Really? I don’t know much about Weld, admittedly.
VP picks aren’t that influential for me, though.
Wait, the email was time-stamped May 6, no? Unless I read that wrong, the email is not the proof of racism that Breitbart is fantasizing it to be, but rather an obvious allusion to a characteristically and fucking numbingly buffoonish public comment/act by Trump (and an attempt to capitalize on his dull-eyed, slack-jawed laziness). Much of the “outrage” over the emails falls into this category: drastically overblown by the far-right.
But if your theory were true, this would be evidence of overt collusion by Trump with what appears to be GRU on a foreign mil-intel operation within American borders. He would go to prison for the rest of his life.
Because he has the worng letter next to his name, yes.
No clue. Like I said, wild speculation.
Absolutely impossible to say, I think. Too many wild cards. Hillary will likely get a bounce from the convention, but what about the next damning secret unleashed via Wikileaks or Russia? What about the pending investigation of the Clinton Foundation? I think there’s a lot left out there to be unloaded.
Same with Trump. What happens if someone leaks his tax returns? What off he says something heinous and disqualifying?
What if Johnson makes the debate stage by polling well enough? That could be a very big deal.
That’s ludicrous. This would not be some politicized “scandal.” It would be treason. I mean, fuck.
Anyway, it doesn’t matter, I just checked, the email is May 6. They were referring to Trump’s unbelievably stupid tweet.
Edited because I can’t believe what I’m reading on this board.
As uncertain an election as we’ve had in a long time (though barring surprises I think Clinton has it, particularly after the debates). There is a new layer of crazy added every day, and there is no way to know how the rest of it might play out. Are there some really damaging Clinton emails pending release? But if they do come from the GRU, does that hurt Trump, in that it pretty much represents an (illegally carried out) endorsement of him by someone who wants us diminished? Does an ISIL soldier sneak across the Mexican border and carry out a terror attack on October 20th? Does Trump continue to make appallingly stupid and incoherent policy proposals?
It almost seems more likely than not that something big is yet to come.
1 Like
You’re really stuck on the idea Trump is in cahoots with Russia aren’t you.
He could have had access to the emails without the leak. Or is the idea of RNC “agents” inside the DNC that wild and crazy you’ll rally on and on about conspiracy theory again?
But aside, does receiving information from a data breach constitute treason?
Likely yes, there are going to be much more significant emails coming forward. Will they actually hurt her? No, not really.
Even if they don’t, they will. You know what I’m saying 
Will be blamed on the NRA. Where have you been man?
100% chance of occurrence.
What does everyone think about the odds that either Clinton or Trump may not actually serve even a 4 year term? Think about where we likely will be in 2018, economy will likely be in a heavy recession, foreign affairs will likely be a mess, more terrorist attacks and the legislature will have shifted to the opposing party. Both candidates will be dogged with enough scandal to kick it off and both candidates already have extremely low approval ratings, just wait until they’ve had a couple years in office to really screw themselves.
I really do hopes he makes that stage. He is the head of a legitimate party and should be heard. How close is he? Last I checked he really wasn’t that far off.
Is there a way for me to cast a vote for him to make it to the debates?
1 Like
Agreed. Conventional politics is out the window. Who cares about an October Surprise for one candidate when a day later the other candidate will have or say something worse?
And good point about any bombs dropped by Russia - every damaging item for Clinton can be offset in part or in whole by tying the action to Trump and his flirtations with a hostile foreign power.
2 Likes
I believe it’s driven by polling (someone correct me if I am wrong), so always, always, always say he’s your guy in a poll.
Johnson needs to make that stage. In the worst way.
1 Like
Not interested in debating his intelligence, already done it.
Here’s the answer:
[quote=“countingbeans, post:791, topic:218984”]
You’re really stuck on the idea Trump is in cahoots with Russia aren’t you.[/quote]
No, obviously. As I have many times said (and will surely have to keep saying), I don’t believe that to be the case, and it’s thus a shameless straw man. What I do believe is a matter of record in this thread (search for words like “cretin” and “stooge”), and do note that nobody has made the slightest substantive attempt to refute it, or even to begin to question it on grounds that could be mistaken but momentarily as evidential.
We were, however, discussing YOUR hypothetical in which Trump got the emails ahead of time and told nobody.
[Quote]
He could have had access to the emails without the leak. Or is the idea of RNC “agents” inside the DNC that wild and crazy you’ll rally on and on about conspiracy theory again?[/quote]
Could have, but since – and I can’t stress enough that the following is the case regardless of empty, fact-free innuendo designed to question it – the available evidence points compellingly (and via various independent routes) to and only to FSB/GRU, we would need…oh, you know…the SLIGHTEST reason to believe that the same emails stolen by the Russians were also stolen by “RNC agents” (and what a coincidence that would be). We have learned throughout this conversation that no such or comparable reason is forthcoming via this discussion. The facts as they presently exist are just what they are, no more and no less.
So my assumption was that you were proposing a hypothetical in which Trump got the leak from the hackers we know about. If I assumed wrong, then your scenario was simply that much less approximate of reality, and that much farther-fetched.
It would be knowledge of and involvement in a foreign military-intelligence agency’s direct (and, obviously, illegal) subversion of an American election. You tell me.
Don’t forget they’re both pretty old…
Ironically, I just read that article… But I appreciate it. I wish they had an online poll for who should be included in the debates.
Nevertheless, if I manage to get to a poll, I just may throw my weight at Gary to get him on that stage. I believe he deserves to be.
While I can’t specifically speak for Johnson on this issue it does seem that libertarians have been shifting their views on abortion recently due to how the debate has shifted. Previously the abortion debate was mostly framed around the religious right viewing it as a morally wrong decision. I would say that over the last 5 years or so it has rightly shifted to the debate over whether an unborn child is an actual person. I suspect the improevents in ultrasounds and improved viability of premature births will continue to help push this argument. Personally I would actually much prefer a candidate that examines the personhood of an unborn child over one that espouses pro life views on religious groounds.
Not to mention the more sinical possibility, extremists are pretty worked up on both sides more so than when Obama was elected. There could very well be another Oswald lurking out there…