Re: The Russians and the 2016 Election PT II

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 12/10/2016, 11:56 pm

LooseGoose wrote:
Turtleneck wrote:

Who is blaming Republicans?

See if you notice a recurring theme here? People seem to be casting a fair amount of shit on the R's.

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:"Doesn't matter. Our team won. Whine some more stupid libs."

DWags wrote:Good luck convincing one supporter. They could be eating borscht getting paid in rubles wearing grey jump suits into work camps and they'd still be going home and celebrating 800 jobs saved for their comrades in Indiana.

GRR Spartan wrote:Conservative voters will be denying Trump's friendly attitudes towards Russia and deny that Russia could ever do anything to affect their vote. We see the same thing where there is evidence of Russian politics nfluencing the Brexit vote with faux news . But no U.K. Voter who helped ed approve Brexit will ever admit a Russian or any other country could affect their vote.

But I know you'll be down to your last breath telling whoever who will listen that enough Trump voters were well informed and immune to subtrafuge by Russia or any foreign power that would affect an national election in the US.

You know I thought the Trump campaign was in bed with Putin before the RNC convention and to date nothing has made me think I was wrong.

GRR Spartan wrote:The GOP leadership chose sdes and they sold out. Next time anyone talks to me about the US having free elections unencumbered by foreign interference I'll walk away. The GOP chose to accept the help of an authoritorian enemy of the US to win the 2016 election.

Nope not a SINGLE person in there blaming the R's.

And you really believe your own bullshit.

What I really don't see is ONE person condemning the man in charge of National Security. Do you?

You quoted me mocking Dude. Lol.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 8:33 am

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

See if you notice a recurring theme here? People seem to be casting a fair amount of shit on the R's.

Nope not a SINGLE person in there blaming the R's.

And you really believe your own bullshit.

What I really don't see is ONE person condemning the man in charge of National Security. Do you?

You quoted me mocking Dude. Lol.

Dude's not Russian, poor guy.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 9:46 am

Golly Fucking Gee - the walkback begins. Any of you can begin to lower your froth levels at any time.

CIA said one thing. FBI said another. One got its story out first, reported as hard fact - not so fast my friend.

Oh and Steve darling? Washington Post link ok with you or not credible?

FBI and CIA give differing accounts to lawmakers on Russia’s motives in 2016 hacks

Sitting before the House Intelligence Committee was a senior FBI counterintelligence official. The question the Republicans and Democrats in attendance wanted answered was whether the bureau concurred with the conclusions the CIA had just shared with senators that Russia “quite” clearly intended to help Republican Donald Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton and clinch the White House.

For the Democrats in the room, the FBI’s response was frustrating — even shocking.

The FBI official’s remarks to the lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee were, in comparison, “fuzzy” and “ambiguous,” suggesting to those in the room that the bureau and the agency weren’t on the same page, the official said.

The divergent messages from the CIA and the FBI put a spotlight on the difficulty faced by intelligence and law enforcement officials as they try to draw conclusions about the Kremlin’s motives for hacking Democratic Party emails during the 2016 race.

The FBI is not sold on the idea that Russia had a particular aim in its meddling. “There’s no question that [the Russians’] efforts went one way, but it’s not clear that they have a specific goal or mix of related goals,” said one U.S. official.

The murky nature of the assessments is maddening many lawmakers who are demanding answers about the Kremlin’s role in the presidential race.

As I've said before I wouldn't put 100% faith in the CIA given their track record.

by **DWags** 12/11/2016, 9:48 am

The Russians and the 2016 Election PT II - Page 3 502811600

Well, we know the FBI is credible. Especially when it comes to the election.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 12/11/2016, 9:49 am

LooseGoose wrote:
Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

You quoted me mocking Dude. Lol.

Dude's not Russian, poor guy.

Dude has said many times he's not a Republican.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 10:10 am

DWags wrote:

Well, we know the FBI is credible. Especially when it comes to the election.

And I'll wait for OTPT's "tribal" chiding.....but it's not like the Dems have ever done anything like this.

Ted Kennedy asked for Russia's help to beat Reagan in 1984.

And Steve? Before you dismiss the link you should confirm if the document is fake or not - pro tip: it's not.

