EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 9907
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On February 15 2018 05:28 On_Slaught wrote: You saw the reaction to the DNC leaks. Seems obvious that releasing RNC leaks would get a similar reaction and add to the cacophony. Paints the whole system as corrupt as opposed to just one side. Is “seems obvious” the best you have? Because that isn’t at all enough nor is it clear that the result would have been that way. As much as anything else it’s about timing and environment. The scenario was perfect in the prelude to the Dem convention - Sanders supporters felt robbed, and it was supposed to be Hillary’s great “unity” moment. Click, boom, and it turned into a desperate farce by a mix of leaks and self-sabotage via DWS. I can say with 80% certainty that nothing in those RNC leaks would have been remotely interesting compared to the BS that comes out of Trump’s mouth daily. All it would do is draw attention to the “hacking” aspect of it. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On February 15 2018 05:34 Plansix wrote: I’ve never really felt it was about Clinton or Trump. It is about making Democracy look dysfunctional to the Russian people and furthering the interest of Putin and his oligarchs. Two political parties at each others throats and inaction congress does both of those things for Putin. Trump is just the cherry on top. But if that was their ONLY goal, why not release the RNC emails or spread negative fake news about Trump? I don't buy that it's just a coincidence the vast vast majority of misinformation/leaks benefited the same party. A counter argument might be that Clinton was the heavy favorite so she didn't need help. However if we are to believe their main objective was disfunction, then why not release the RNC leaks? Undermining both parties before a election would be the ultimate form of chaos. The fact they didn't tells me that either there was nothing salacious in the hack or they preferred a Trump victory. The latter seems more likely. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Nebuchad
Switzerland12363 Posts
| ||
|
MoonfireSpam
United Kingdom1153 Posts
Seems there are more school shootings in the last year than there are days of snow in the UK. (just to put the weather thing into context) | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
On February 15 2018 05:36 LegalLord wrote: Is “seems obvious” the best you have? Because that isn’t at all enough nor is it clear that the result would have been that way. As much as anything else it’s about timing and environment. The scenario was perfect in the prelude to the Dem convention - Sanders supporters felt robbed, and it was supposed to be Hillary’s great “unity” moment. Click, boom, and it turned into a desperate farce by a mix of leaks and self-sabotage via DWS. I can say with 80% certainty that nothing in those RNC leaks would have been remotely interesting compared to the BS that comes out of Trump’s mouth daily. All it would do is draw attention to the “hacking” aspect of it. If you don't think that the MSM would have gone full nuclear over RNC leaks that had even the smallest bad thing then you haven't been paying attention. It would have been a big deal. It would have added to the noise and negative news before the election. @GreenH, didn't the leaks happen after Trump was either the nominee or at least the presumptive fav? I dont doubt the RNC didnt want Trump tho. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On February 15 2018 05:48 MoonfireSpam wrote: Sometimes things like that happen I guess. Doesn't really register any more than "heavy rain" on the weather forecast. Isn't really any part of the gun debate that hasn't been done is there? None. After a bunch of children were killed in their school while their teachers shielded them with their own bodies, it became clear Republicans in congress care more about getting elected than literally anything else. There wasn’t even a debate on the floor of the House. They didn’t even talk about it. | ||
|
Jockmcplop
United Kingdom9732 Posts
On February 15 2018 05:51 Plansix wrote: None. After a bunch of children were killed in their school while their teachers shielded them with their own bodies, it became clear Republicans in congress care more about getting elected than literally anything else. There wasn’t even a debate on the floor of the House. They didn’t even talk about it. Those children were acceptable loss. | ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
I know he was trying to avoid violating the law, but damn did he blow this story up. Also, reported that there are multiple fatalities. Saw someone in handcuffs in TV so they may have the shooter. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
According to Sen Bill Nelson, there are "a number of fatalities", not just injured. No idea how confirmed that is though. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On February 15 2018 06:07 On_Slaught wrote: Oh btw, apparently Cohen's little stunt voided the NDA and now Stormy Daniels is "shopping her story." I know he was trying to avoid violating the law, but damn did he blow this story up. Also, reported that there are multiple fatalities. Saw someone in handcuffs in TV so they may have the shooter. I saw that too; if she wants to ensure she doesn't break the NDA wrongly, what sort of process is involved? Like I'd imagine if she just blabs it out now she'd get sued by the Trump team and have to deal with that. | ||
|
LegalLord
United States13779 Posts
On February 15 2018 05:51 On_Slaught wrote: If you don't think that the MSM would have gone full nuclear over RNC leaks that had even the smallest bad thing then you haven't been paying attention. It would have been a big deal. It would have added to the noise and negative news before the election. Again your argument ends mostly at “it’s obvious it would have been better that way” without much of an analysis as to how exactly it would be that way. “The media” goes full nuclear over a lot of things. They’re going “full nuclear” every day over anything even remotely credible, or not credible at all, that would tie Trump to Russia. People even bought wholesale into Kurt Eichenwald and his random conspiracy theory way back that Trump was fed info from Sputnik News. It wouldn’t have been anywhere near as glorious as DNC because there really is no topping that. Less is more when the goal is not to draw attention to the hacking. “It’s obvious” doesn’t change that. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18839 Posts
On February 15 2018 06:09 Logo wrote: I saw that too; if she wants to ensure she doesn't break the NDA wrongly, what sort of process is involved? Like I'd imagine if she just blabs it out now she'd get sued by the Trump team and have to deal with that. Generally, once one party to an NDA violates its terms, the other parties to it are off the hook, so to speak. | ||
|
m4ini
4215 Posts
Seems like they got him. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On February 15 2018 05:13 On_Slaught wrote: I disagree with Plansix on that point. Sure having discord is great, but even better is having discord and a president who will do good things for you. If Hillary wins Russia gets zero concessions. They had every reason to prefer Trump who already showed his willingness to cooperate with the Republican Platform Crimea thing and his business ties to them. The Trump admin wanted to lift sanctions right away. This is a fact, and it tells you a lot. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On February 15 2018 06:11 farvacola wrote: Generally, once one party to an NDA violates its terms, the other parties to it are off the hook, so to speak. Yeah but what's the legal track like for that if there's a dispute? Like Trump's Lawyers can probably litigate as much as they want for as long as they want and if Stormy doesn't have an easy way to deal with that there's still risk right? | ||
|
{CC}StealthBlue
United States41117 Posts
| ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On February 15 2018 06:11 LegalLord wrote: Again your argument ends mostly at “it’s obvious it would have been better that way” without much of an analysis as to how exactly it would be that way. “The media” goes full nuclear over a lot of things. They’re going “full nuclear” every day over anything even remotely credible, or not credible at all, that would tie Trump to Russia. People even bought wholesale into Kurt Eichenwald and his random conspiracy theory way back that Trump was fed info from Sputnik News. It wouldn’t have been anywhere near as glorious as DNC because there really is no topping that. Less is more when the goal is not to draw attention to the hacking. “It’s obvious” doesn’t change that. So you are basically saying “it’s obvious” in the other direction. But there was ample attention going to the hacking itself, and that would be the case no matter which party was leaked. The prospect of the media going like hounds to a steak with a RNC leak is discord city. | ||
| ||
