Here's the thing though I really really really don't care for Trump. I just think this Russia thing is a lot of bitching about nothing, in fact a lot of bitching about what our CIA has done across the world to both foe and friend for years. And this is important because the continued media coverage is emboldening Trump's supporters (and in turn GOP leaning voters) and to be honest they aren't wrong. It is Whitewater, Halliburton, Obama's birth certificate... but some of you guys all so left leaning that you think it's different. It's not. Nothing will come of it, nothing. Why show the magazine cover? Because this is what it is like when we really don't care. This is what it is like when (ironically) Clinton's admin meddles in foreign elections. It's only different because you guys are mad about the election and think Russia (and not a shitty candidate who screwed over Bernie Sanders) is why you lost.

You have a lot of stuff going on in that post. Let me offer a few reactions.

1. On the CIA having done this stuff in other countries. Sure, of course. I think a freeway analogy is best. When I'm in a lane and you're in the lane that merges in to it and you cut me off, I'm going to honk at you because you cut me off. If I'm the one merging and I stay in the merging lane an extra 20 or 30 cars and then merge in, that's just good driving.

2. I think you're creating a false parallel on Whitewater, Haliburton and the birth certificate. Maybe Whitewater is comparable, and I'll get back to that in a second, but in the case of Obama's birth certificate, we didn't have evidence of a meeting with Michelle Obama and an emissary of the Kenyan government talking about how to fix Obama's birth certificate. It was wholly made up. Halliburton too I believe was largely political.

In Whitewater, where there was some evidence of some shady activity, whether it was known to HRC or not, we had hearings and investigations and a special procecutor and ultimately an impeachment based on a lie about an extramarital affair. We're so much beyond that, with more direct evidence of improper behavior, it's silly.

We've already had what 3 plea agreements and more than a dozen indictments in the Mueller investigation. Whether and to what extent people in the Trump campaign knew about what was going on, whether they were just being played too or whether they had bad intent, I think remains very much up in the air. And worth investigating.

Indeed. It's far more like, say, Iran Contra than it is to Whitewater or Watergate. It may end up changing nothing as far as who is President, but there is definitely something there.

And I never thought I'd see the day where people would say, well the CIA fucked with other country's elections, so turnabout is fair play. It's almost akin to saying, well the CIA killed folks and helped leaders set up death camps in other countries, so 9/11 is fair play (to be fair, some folks actually did say that and got crucified for it).

Ya, even assuming the U.S. has meddled in elections, I STILL don't want Russians flooding social media with bullshit and trying to rig voting machines. I wasn't personally involved in the former so I think it's OK for me to not be happy with the latter.

The "it" you are referring to is impeachment/censure? If so, this is such a brilliant statement. It can build the foundation for re-election.

Which I think is the bigger issue. How much damage needs to be done that will trump self interest? The Russia and wiki means, so far, seems to justify Republican being in control end.

I could see if you wanted to discuss how the US is hypocritical in interfering with other elections, but don't want interference in their own. That would be an interesting topic to debate. Instead, as is usual for you, you tried to make this about some hypocritical liberal bias in the media about two things that aren't the same at all. One situation involves interference in another country's election and the other situation involves interference in our own. For your comparison to make any sense, you'd have to come up with evidence of the media not caring that another country helped Obama or Clinton win.


Where's your backing for this bolded claim? If anything, there's significant evidence to the contrary.



I would love to hear the argument about how the birth certificate is similar to the Russian investigation. That's got to be one of the most ridiculous claims I've ever seen on this board. And to top it off, you finish with an ad hominem attack on the reasons why we think it's different.

Agreed. I think the proper response to the CIA has meddled is to be against the CIA meddling ever again and apologize for the past, not to say that allows for a free-for-all.

We have spies all over the world and we're still going to get pissed and kick spies out of our country when they're discovered. That's the very nature of foreign policy.

The same goes for elections. We're going to interfere to an extent and we can expect the same. However, there are lines that are crossed when it's extensive enough that you get caught as the Russians did.

I think it's also willful ignorance to claim nothing is coming of the Russian investigation when we've already had more than a dozen indictments, multiple guilty pleas, and it appears at least 4 foreign agents were working for the Trump campaign in some capacity.

.

And not that it matters, but how much do you want to bet he didn't even get far enough to see which side of the cleverly-worded "Clinton administration" political advisers fell on who helped Yeltsin win?

From a long piece by Josh Marshall on the Russia investigation:


https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog...tics-are-wrong

Part of it was actually Clinton himself using the IMF Fund. Of course this was reported by the very conservative LA Times so maybe I should consider the source?

The U.S. is no stranger to interfering in the elections of other countries

Geez even when I am on your side you find a way to get mad at my posts. I said this is basically the fire Trump and his supporters thrive on. Ignore all you want, warning signs were ignored leading up to the election also.

Comservatives are unhappy with twitter after they lose followers due to Twitter banned some bots:

Attention Required! | Cloudflare

Trump's notes with "I hear you" written on it could only be funnier if Kang or Kodos bust out of him as part of a Simpsons' Halloween special.