Letter Details Kennedy Offer To USSR

TEXT OF KGB LETTER ON SENATOR TED KENNEDY
_________________________________________
Special Importance
Committee on State Security of the USSR
14.05. 1983 No. 1029 Ch/OV
Moscow

Regarding Senator Kennedy’s request to the General Secretary of the Communist Party Comrade Y.V. Andropov

Having conveyed Kennedy’s appeal to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Tunney also explained that Senator Kennedy has in the last few years actively made appearances to reduce the threat of war. Because he formally refused to partake in the election campaign of 1984, his speeches would be taken without prejudice as they are not tied to any campaign promises. Tunney remarked that the senator wants to run for president in 1988. At that time, he will be 56 and his personal problems, which could hinder his standing, will be resolved (Kennedy has just completed a divorce and plans to remarry in the near future). Taken together, Kennedy does not discount that during the 1984 campaign, the Democratic Party may officially turn to him to lead the fight against the Republicans and elect their candidate president. This would explain why he is convinced that none of the candidates today have a real chance at defeating Reagan.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 10:17 am

Oh....and even Glenn Greenwald isn't convinced. You guys keep frothing.

Anonymous Leaks to the WashPost About the CIA’s Russia Beliefs Are No Substitute for Evidence

THE WASHINGTON POST late Friday night published an explosive story that, in many ways, is classic American journalism of the worst sort: The key claims are based exclusively on the unverified assertions of anonymous officials, who in turn are disseminating their own claims about what the CIA purportedly believes, all based on evidence that remains completely secret.

Deep down in its article, the Post notes — rather critically — that “there were minor disagreements among intelligence officials about the agency’s assessment, in part because some questions remain unanswered.” Most importantly, the Post adds that “intelligence agencies do not have specific intelligence showing officials in the Kremlin ‘directing’ the identified individuals to pass the Democratic emails to WikiLeaks.” But the purpose of both anonymous leaks is to finger the Russian government for these hacks, acting with the motive to defeat Hillary Clinton.

To begin with, CIA officials are professional, systematic liars; they lie constantly, by design, and with great skill, and have for many decades, as have intelligence officials in other agencies.

by **DWags** 12/11/2016, 10:38 am

LooseGoose wrote:
DWags wrote:

Well, we know the FBI is credible. Especially when it comes to the election.

And I'll wait for OTPT's "tribal" chiding.....but it's not like the Dems have ever done anything like this.

Ted Kennedy asked for Russia's help to beat Reagan in 1984.

And Steve? Before you dismiss the link you should confirm if the document is fake or not - pro tip: it's not.

Letter Details Kennedy Offer To USSR

TEXT OF KGB LETTER ON SENATOR TED KENNEDY
_________________________________________
Special Importance
Committee on State Security of the USSR
14.05. 1983 No. 1029 Ch/OV
Moscow

Regarding Senator Kennedy’s request to the General Secretary of the Communist Party Comrade Y.V. Andropov

Having conveyed Kennedy’s appeal to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Tunney also explained that Senator Kennedy has in the last few years actively made appearances to reduce the threat of war. Because he formally refused to partake in the election campaign of 1984, his speeches would be taken without prejudice as they are not tied to any campaign promises. Tunney remarked that the senator wants to run for president in 1988. At that time, he will be 56 and his personal problems, which could hinder his standing, will be resolved (Kennedy has just completed a divorce and plans to remarry in the near future). Taken together, Kennedy does not discount that during the 1984 campaign, the Democratic Party may officially turn to him to lead the fight against the Republicans and elect their candidate president. This would explain why he is convinced that none of the candidates today have a real chance at defeating Reagan.

So, it's been done before? Well then, fuck it who cares then? We should just let it go.

You know the biggest kind of fools there are? Those so entrenched with being on their side of the isle they're willing to look past shit that possibly could be undermining the democracy they live in because "the other side did it too"

Cop friends who were about to lose their fucking pension,and still might, have said to me in regards to our legislature sucking the teet of the Devos and pushing through lame duck legislation that would screw them, "well that's how obama care was pushed through". WTF?

Putin is a murderer, a liar a tyrant and despises freedom and our democracy. Bi partisan senators agree they hacked into shit and fucked with our stuff during the election. To say at this point "this is cooked up by the left and even if true they did it before too" is so fucking pathetically short sighted id say once again we get what we deserve.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 10:46 am

Wags? Where did I say let it go?

People in here have a HUGE tendency to put words in my mouth.

