El Presidente Trump

Christy42 · 12-12-2016 02:41PM

oik wrote: »

Only time will tell. The CIA by it's very nature is a secretive organisation and one can only guess what their angle is, but they have a track record and it's more likely that the track record continues then that it doesn't.

Interesting how the Democrats tune has changed on the possibility of a rigged election.

They've already claimed it's impossible to rug so now when they say it was rigged for Trump no one believes them

He has really done a number on them. Their credibility among independents must be approaching single digits at this stage.

They have also told the truth in the past. Merely their costly mistake/lie is what sticks in people's minds. As has been pointed there are a few places saying this right now as well.

No one said it was rigged. Interfered with there is a difference. Rigged would suggest some manual illegal work to change the votes/numbers who voted (like Trump's baseless claim of illegal immigrants voting or the investigation into hacking machines which turned up nothing from the Greens). Interfered with is a different matter and means they released biased info or covertly went after one party. More like Trump's claim of the biased media really.

Jelle1880 · 12-12-2016 02:47PM

oik wrote: »

Lefties on the same side as McCain and Graham in relation to foreign policy. Hence, full circle.

Did you even read the article you posted? They say they have no hard evidence, only circumstantial and they haven't even told us what that circumstantial evidence is. Besides it's only the news media that has been reporting this. No official source has gone on record. If you want to believe "sources" go right ahead, I'll continue to stand back and laugh.

You seem to be convinced that agreeing with McCain and Graham on this issue means that we agree with them on everything.
Obviously that's nonsense, but I'm sure it helps with your idea of 'lefties' or some other nonsense.

There's a reason why they are asking for this not to be turned into a partisan issue.

I'll repeat myself: If you do away with everything as lies then there is no way to discuss with you.
Just keep having faith in the great leader who has a long history of lying and deceiving people, I'm sure it'll work out in the end.

oik · 12-12-2016 02:48PM

Christy42 wrote: »

They have also told the truth in the past. Merely their costly mistake/lie is what sticks in people's minds. As has been pointed there are a few places saying this right now as well.

No one said it was rigged. Interfered with there is a difference. Rigged would suggest some manual illegal work to change the votes/numbers who voted (like Trump's baseless claim of illegal immigrants voting or the investigation into hacking machines which turned up nothing from the Greens). Interfered with is a different matter and means they released biased info or covertly went after one party. More like Trump's claim of the biased media really.

Well the Russians probably did target Hillary but why would the American voter be upset by that? All that happened is that the voter had more information to base their decision on. If the information was false there would be an issue but since it was obviously all genuine where is the problem?

This is no different to what America does in Russia. They back prodemocratic groups. Putin backs antiglobalists.

oik · 12-12-2016 02:49PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

You seem to be convinced that agreeing with McCain and Graham on this issue means that we agree with them on everything.
Obviously that's nonsense, but I'm sure it helps with your idea of 'lefties' or some other nonsense.

There's a reason why they are asking for this not to be turned into a partisan issue.

I'll repeat myself: If you do away with everything as lies then there is no way to discuss with you.
Just keep having faith in the great leader who has a long history of lying and deceiving people, I'm sure it'll work out in the end.

edit: Is this 'official' enough for you ?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-illinois-republican-party-email-hack-met-1212-20161211-story.html

I remember why I had you on ignore.

Jelle1880 · 12-12-2016 02:52PM

oik wrote: »

I remember why I had you on ignore.

Feel free to put me back on it then.

On second thought, let me do it right now from my end, you add absolutely nothing to this thread.

Christy42 · 12-12-2016 03:43PM

oik wrote: »

Well the Russians probably did target Hillary but why would the American voter be upset by that? All that happened is that the voter had more information to base their decision on. If the information was false there would be an issue but since it was obviously all genuine where is the problem?

This is no different to what America does in Russia. They back prodemocratic groups. Putin backs antiglobalists.

A second ago you were saying the CIA were lying trying to push war and now you say they are probably correct in the claims they have made.

oik · 12-12-2016 03:57PM

Christy42 wrote: »

A second ago you were saying the CIA were lying trying to push war and now you say they are probably correct in the claims they have made.

Well the CIA haven't actually said anything. An "alleged" "source" within the CIA "supposedly" said it to WaPo which tells us that at a minimum there is a faction or individual within the CIA who wants to delegitimise Trump or poison the well with Russia.

The job of the CIA is human intelligence. If anyone would be investigating the source of the hacks it would be the NSA.