We should all send thoughts and prayers for the loss of those bots.

So Marco Rubio who I give a lot of credit to for standing up and facing all that mostly negative emotion towards him at the CNN town hall on gun control last night. Pledged to have a more open mind about the issue in the future, etc. Well the future didn't last very long:

Marco Rubio‏Verified account @marcorubio

Banning all semi-auto weapons may have been popular with the audience at #CNNTownHall, but it is a position well outside the mainstream

I hope the mainstream shows him the error of his ways should he run for President again or re-election.

I think this is big for several reasons. It's not like the Clinton campaign didn't have talks with the Russians either. If she won, the shoe would be on the other foot (I think the Russians don't care who won, they just want to destabilize us).

A similar situation happened in the 2000 election, people were complaining that Gore would have had enough votes to win had the recounts gone on, but were we supposed to just stop the recounts when Gore had enough votes to win?

If I had to pick between how to react to an election defeat, I would much rather see both parties follow the Republican lead after 2008/12, because if you do not like the obstruction you can vote them out. The Democrat response in 2000 and 2016 I believe is more detrimental in the long term because it weakens our faith in the overall system.

Trump Praises NRA as It Mounts Offensive Against Gun Measures

as usual, his strategy is to agree with everybody. We are likely a day or three from there being "both sides to be blamed" in school shootings.

If I recall correctly, it was the Bush team that appealed to the Supreme Court after the Florida Supreme Court ruled that all votes should be recounted.

Also, I missed when HRC appointed independent counsel from her role as private citizen to investigate Russian involvement in the election as a means of protest.

I also fail to see how these two are comparable in the least.

Do you honestly believe that the entire investigation into Russian inference in the campaign is all a Democrat response because Trump won?

What about those of us who just want the truth? The how and result of the how? I honestly don't know a single person who thinks the election should be invalidated. 20 years from now if the republicans ever did anything wrong they'll blame the Clintons as their reasoning. Get over them already.

I think that most of these people actually do. Sometimes I feel we as Americans live in two completely different reality narratives.

That ignores the language in Mueller's indictment which said that the Russian attempts were “operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump.”

My point is, and as I said I have been out of the country so I have not read everything, there was smoke on both sides of the Russian issue. I also believe that the Clinton Foundation was a lot of pay to play for when Clinton would get into the White House.

And regarding 20 years from now about going back to the Clintons that is besides the point. The reason their doings are being brought up now is that she was involved with the last election. Their past doings are relevant. I knew a lot from when he was AR governor and nothing Bill did since, or Hillary has either, has caused me to change my opinion that they are crooked and out only for themselves.

Trump was a poor candidate. He is the second worst I can remember. The problem was Hillary was the worst candidate and ran a poor campaign. Everyone speaks to her experience, which I liken to John Fox in the NFL. Yeah, he has coached, yeah he has done some good things, but I have always felt he has underperformed with the roster he was dealt.

Anybody who believes this is a fucking idiot.

If that is what it was, than how is what they did any different than a political PAC?

I am not endorsing that foreign governments should be involved in our elections, but if that is all this is about, why is this of paramount importance? Anyone with enough money and enough drive could impact it the same way. As someone else said, yes we need to figure out ways to shut this down, but this is not what was previously insinuated which was hacked voting machines, etc.

Looking at this, Rubio blew himself up when he tried to get in the mud with Trump. Cruz had too many enemies and was unlikable. Sanders? That I could see having some impact if he actually won the primary, but most of his support should have swung to Hillary. All that said, once it was down to Trump and Hillary, with the hand Hillary was dealt, she should have won going away.

Another way of looking at this, and talking about different narratives, is this a means of absolving Hillary responsibility for her electoral loss?

wut pic.twitter.com/nGeldmOOM2

— Gideon Resnick (@GideonResnick) February 22, 2018

Because it's a foreign country? Have we really reached the point where we're ok with foreign countries acting like PACs in our country?

Not to mention that Russia also engaged in hiring individuals to sway Facebook algorithms by spreading fake news (like the actual kind) and hacking DNC and RNC email servers. Which actually would probably be illegal for a PAC to do as well.


Insinuated by who? No one ever asserted this was the Russian government hacking voting machines to alter votes. It has always been that they have been using electronic infiltration to attempt to have an effect our election. This is the issue with biased reporting because some now think that people were asserting that the Russians hacked voting machines, and therefore manipulating algorithms on social media to spread lies and hacking email services is no big deal as a result.


To quote Butter here:


I mean Republicans have been blaming Hillary for everything under the sun for a while, so why not use her as a reason not to deal with foreign infiltration into a domestic election? Something that previous Republican administrations would have likely declared war over. I can't imagine Ronald Reagan being like, well we intervened in Iran's election, so fair play to the Soviets for doing it in ours.

Our intelligence agencies disagree.

Clinton scared them. What happened in Libya, Egypt, and Syria scare them to death. And her policies helped push those kind of revolutions.

Putin's biggest fear is being dragged out to the streets and killed like Gaddafi. He knows Clinton is a threat to him and Trump is not.