It's hilarious how far Dems will go to make excuses for this loss:

The FBI
Bad Campaign
Media hates Hillary
The Russians
Koch Brothers
Etc, Etc.

No, America, it wasn’t Russia: You did it to Yourself

Clinton’s own polling people found the big turning point was when she called Trump voters a “basket of deplorables.” Americans don’t like being talked down to, and had already gotten rid of Romney for the same sin. The spectacle of Clinton taking hundreds of thousands of dollars to give a speech to the people who put them out of their homes in 2008-9 also turned many of them off so that they stayed home, while another section of them decided to take a chance on Trump. He will screw them over, but from their point of view, they worried that she might have, as well. Trump was promising to stop the hemorrhaging of jobs via protectionism, whereas everyone understood that Sec. Clinton’s first instinct was to do TPP and send more jobs to Asia.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 10:48 am

DWags wrote:Putin is a murderer, a liar a tyrant and despises freedom and our democracy. Bi partisan senators agree they hacked into shit and fucked with our stuff during the election. To say at this point "this is cooked up by the left and even if true they did it before too" is so fucking pathetically short sighted id say once again we get what we deserve.

Amazing that you hate Putin so much yet seem to support the Dems that have bowed to him for 8 years.

I'm not disputing that they may have "fucked with our stuff" - you seem to be missing that. I'm disputing the conclusions drawn.

by **DWags** 12/11/2016, 10:54 am

LooseGoose wrote:Wags? Where did I say let it go?

People in here have a HUGE tendency to put words in my mouth.

It's hilarious how far Dems will go to make excuses for this loss:

The FBI
Bad Campaign
Media hates Hillary
The Russians
Koch Brothers
Etc, Etc.

No, America, it wasn’t Russia: You did it to Yourself

Clinton’s own polling people found the big turning point was when she called Trump voters a “basket of deplorables.” Americans don’t like being talked down to, and had already gotten rid of Romney for the same sin. The spectacle of Clinton taking hundreds of thousands of dollars to give a speech to the people who put them out of their homes in 2008-9 also turned many of them off so that they stayed home, while another section of them decided to take a chance on Trump. He will screw them over, but from their point of view, they worried that she might have, as well. Trump was promising to stop the hemorrhaging of jobs via protectionism, whereas everyone understood that Sec. Clinton’s first instinct was to do TPP and send more jobs to Asia.

What loss? The election?

Goose... fuck Hilliary... fuck Trump. I can't belueve are heads are so far up our ass that we're arguing over two pieces of human vile shit, one who got rich in politics, one who thinks grabbing our daughters by the pussy is fine, while there is the real possibility of the most evil man in the world fucking with our democracy.

So holy shit, tell me about losing a fucking election. Seriously.

Again, we get what we deserve.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 12/11/2016, 10:55 am

LooseGoose wrote:
DWags wrote:Putin is a murderer, a liar a tyrant and despises freedom and our democracy. Bi partisan senators agree they hacked into shit and fucked with our stuff during the election. To say at this point "this is cooked up by the left and even if true they did it before too" is so fucking pathetically short sighted id say once again we get what we deserve.

Amazing that you hate Putin so much yet seem to support the Dems that have bowed to him for 8 years.

I'm not disputing that they may have "fucked with our stuff" - you seem to be missing that. I'm disputing the conclusions drawn.

Disapproval for Trump does not equal support for Democrats. That's where your logic is flawed time and time again.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 11:03 am

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

Amazing that you hate Putin so much yet seem to support the Dems that have bowed to him for 8 years.

I'm not disputing that they may have "fucked with our stuff" - you seem to be missing that. I'm disputing the conclusions drawn.

Disapproval for Trump does not equal support for Democrats. That's where your logic is flawed time and time again.

Golly Gee.....but yet any time I defend Trump or post facts on what happened I'm kissing his ass and am a closet lover of his.
Funny that.

I guess it must be more fake news.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 11:04 am

DWags wrote:Again, we get what we deserve.

Yes we do, because we let the country bumpkins vote.

by **Turtleneck** 12/11/2016, 11:05 am

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Disapproval for Trump does not equal support for Democrats. That's where your logic is flawed time and time again.

Pylon, as I pointed out above, the White House's position on Russia changed greatly by 2014. This is evidenced by 2015 National Security Strategy, which labels Russia as an aggressor and threat to the stability of the international system. So the claim put forward that the Obama administration catered to Russia is false, but one might not know that if they only browse glorified blogs of a partisan nature for their information.

