because we don't have any details behind this front page of his New York and New Jersey returns, that this is a tax shelter," Cuban said. “We’re presuming it’s a real estate deal that went bad, but it could just as easily be a tax shelter for him to avoid income taxes.”
Trump’s losses, revealed by the New York Times Saturday night, could have allowed him to avoid paying federal income taxes for up to 18 years. The Times reported that mismanagement of Trump's three Atlantic City casinos, and business failures around his Trump Shuttle and Plaza Hotel projects, led to the huge figure.
But Cuban said voters shouldn’t rush to the conclusion that Trump’s loss is simply the result of failed casinos.
“If Donald is taking tax shortcuts, maybe he bought an insurance company instead of doing something in real estate,” Cuban speculated, “and he took a huge tax write-off to offset income.”
“We’ve all heard about tax scams and tax shelters, right? What we don’t know is whether or not this is a tax shelter,” he added. “This could be something where he got involved in currencies or insurance tax shelters, there a thousand and one tax shelters that were very aggressive and were being offered at the time.”
Cuban recalled that in the '90s, “there were accounting companies, accounting agencies, and tax shelter companies coming to me, offering me ways to offset my income so I didn’t have to pay taxes.”
“We don’t know. And that’s the inherent problem,” he continued. “There’s no transparency, and he is so ashamed of what he’s done, he’s not willing to speak up and explain to us what happened.”
Source
|
i'm weighing which is more plausible: trump lost a billion dollars on NY real estate and casinos in a booming economy, or the loss is actually due to some sort of liabilities shell game.
it's actually kind of hard to say.
beyond that, i'm curious how he recorded all the debt forgiveness.
|
On October 04 2016 22:55 farvacola wrote:
Perhaps some of us are skeptical of the notion that Assange is motivated by a "quest for transparency of the mighty." His releases of information curiously privy a particular former world superpower, perhaps you can guess who?
Well, maybe if the US wouldn't have reacted by calling him a terrorist, the situation would have been different... And even then, what he releases is genuine enough to be taken seriously by mainstream and serious medias all around the world.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On October 04 2016 22:11 Mohdoo wrote:
So, now that we've got that out of the way. Those of you who keep letting yourselves be convinced there are huge conspiracies and other nonsense (Bill's black kid, etc), have you begun to lose faith in Julian Assange? I can see the allure in wanting to believe Clinton will somehow be disqualified from running for president, but Assange isn't your hero. He's a joke. I can't help but have this wonderful grin on my face after how excited Trump supporters were.
I was quite sure since about two years ago that the Russians had gotten to him and started using him for their own hacktivism. This entire saga of events makes it pretty obvious that that was in fact the case.
|
|
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On October 04 2016 23:08 ticklishmusic wrote:
i'm weighing which is more plausible: trump lost a billion dollars on NY real estate and casinos in a booming economy, or the loss is actually due to some sort of liabilities shell game.
it's actually kind of hard to say.
beyond that, i'm curious how he recorded all the debt forgiveness.
The important thing is that he's thin-skinned enough that it's easy to trigger him by insinuating that he might not be all that wealthy.
|
On October 04 2016 22:36 TheTenthDoc wrote:
Well if Assange really has been co-opted by the Russians Wikileaks probably don't have any documents that could sink Clinton because this was definitely the best time to release them because it would hugely draw attention away from the Trump meltdowns.
Also I wonder if Infowars will ever trust them again.
Assange has been a self serving asshole from day one. He lives to taunt and irritate the powerful, while claiming he is for the people and fighting corruption. There is zero reason to trust them or that information they release isn't cherry picked to support his political views. He rides on the coat tails of people like Snowden, who did what he felt was best for the country. But when Snowden criticized wikileaks for releasing un-redacted credit card numbers and the names of opposition supporters in Turkey, wikileaks attacked him.
|
On October 04 2016 22:27 ticklishmusic wrote:Waiting for Assange like...
Yes, I'm glad that I didn't stay up for this one. What's caught my attention isn't so much that Assange didn't drop any evidence last night, but that he seems to be severely walking back all of his prior representations about what he had.
|
United Kingdom13775 Posts
On October 04 2016 23:28 xDaunt wrote:Yes, I'm glad that I didn't stay up for this one. What's caught my attention isn't so much that Assange didn't drop any evidence last night, but that he seems to be severely walking back all of his prior representations about what he had.
Honestly, if he really had something to sink Hillary, he should have used it back in the primaries when Sanders was still in the running. As it is, the biggest email result of this election was the DNC leaks that forced DWS to resign.
|
On October 04 2016 23:20 Dan HH wrote:+ Show Spoiler +https://twitter.com/pewresearch/status/783310204213587973
Think the figure was like 80% for French in early 2015, the USA seem really far behind...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