The Missouri governor has been indicted for Felony Invasion of Privacy.

Gov. Greitens indicted on felony invasion of privacy charge - KMOV.com

Family Values!

Ted Cruz said that the Democrats are the party of Lisa Simpson, who if I remember The Simpsons correctly was elected president and forced to deal with the massive budget crisis left by President Trump.

I expect he's well and truly screwed. I doubt they bring these charges if they don't have the pics and some sort of blackmailing message.

I though Ted Cruz loved The Simpsons

Ted Cruz Auditions For The Simpsons - YouTube

From a search I just ran:

voting machines hacked 2016 - Google Search

Which one of the top 5 is a alt-right news source? None. All of those were articles written, so yeah there were people talking about voting machines hacked.

Also, I think both campaigns should be investigated not just one, and I have said so for several weeks at least and posted that earlier in the thread. I also do believe the democrats are doing this to weaken Trump. This has been their MO the last two times they lost elections.

Again, I think we do need to prevent foreign powers from influencing the election, but the means these guys did so, we only have ourselves to blame. We need to educate ourselves and not rely on social media for our news sources. How would this be different from someone paying off an editorial writer in the days when print was big?

EDIT: My point about the PAC was, how were they acting any different from a PAC? Sure, they may have hacked the algorithms, but marketing firms try to take advantage of these to get their message across. The difference here was the efficiency, which would not have been effective had we been using our brains.

Three of those articles are about documented accusations of Russian attempts to infiltrate voting databases at the state level and one was a story proving that there was no hack of electronic voting systems in MI and WI. I'm not sure what your point is here.

Why should both campaigns be investigated when our intelligence agencies all agree that the Russians were trying to help the Trump campaign? What would you want investigated?

Funny you mention paying columnists, as that's exactly what the Bush admin got caught doing on at least three different occasions. But we aren't simply talking about paying opinion influencers. There was just a plea agreement where it was admitted that the Russian hackers were stealing IDs and routing money through those fake accounts. We already know crimes were committed and we aren't close to the end of the investigation.

Hillary Clinton has been the subject of what's basically a sexist Republican smear job since 1992. She never fit the mold of what a first lady should be like. She tried to use political capital to make the health care thing happen. No doubt that she and Bill both got into bed with the wrong people at times to get where they were. R's saw her ambition as a threat to traditional female roles, as she did things that were only reserved for men. Once that target was on her back, it never left.

Then came the NY residency, so she could pursue her own ambitions again. Damn right she wanted to be the first female president. She never would have worked for Obama if she didn't think that the experience wouldn't prepare her for to be President, or the race.

I never liked her, tbh, but I have to respect the efforts that she went to in order to pursue her ambitions. There isn't a single politician who has had to endure the level of political attention, investigation, founded and unfounded attacks, right down to punishment for trying to be like a man in a man's political world.

Any of us would have folded long before then. So instead of pointing to a long list of her (supposed; I'm still seeing meme's on facebook accusing the Clintons of murdering *new* people) transgressions, remember that it's been 23 years of unyielding, political, personal, sometimes sexist attacks from the right so they could keep flinging that dirt around.

If any of us had someone else (or another group) with essentially unlimited money to go around and dig up dirt, publish articles about why we suck, and call the police every time we broke the rules, we'd have given up long, long ago.

It's all about the Whataboutisms and making sure to point out there's always wrongdoing and bad people on both sides. Also, since every one of those intelligence agencies make mistakes, that gives you carte blanche to say they are wrong and/or biased whenever you please. The wonderful reality of 2018 :(

This exact thing makes all of us who have learned the scientific method in research, written research papers, sent stuff off for review, and ultimately been published freak out over.

It's like a 4th grader yelling at a high schooler that just because they both go to school that the 4th grader should get high school credit because isn't all school pretty much the same thing?

:banghead:

Y'all I'm dying, Manafort created an incriminating paper trail because he needed someone to help him convert a Word doc to PDF. pic.twitter.com/CTE4oV7zj0

— Susan Simpson (@TheViewFromLL2) February 22, 2018

Honest question, which Democrats are doing the investigating? It can’t be the senate or congressional committees because they are run by republicans. Is it FBI, and Muller/rosenstien? You would describe them as dems out to get trump? If so, funny how the exact people Hillary blames for costing her election are the same ones fulfilling the dems wishes...

Just like with Patriots fans.
;)

Trump is aware that these same video games and movies are also played internationally.

And the on again/off again negotiations with Gates is now on again it seems-at 2pm EST, he's pleading guilty to conspiracy against the US and lying to Mueller's investigation.

Yeah, but they probably have some kind of rating system for them over there.

"We want their best and brightest. Instead they're sending professional Overwatch players!"

Not sure where you are going with that. All movies here have ratings (G, PG, etc) and so do video games (E, E 10+, T, etc)

He was making fun of Trump's comments here...

Trump suggests rating system for movies, video games to curb youth violence | EW.com

I think the sarcasm of my original post didn’t come across which is why I was confused. :D