You are also dead on about the criticism of Trump. It seems he is off limits. Actually, it has gotten so bad that you cannot criticize anything. If you were to post something in tBin about the weather being lousy today, you're most likely going to get yelled at for not talking about lousy weather for the past eight years and then be buried in links to weather reports from 2008-present.

by **NigelUno** 12/11/2016, 11:12 am

LooseGoose wrote:Golly Fucking Gee - the walkback begins. Any of you can begin to lower your froth levels at any time.

CIA said one thing. FBI said another. One got its story out first, reported as hard fact - not so fast my friend.

Oh and Steve darling? Washington Post link ok with you or not credible?

FBI and CIA give differing accounts to lawmakers on Russia’s motives in 2016 hacks

Sitting before the House Intelligence Committee was a senior FBI counterintelligence official. The question the Republicans and Democrats in attendance wanted answered was whether the bureau concurred with the conclusions the CIA had just shared with senators that Russia “quite” clearly intended to help Republican Donald Trump defeat Democrat Hillary Clinton and clinch the White House.

For the Democrats in the room, the FBI’s response was frustrating — even shocking.

The FBI official’s remarks to the lawmakers on the House Intelligence Committee were, in comparison, “fuzzy” and “ambiguous,” suggesting to those in the room that the bureau and the agency weren’t on the same page, the official said.

The divergent messages from the CIA and the FBI put a spotlight on the difficulty faced by intelligence and law enforcement officials as they try to draw conclusions about the Kremlin’s motives for hacking Democratic Party emails during the 2016 race.

The FBI is not sold on the idea that Russia had a particular aim in its meddling. “There’s no question that [the Russians’] efforts went one way, but it’s not clear that they have a specific goal or mix of related goals,” said one U.S. official.

The murky nature of the assessments is maddening many lawmakers who are demanding answers about the Kremlin’s role in the presidential race.

As I've said before I wouldn't put 100% faith in the CIA given their track record.

Why did you bold the first sentence in your last quote, and not the second sentence which said "There’s no question that [the Russians’] efforts went one way..."?

So, is it the FBI's position (and yours) that because a "particular aim" can't be established, that the Russian efforts to meddle in the election "one way" indicate they weren't trying to get Trump elected? They were just meddling? Having a little fun?

I find that a little unbelievable, but sounds like you're buying it.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 11:18 am

NigelUno wrote:Why did you bold the first sentence in your last quote, and not the second sentence ...?

Because it's my fucking message and I can do what I want. Go dig up some stories and you can bold whatever you want from them...the big difference is that unlike many in here I post links to stories and not just bullshit. And what a shocker - sometimes those stories offer differing opinions. I'm not scared of differing opinions and I think there is a question of what the motives were.

I wouldn't rule out general spying, meddling, etc - it's what we and Russia have done to each other for 100+ years now.

by **Blanch32** 12/11/2016, 11:19 am

DWags wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:Wags? Where did I say let it go?

People in here have a HUGE tendency to put words in my mouth.

It's hilarious how far Dems will go to make excuses for this loss:

The FBI
Bad Campaign
Media hates Hillary
The Russians
Koch Brothers
Etc, Etc.

No, America, it wasn’t Russia: You did it to Yourself

What loss? The election?

Goose... fuck Hilliary... fuck Trump. I can't belueve are heads are so far up our ass that we're arguing over two pieces of human vile shit, one who got rich in politics, one who thinks grabbing our daughters by the pussy is fine, while there is the real possibility of the most evil man in the world fucking with our democracy.

So holy shit, tell me about losing a fucking election. Seriously.

Again, we get what we deserve.

lol

by Guest 12/11/2016, 11:22 am

Turtleneck wrote:If you were to post something in tBin about the weather being lousy today, you're most likely going to get yelled at for not talking about lousy weather for the past eight years and then be buried in links to weather reports from 2008-present.

The Russians and the 2016 Election PT II - Page 3 13122012236154181

The Russians and the 2016 Election PT II - Page 3 CRYING-CHILD-FACEBOOK

by Guest 12/11/2016, 11:24 am

Turtleneck wrote:then be buried in links to weather reports from 2008-present.

So rather than links to actual information you prefer the repetition of "racist, bigoted, sex offender, knuckle dragger, bigot, etc, etc, etc" because that reinforces your preconceived notions.