As for whether Putin would want to hack Clinton's emails I think it's obvious that he would but wanting to and actually succeeding is another thing. Based on what we know publicly there's more evidence to suggest it was Seth Rich who leaked the DNC emails not Russian hackers. That doesn't mean Russian hackers didn't dig up some info, but the Guccifer leaks were nothing so it seems unlikely they found anything good. The Podesta emails were hacked once by an unknown source and a second time by someone on 4chan. So to try and pin this all on Russia is suspect in itself. And let's not pretend that the US isn't hacking Russia's communications and trying their best to undermine Putin. This is what cyberwarfare is.

What I find strange is that the release of information is considered interference in an election. No where in the western world is this the case. No one ever accused the News of the World of tampering with elections for hacking the phones of politicians. It's a bizarre double standard that has just been introduced conveniently enough to delegitimse the antigloballist candidate.

ebbsy · 12-12-2016 05:06PM

So a court has blocked Jill Stein's stupid attempt to have a recount in Pennsylvania, which was nothing more than an attempt to prevent the state from certifying its vote before the deadline, which I believe is tomorrow.

3 attempted recounts, 2 which never happened, and millions of donations spent on lawyers fees.

This woman needs to be investigated.

Christy42 · 12-12-2016 05:37PM

oik wrote: »

Well the CIA haven't actually said anything. An "alleged" "source" within the CIA "supposedly" said it to WaPo which tells us that at a minimum there is a faction or individual within the CIA who wants to delegitimise Trump or poison the well with Russia.

The job of the CIA is human intelligence. If anyone would be investigating the source of the hacks it would be the NSA.

As for whether Putin would want to hack Clinton's emails I think it's obvious that he would but wanting to and actually succeeding is another thing. Based on what we know publicly there's more evidence to suggest it was Seth Rich who leaked the DNC emails not Russian hackers. That doesn't mean Russian hackers didn't dig up some info, but the Guccifer leaks were nothing so it seems unlikely they found anything good. The Podesta emails were hacked once by an unknown source and a second time by someone on 4chan. So to try and pin this all on Russia is suspect in itself. And let's not pretend that the US isn't hacking Russia's communications and trying their best to undermine Putin. This is what cyberwarfare is.

What I find strange is that the release of information is considered interference in an election. No where in the western world is this the case. No one ever accused the News of the World of tampering with elections for hacking the phones of politicians. It's a bizarre double standard that has just been introduced conveniently enough to delegitimse the antigloballist candidate.

I am pretty sure Morgan has had issues with phone tapping or was he gone at that point? Anyway the paper had issues when people found out what you were doing.

Russia should not have that information in the first place. Second if you really thought more information was good you would have called for the release of emails relating to the Republican campaign. Either all or none is how it should work for fairness sake. Who gets discredited should not be decided by a foreign power. Trump's supporters got annoyed when they thought the media only dealt with one side. Now a foreign military power with actual foreign policy of their own actually only releases from side (remember cnn et al did deal somewhat with emails etc and Trump did have so many more scandals) and there is no issue at all. (Last statement should be taken as if Russia did it since I will be called on it otherwise - pity Trump hasn't been held to that standard by them).

If random hackers could the info it seems likely Russia could (if they tried).

Igotadose · 12-12-2016 05:59PM

Leading senators call for investigation into the alleged Russian cyberespionage:http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/press-releases/mccain-graham-schumer-reed-joint-statement-on-reports-that-russia-interfered-with-the-2016-election

About time they got around to this.

HellSquirrel · 12-12-2016 07:24PM

oik wrote: »

What I find strange is that the release of information is considered interference in an election. No where in the western world is this the case. No one ever accused the News of the World of tampering with elections for hacking the phones of politicians. It's a bizarre double standard that has just been introduced conveniently enough to delegitimse the antigloballist candidate.

"What I find strange is that the covert hacking of party emails, the potential for tampering, and the partisan releasing of information against one side by a semi-hostile foreign power is considered interference in an election. Nowhere in the western world is this the case."
Indeed. Shocking altogether.

And good heavens, did you miss the ****storm connected with the News of the World getting into people's phones, politicians or not? It's connected to this funny concept called privacy, and also honour. It's not a bizarre double standard at all, it's common decency.

Fleawuss · 12-12-2016 07:27PM

A Little Pony wrote: »

I have no evidence that a tea pot is flying around mars. You make the claim, some sort of evidence or source would be nice.

I didn't. You put forward your criteria for proof. Then you changed your tune.

There's nothing wrong with being a Trump fanatic. But it's good to admit that for you it's Trump right or wrong.

Personally I think he's an idiot, a reprehensible human being, a danger to climate change management, a charlatan and a stooge. Which is not to say that he won't do something positive.

MadYaker · 12-12-2016 08:00PM

if the trump enthusiasts here are so sure there's no real evidence of Russian involvement then surely they would support a bipartisan congressional investigation to prove them right

A Little Pony · 12-12-2016 08:01PM

Jelle1880 wrote: »

ebbsy wrote: »

He can't back it up because it's bull****.

