This is concerning the Russian intelligence theft of DNC documents and internal communications and the subsequent publication on Wikileaks. Americans should be extremely concerned that a near-peer adversary in Russia is utilizing its intelligence services in a direct attempt to subvert the American democratic process and bolster Donald Trump’s campaign. There’s no question that a Trump presidency would be a geopolitical windfall for Moscow.
1 Like
The same could be said about the DNC using it’s resources to subvert the American democratic process. After all, that is what the hack reveals. I have taken the time to show some of the actual emails that indicate this subversion. It is as subtle as it is obvious. The current candidate stands a chance as not being the legitimate candidate.
You are igoring the proven for the unproven.
1 Like
And that would be what? The DNC wanted a highly qualified candidate that isn’t a raging, unelectable socialist to be its nominee? Hilary beat Sanders by 3.6 million votes.
If you want to vote for the candidate that Putin has effectively endorsed, be my guest. I wouldn’t expect anything less from you.
This is what I find so fucking gallingly infuriating. I realize that there’s a lot of things in geopolitics that require a certain flexibility in order to engage successfully with, but I can’t stand things like people begging for help and then this country being like “eh…no”. I mean this is more a rant than any objectively thorough dissertation on geopolitics and the national interests…but fuck I can’t stand people who are in such a tough spot against an obviously psychotic bully not getting help. Like the Kurds and the Yezidi fighting ISIS with fucking scraps while their women are raped and sold into slavery. It makes my blood boil.
YEAH for real, “I think I read he is an atheist this could make several points difference with my peeps” is just like (as the present evidence and consensus suggest) a revanchist nuclear power launching a mil-intel cyberattack against its despised adversary’s political institutions and then using the intelligence in a direct and unprecedented act of subversion of the latter’s political sovereignty.
Don’t get me wrong, the DNC (like the RNC, I suspect [I’d love to see some RNC emails concerning Trump…**if only one of our allies would hack for Hillary, as our enemies seem to have done for Trump, amiright**]) is exactly what the Sanders supporters were saying it was all along. They should be angry. The DNC should be reformed, or burned down and rebuilt.
But if you are so appallingly blinded by tribalist shit-flinging bias to believe such self-evident horseshit as “the same could be said,” you need to sit a few elections out.
Oh, I see. So you are absolutely certain Hillary would have won anyway evendors if the DNC not not meddle.
Well, I suppose that could be true. It’s very possible that Hillary would have won, even if the DNC did not try to influence the results.
BUT, it is also possible that Sanders may have squeaked out a victory… Unfortunately, we will never know.
We cannot be sure how much of an influence the DNC actually had. Some of the more interesting emails usually say something to the effect of “…we will have to discuss this on the phone, we cannot talk about it on email.” ← This is not a media spin, this is stuff I read in the actual emails…
Oh! The most qualified candidate!
So you are insinuating that even if the system was rigged against Sanders, it’s better because the DNC ensured that the most qualified candidate won!
I suppose it’s just stupid luck that it happens to be the candidate you support, huh?
So let me get this straight, it’s a-ok if Hillary won, even if it’s possible that it’s likely rigged, (almost certainly, actually. The evidence is pretty strong) because the most qualified candidate won.
So the corruption in the DNC is just fine because the end result was what you wanted. I get it. By hook or crook. You got your nominee. So it’s cool, nothing to see here…damn Russians (maybe).
1 Like
So far, the leaks reveal that the DNC weren’t as impartial as they claimed to be.
AFAIK, there has been nothing to support the claim that the DNC actively manipulated the polls or did anything to actually make Clinton the nominee by subverting the primaries and/or effectively rendering them irrelevant.
It makes the DNC look bad and probably enrages Sanders, but I’m not sure why you would consider this corruption.
These were private e-mails. This is basically Russia revealing gossip that you would probably see in any office. I’m willing to bet my life savings that the RNC has a bunch e-mails that say the same thing about Trump.
Trump could NEVER be the actual Republican nominee.
No siree.
…
Fuck, I’m actually scared right now.
1 Like
Apparently Hillary Clinton didn’t seem to share your concern, otherwise she would have been certain her emails were secure. People are clutching their pearls over Trump’s comment about Russian hackers, what people should be even more worried about it Hillary’s lack of commitment to make sure our doings in America remain safe.
I honestly don’t know how any of you can consider Trump the lesser of two evils anymore.
Seriously… If it was ANYONE other than Clinton Trump would have been thrown to the curb by the RNC and actual Republicans (mind you, I think the populist sentiment that got Trump to victory actually agrees with him on the following, but they’re not really Republicans in ideology so who cares) the moment he said he’d be willing to abandon NATO and our allies.
This doesn’t even have anything to do with neo-cons and such- The man is literally willing to cut off foreign relations and give free reign to Russia and China.
The lot of you hate on Obama for being weak against Russia and China. MAny of you raged when Obama and the Democrats started to weaken support for Israel. Why on Earth aren’t you folks getting incredibly upset about Trump and his foreign policy statements?
I really don’t get it anymore.
What the fuck is going on?
2 Likes
Now magick…
Shame on you…
Why would the GOP generate ANYTHING negative…e-mails or otherwise…about their most beloved candidate since Reagan?
2 Likes
Uh… if you’ve even read through a few posts on this thread you would pretty clearly know that the actual conservatives are pretty furious about Trumps proposed foreign policy.
2 Likes
Sorry; I haven’t paid attention to this thread in a while.
Haha that explains it, scroll up a little plenty of (justified) ranting going on…
And this seems to be a bit more than intra party gossip, although I agree that it’s not like HRC literally bought votes. But the funneling of DNC funds intended for state elections to HRC’s primary campaign seems like it should qualify as a campaign finance violation.
At the end of the day though this only buys one a bigger microphone, it’s up to us the voters to make an informed decision on who we cast our ballot for. It gets old hearing all these people rant about money’s influence in politics when people are too lazy to educate themselves or for that matter even go out and vote.
[quote=“sig805, post:737, topic:218984, full:true”]
I forgot about this one.
Because of the issues I can’t support either, and am finding that Gary Johnson is a lot closer than what they represent. Third party is not how I would traditionally support, but I refuse to support the “crook and buffoon”.
1 Like
So you think Trump is some mindless automaton blindly following the direction of his Kremlin influenced campaign manager?
This is cute and all, but I think it’s hilarious you think this is the first time some foreign country was involved in a nation’s political sovereignty, directly or not, ours or not.
The safe assumption is the shit leaking into the “press” isn’t the whole story, by a long shot, and that the DNC emails are only a fraction of the actual events… And likely a diversion from some larger deception going on.
I’m really impressed that such rational and intelligent people have fallen so desperately hard upon the hook given the “but Russia” bait.
This is a common refuge of intellectually dishonest debaters who have been beaten.
Side A marshals the evidence. Evidence, fact, consensus. IP numbers. Quotations in the public record. Names and dates. (Aside: does it occur to you that you are not working with this kind of material?)
Side B ignores the evidence, or tries feebly and impotently to resist it before giving up and ignoring it. Next, side B sarcastically restates, as a question, a hyperbolized reformulation of side A’s claim. So you really think…
That’s the last step. It’s over. You lost. Maybe some new evidence emerges to alter the facts and conclusions. There are still dots to connect as it is. But the picture is coming into focus, and as of now you have failed to blind anybody to what it depicts.