Sorry to provide links to actual information that contradict your fantasies.

by **DWags** 12/11/2016, 11:30 am

LooseGoose wrote:
DWags wrote:Again, we get what we deserve.

Yes we do, because we let the country bumpkins vote.

Wow. ok. That's what I'm worried about.

by **DWags** 12/11/2016, 11:36 am

LooseGoose wrote:
DWags wrote:Putin is a murderer, a liar a tyrant and despises freedom and our democracy. Bi partisan senators agree they hacked into shit and fucked with our stuff during the election. To say at this point "this is cooked up by the left and even if true they did it before too" is so fucking pathetically short sighted id say once again we get what we deserve.

Amazing that you hate Putin so much yet seem to support the Dems that have bowed to him for 8 years.

I'm not disputing that they may have "fucked with our stuff" - you seem to be missing that. I'm disputing the conclusions drawn.

You need to tell me how I'm supporting the Dems. Please. I'm really trying to understand where you're coming from.

by **Blanch32** 12/11/2016, 11:39 am

DWags wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

Amazing that you hate Putin so much yet seem to support the Dems that have bowed to him for 8 years.

I'm not disputing that they may have "fucked with our stuff" - you seem to be missing that. I'm disputing the conclusions drawn.

You need to tell me how I'm supporting the Dems. Please. I'm really trying to understand where you're coming from.

It's not obvious to you already? lol man you simpleton.

by **NigelUno** 12/11/2016, 11:45 am

LooseGoose wrote:
NigelUno wrote:Why did you bold the first sentence in your last quote, and not the second sentence ...?

Because it's my fucking message and I can do what I want. Go dig up some stories and you can bold whatever you want from them...the big difference is that unlike many in here I post links to stories and not just bullshit. And what a shocker - sometimes those stories offer differing opinions. I'm not scared of differing opinions and I think there is a question of what the motives were.

I wouldn't rule out general spying, meddling, etc - it's what we and Russia have done to each other for 100+ years now.

I guess I hit a nerve.

So, you think the Russians were just messing around and had no interest in who won the election (even though it was clear their efforts were directed at getting Trump elected)?

Kind of seems like the motive was to get Trump elected?

But...you're running with the whole just messing around thing?

OK.

And you couch your argument regarding this by saying you're presenting facts?

OK.

by **steveschneider** 12/11/2016, 11:54 am

http://www.teenvogue.com/story/donald-trump-is-gaslighting-america

Never thought I'd see the day I'm forwarding on a Teen Vogue article, but hey Teen Vogue with a compelling essay on Gas Lighting.

by **steveschneider** 12/11/2016, 11:57 am

DWags wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

Amazing that you hate Putin so much yet seem to support the Dems that have bowed to him for 8 years.

I'm not disputing that they may have "fucked with our stuff" - you seem to be missing that. I'm disputing the conclusions drawn.

You need to tell me how I'm supporting the Dems. Please. I'm really trying to understand where you're coming from.

I'm convinced if a planet destroying asteroid was on a collision course with Earth in our final hours right wingers would come out blaming Obama and Hillary. It's a pathology at this point.

We can all say what we want about Hillary, but she would have been tougher on Russia than Trump. Now we are open for business.

Putin has gained power by aggression and having a lot of oil and he's about to get rewarded for it.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 11:58 am

steveschneider wrote:http://www.teenvogue.com/story/donald-trump-is-gaslighting-america

Never thought I'd see the day I'm forwarding on a Teen Vogue article, but hey Teen Vogue with a compelling essay on Gas Lighting.

The 1st line gaslighted me:

The CIA officially determined that Russia intervened in our election,

THEN they mention FAKE NEWS without acknowledging they just posted some. Someone in the CIA leaked that shit, there is no "official" determination.

by **steveschneider** 12/11/2016, 12:00 pm

LooseGoose wrote:
steveschneider wrote:http://www.teenvogue.com/story/donald-trump-is-gaslighting-america

Never thought I'd see the day I'm forwarding on a Teen Vogue article, but hey Teen Vogue with a compelling essay on Gas Lighting.

The 1st line gaslighted me:

The CIA officially determined that Russia intervened in our election,

THEN they mention FAKE NEWS without acknowledging they just posted some. Someone in the CIA leaked that shit, there is no "official" determination.