Just like the Women coming forward but have no evidence that Trump assaulted them (would love to see their bank balances), or the claims that Clinton won the nomination fairly. Where are these stories in the media ?

Did you buy into the whole 'Bill Clinton raped women' stuff during the election campaign ?

A Little Pony wrote: »

No evidence that Russia tried to interfere in the election at all. Do not trust the CIA, the same institution which helped America go to war in Vietnam on a lie. Iraq on a lie.

Can we trust the 3 independent organisations that have absolutely no ties to the CIA/NSA/... who all came to the exact same conclusion ?

I mean, I know it must be super easy to just do away with anything you don't like as lies or propaganda, unfortunately the real world doesn't work like that.

On another note, it's fun to see China smacking him down in public. They flew a goddamn nuke over the South China Sea in response to him.

edit: I just read he said he doesn't need daily intel briefings since he is 'a smart man' (his words). 2 years ago he complained about Obama not getting daily intel briefings.

The next President won't be a little bitch like Obama. China won't mess about with Trump, what can they do militarily, America would annihilate them.

Arcade_Tryer · 12-12-2016 08:10PM

MadYaker wrote: »

if the trump enthusiasts here are so sure there's no real evidence of Russian involvement then surely they would support a bipartisan congressional investigation to prove them right

They are sure of everything. That's the problem.

Cannot engage with or expect intellectual honesty from fanatics.

Cheerful Spring · 12-12-2016 08:15PM

A Little Pony wrote: »

The next President won't be a little bitch like Obama. China won't mess about with Trump, what can they do militarily, America would annihilate them.

The Chinese have never been afraid to start a war against a Superpower remember the Korean War. And, just this weekend the Chinese starting flying nuclear bombers over the China South Seas as a warning to Trump not to stir the pot.

A Little Pony · 12-12-2016 08:17PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

A Little Pony wrote: »

The next President won't be a little bitch like Obama. China won't mess about with Trump, what can they do militarily, America would annihilate them.

The Chinese have never been afraid to start a war against a Superpower remember the Korean War. And, just this weekend the Chinese starting flying nuclear bombers over the China South Seas as a warning to Trump not to stir the pot.

Let them, they will do nuttin as Conor McGregor says.

Cheerful Spring · 12-12-2016 08:33PM

A Little Pony wrote: »

Let them, they will do nuttin as Conor McGregor says.

The Chinese have got some of the best missiles systems today and, they even got missiles that can take out an aircraft carrier. They have modern subs and bombers that carry nuclear warheads that can hit American cities. They would be able to field more men then the United States to fight..The Soldier weaponry is modern and Chinese army is well trained. Tanks and planes are being updated every year. The Chinese would inflict heavy damage and America can not win a nuclear war.

Professor Moriarty · 12-12-2016 08:40PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The Chinese have got some of the best missiles systems today and, they even got missiles that can take out an aircraft carrier. They have modern subs and bombers that carry nuclear warheads that can hit American cities. They would be able to field more men then the United States to fight..The Soldier weaponry is modern and Chinese army is well trained. Tanks and planes are being updated every year. The Chinese would inflict heavy damage and America can not win a nuclear war.

American defence systems are very advanced and they claim that they could knock out China's missiles within minutes of launch. This includes the DF41 which is China's flagship missile. Having said that, nobody wins a nuclear war.

Cheerful Spring · 12-12-2016 08:40PM

Its bull not a fan of Trump, but lets be real the people who voted for him where born in the United States. How would the Russia influenced 50 million + Americans to vote Trump?

ebbsy · 12-12-2016 08:42PM

MadYaker wrote: »

if the trump enthusiasts here are so sure there's no real evidence of Russian involvement then surely they would support a bipartisan congressional investigation to prove them right

Considering the way Vlad has ran rings around the Usa I won't be expecting much.

It's only a smokescreen to hide the Democratic failures by the way.

Cheerful Spring · 12-12-2016 09:04PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

American defence systems are very advanced and they claim that they could knock out China's missiles within minutes of launch. This includes the DF41 which is China's flagship missile. Having said that, nobody wins a nuclear war.

The Americans could not stop a Chinese army with no tanks or aircraft during the Korean war and they were forced out of Vietnam after a 8 year battle with them. The Last time America faced a legitimate military power was Germany in the 40s and even then they had the UK and Russia as allies helping them. Beating an Iraqi army who fled is not a huge achievement. And lets remember 9/11 it took them 1 to 2 hours to figure out there was a terrorist attack underway. The Chinese missiles would reach USA targets in less then 5 minutes if they used Submarines.