The debate has shifted from did the russians interfere, to the question of why.

by **DWags** 12/11/2016, 12:20 pm

steveschneider wrote:
DWags wrote:

You need to tell me how I'm supporting the Dems. Please. I'm really trying to understand where you're coming from.

I'm convinced if a planet destroying asteroid was on a collision course with Earth in our final hours right wingers would come out blaming Obama and Hillary. It's a pathology at this point.

We can all say what we want about Hillary, but she would have been tougher on Russia than Trump. Now we are open for business.

Putin has gained power by aggression and having a lot of oil and he's about to get rewarded for it.

Goose is to the right what Bob is to the left. It's best to just get out of this shit. Too frustrating trying to make a point with two guys who have fingers in their ears and humming.

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 12/11/2016, 12:32 pm

DWags wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

I'm convinced if a planet destroying asteroid was on a collision course with Earth in our final hours right wingers would come out blaming Obama and Hillary. It's a pathology at this point.

We can all say what we want about Hillary, but she would have been tougher on Russia than Trump. Now we are open for business.

Putin has gained power by aggression and having a lot of oil and he's about to get rewarded for it.

Goose is to the right what Bob is to the left. It's best to just get out of this shit. Too frustrating trying to make a point with two guys who have fingers in their ears and humming.

Exactly. Goose = Bob on this board.

by **steveschneider** 12/11/2016, 12:36 pm

DWags wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

I'm convinced if a planet destroying asteroid was on a collision course with Earth in our final hours right wingers would come out blaming Obama and Hillary. It's a pathology at this point.

We can all say what we want about Hillary, but she would have been tougher on Russia than Trump. Now we are open for business.

Putin has gained power by aggression and having a lot of oil and he's about to get rewarded for it.

Goose is to the right what Bob is to the left. It's best to just get out of this shit. Too frustrating trying to make a point with two guys who have fingers in their ears and humming.

I'm definitely a progressive on social issues, probably more fiscally conservative on a lot of issues but I support funding of some key social programs (education, health care etc).

I've lived and grown up around a lot of conservatives, I get along with them all just fine. I don't even view Trump as a real republican. I think he's like a Bernie Sanders that infiltrated that party. If John Kasich had won I probably wouldn't even be posting in the bin. I'd be off drinking beer and spending time reading up on the upcoming baseball season.

I should make a post clarifying my concerns of Trump have nothing to do with the RNC, just Trumpism. I firmly believe Trumpism has to be defeated. He's a threat to all the institutions in this country we should all hold sacred.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 12:56 pm

DWags wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

I'm convinced if a planet destroying asteroid was on a collision course with Earth in our final hours right wingers would come out blaming Obama and Hillary. It's a pathology at this point.

We can all say what we want about Hillary, but she would have been tougher on Russia than Trump. Now we are open for business.

Putin has gained power by aggression and having a lot of oil and he's about to get rewarded for it.

Goose is to the right what Bob is to the left. It's best to just get out of this shit. Too frustrating trying to make a point with two guys who have fingers in their ears and humming.

Not exactly true.

I support legalizing Marijuana and many other drugs - that's not a position you'll find on the R platform.
I 100% oppose civil forfeiture - " "
I 100% oppose the Department of Homeland Security and the Patriot Act that created it. - " "
I support a Basic Income program - " "
I believe we need to stay out of foreign wars - " "
I oppose minimum sentencing for crimes - " "

Given time/reminders I'm sure I could come up with many more.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 1:01 pm

Question for anyone reading this thread:

If say Mikhail Gorbachev were to come to the US and campaign with/for a candidate how would you feel about that?

Would it be ok? Would it depend on which candidate he supported? Would it not matter because even though he's Russian he's no longer in power?

by Guest 12/11/2016, 1:26 pm

LooseGoose wrote:Wags? Where did I say let it go?

People in here have a HUGE tendency to put words in my mouth.

It's hilarious how far Dems will go to make excuses for this loss:

The FBI
Bad Campaign
Media hates Hillary
The Russians
Koch Brothers
Etc, Etc.

Oh and I know I'm just a cranky old partisan.....but does anyone notice an old chestnut of the Dems that IS missing from that list?

The Russians and the 2016 Election PT II - Page 3 Money

The Russians and the 2016 Election PT II - Page 3 Money

Gosh I wonder if that's because Hills outspent Trump by 2:1 just as Obama did to McCain & Romney.