KingBrian2 · 12-12-2016 09:09PM

Geert Wilders had more influence on Trump getting elected and the situation in Egypt, Libya and Iraq than any hacking from the Kremlin. Talk about McCarthyism.:pac:

Professor Moriarty · 12-12-2016 09:15PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

The Americans could not stop a Chinese army with no tanks or aircraft during the Korean war and they were forced out of Vietnam after a 8 year battle with them. The Last time America faced a legitimate military power was Germany in the 40s and even then they had the UK and Russia as allies helping them. Beating an Iraqi army who fled is not a huge achievement. And lets remember 9/11 it took them 1 to 2 hours to figure out there was a terrorist attack underway. The Chinese missiles would reach USA targets in less then 5 minutes if they used Submarines.

Korea, Vietnam and Iraq were all fought thousands of miles away from the US and 9/11 was a terrorism. Anyway, it won't be a direct land war, it will be a proxy war with some sabre rattling thrown in.

The US wouldn't allow the subs get within striking distance if there was a possibility of a strike. You must remember that if matters escalated to nuclear war between them, then we would all die.

Cheerful Spring · 12-12-2016 09:21PM

MadYaker wrote: »

if the trump enthusiasts here are so sure there's no real evidence of Russian involvement then surely they would support a bipartisan congressional investigation to prove them right

Was not the FBI who reopened the email investigation before the election that some say lost her the election? And so what if the Russians hacked hilary emails she did the wrong was not Russia.

Trump actually got less votes then Romney and still won the electoral college vote and nobody talks about it but hilary got 6 million less votes then Obama in 2012. She lost in states that lost manufacturing jobs in recent years. Voters in Michigan for example voted for Trump because he promised (even if he don't do in the future) cut the corporation tax and end trade deals and bring back those jobs. Hilary was more of the same for people living in Michigan and she lost because of it.

Cheerful Spring · 12-12-2016 09:29PM

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Korea, Vietnam and Iraq were all fought thousands of miles away from the US and 9/11 was a terrorism. Anyway, it won't be a direct land war, it will be a proxy war with some sabre rattling thrown in.

The US wouldn't allow the subs get within striking distance if there was a possibility of a strike. You must remember that if matters escalated to nuclear war between them, then we would all die.

Yes but non of them countries where economic or military powerhouses. To take on the Chinese today would be a different kind of war for America. Trump is an idiot he could start a war with China easily because hes a tough guy who likes to have hes own way. The Chinese have their own agendas so i see a rocky relationship ahead. Hes not even in office yet and the Chinese are worried.

Professor Moriarty · 12-12-2016 09:35PM

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Yes but non of them countries where economic or military powerhouses. To take on the Chinese today would be a different kind of war for America. Trump is an idiot he could start a war with China easily because hes a tough guy who likes to have hes own way. The Chinese have their own agendas so i see a rocky relationship ahead. Hes not even in office yet and the Chinese are worried.

I agree. He's an egotistical clown with all the diplomatic skills of a bull in a (ahem) china shop. He shouldn't be put in charge of a cat let alone a country. But we are where we are, as someone once said.

ebbsy · 12-12-2016 09:48PM

The Donald is running rings around everyone.

SeanW · 12-12-2016 10:21PM

HellSquirrel wrote: »

Yeah, but if NASA said "teapot from lost shuttle found orbiting earth with terrestrial debris" would you said "Rubbish! There are no teapots in space! What has NASA done that I should trust them?!" people might be inclined to suspect you have a whole hive of bees in your bonnet.

Which, tbh, you come across as having.

Did NASA start the heroin epidemic? Launch Al-Quaeda? Screw up on 9/11? Assure us there were WMDs in Iraq?

HellSquirrel · 12-12-2016 10:32PM

SeanW wrote: »

Did NASA start the heroin epidemic? Launch Al-Quaeda? Screw up on 9/11? Assure us there were WMDs in Iraq?

They've also gotten a lot of things right, or else we'd have heard about it. Do you really think that the CIA would would be the name it is in American counter-terrorism if it was utterly incompetent? It is also not beyond belief that there are a few agencies in the US that aren't as madly involved in the presidential turmoil and are actually doing their jobs. As things stand, I reckon there's reason to be suspicious of the FBI being neutral, but there's no evidence against the CIA yet that they're not acting like rational people.

I don't quite understand why Russia is being treated as being obviously telling the truth and the CIA lying as a matter of course though. It's not like Russia has nothing to gain from lying as well. And this does fit Russian tactics pretty thoroughly. There appears to be far more evidence that Russia is involved than wasn't, and for people to so blindly claim that there is absolutely no way that Russia could be involved is getting to the stage of silly. Hell, I couldn't claim that -Canada- didn't do it with the level of blind faith that some are showing.

El Presidente Trump

Comments