You can bet your ass that had Trump outspent Hills 2:1 we wouldn't be hearing about Russians, we'd be hearing about the corrupting power of money in politics.

by **Blanch32** 12/11/2016, 1:55 pm

DWags wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

I'm convinced if a planet destroying asteroid was on a collision course with Earth in our final hours right wingers would come out blaming Obama and Hillary. It's a pathology at this point.

We can all say what we want about Hillary, but she would have been tougher on Russia than Trump. Now we are open for business.

Putin has gained power by aggression and having a lot of oil and he's about to get rewarded for it.

Goose is to the right what Bob is to the left. It's best to just get out of this shit. Too frustrating trying to make a point with two guys who have fingers in their ears and humming.

this proves you are dem.

dude is to the right as bob is to the left.

moreover, loose is to the right as you are to the left.

by **steveschneider** 12/11/2016, 2:42 pm

Little Marco growing a set of little balls.

From his twitter----

Being a "friend of Vladimir" is not an attribute I am hoping for from a #SecretaryOfState - MR

by **steveschneider** 12/11/2016, 2:47 pm

LooseGoose wrote:
DWags wrote:

Well, we know the FBI is credible. Especially when it comes to the election.

And I'll wait for OTPT's "tribal" chiding.....but it's not like the Dems have ever done anything like this.

Ted Kennedy asked for Russia's help to beat Reagan in 1984.

And Steve? Before you dismiss the link you should confirm if the document is fake or not - pro tip: it's not.

Letter Details Kennedy Offer To USSR

TEXT OF KGB LETTER ON SENATOR TED KENNEDY
_________________________________________
Special Importance
Committee on State Security of the USSR
14.05. 1983 No. 1029 Ch/OV
Moscow

Regarding Senator Kennedy’s request to the General Secretary of the Communist Party Comrade Y.V. Andropov

Having conveyed Kennedy’s appeal to the General Secretary of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, Tunney also explained that Senator Kennedy has in the last few years actively made appearances to reduce the threat of war. Because he formally refused to partake in the election campaign of 1984, his speeches would be taken without prejudice as they are not tied to any campaign promises. Tunney remarked that the senator wants to run for president in 1988. At that time, he will be 56 and his personal problems, which could hinder his standing, will be resolved (Kennedy has just completed a divorce and plans to remarry in the near future). Taken together, Kennedy does not discount that during the 1984 campaign, the Democratic Party may officially turn to him to lead the fight against the Republicans and elect their candidate president. This would explain why he is convinced that none of the candidates today have a real chance at defeating Reagan.

I don't trust the source and I tell this to my progressive friends all the time as well. They rely mostly on independent journalism.

We live in an age of so much deception on the internet I apologize to you if that source is legit, but I've retreated to establishment news until we get a handle on this fake news problem.

by Guest 12/11/2016, 2:56 pm

LOL - "fake" news has been around for decades, good to see you're aware of the shit you've been fed.

Want an example? Delve into the GHWBush and the grocery store scanner story from the 1992 campaign. Completely made up story fed to the public as "truth".

by Guest 12/11/2016, 2:58 pm

steveschneider wrote:
LooseGoose wrote:

And I'll wait for OTPT's "tribal" chiding.....but it's not like the Dems have ever done anything like this.

Ted Kennedy asked for Russia's help to beat Reagan in 1984.

And Steve? Before you dismiss the link you should confirm if the document is fake or not - pro tip: it's not.

Letter Details Kennedy Offer To USSR

I don't trust the source and I tell this to my progressive friends all the time as well. They rely mostly on independent journalism.

We live in an age of so much deception on the internet I apologize to you if that source is legit, but I've retreated to establishment news until we get a handle on this fake news problem.

Is Forbes establishment? Not hard to find verification.

Ted Kennedy's Soviet Gambit

by **Watch Out Pylon!** 12/11/2016, 3:02 pm

LooseGoose wrote:
steveschneider wrote:

I don't trust the source and I tell this to my progressive friends all the time as well. They rely mostly on independent journalism.

We live in an age of so much deception on the internet I apologize to you if that source is legit, but I've retreated to establishment news until we get a handle on this fake news problem.

Is Forbes establishment? Not hard to find verification.

Ted Kennedy's Soviet Gambit

You are the grand master of straw man arguments. This is why no one can have a serious debate with you.

by Sponsored content