Poll of the Day > House majority leader to colleagues in 2016: I think Putin pays Trump

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/house-majority-leader-to-colleagues-in-2016-i-think-putin-pays-trump/2017/05/17/

KIEV, Ukraine — A month before Donald Trump clinched the Republican nomination, one of his closest allies in Congress — House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy — made a politically explosive assertion in a private conversation on Capitol Hill with his fellow GOP leaders: that Trump could be the beneficiary of payments from Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump,” McCarthy (R-Calif.) said, according to a recording of the June 15, 2016, exchange, which was listened to and verified by The Washington Post. Rep. Dana Rohrabacher is a Californian Republican known in Congress as a fervent defender of Putin and Russia.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) immediately interjected, stopping the conversation from further exploring McCarthy’s assertion, and swore the Republicans present to secrecy.

Before the conversation, McCarthy and Ryan had emerged from separate talks at the U.S. Capitol with Ukrainian Prime Minister Vladimir Groysman, who had described a Kremlin tactic of financing populist politicians to undercut Eastern European democratic institutions.

A longer article with video.
---

This is tiresome.
---

the russia thing is one of the weirdest things i've seen. the majourity of american politicians seem to REALLY want to go to war with russia and use anything they can to do it.
---

ssj4supervegeta posted...

the russia thing is one of the weirdest things i've seen. the majourity of american politicians seem to REALLY want to go to war with russia and use anything they can to do it.

It makes sense to want to go to war with a country that is actively trying to interfere with our elections. People like deflect this by saying that we tend to also interfere with elections but that doesn't mean we should be okay when it occurs to us. Our wrongs don't really negate their wrongs. So ya. Wanting war makes sense.
---

Because, a man with billions of dollars can be bought off? All with absolutely no evidence at all?

I smell fake news.

TheWorstPoster posted...

Because, a man with billions of dollars can be bought off? All with absolutely no evidence at all?

I smell fake news.

you think the wealthy can't be bought? 3 billion likely isn't that much when you're dealing with the potential in that position
---

Veedrock- posted...

This is tiresome.

The lack of the checks and balances in washington? Agreed.
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

you think the wealthy can't be bought? 3 billion likely isn't that much when you're dealing with the potential in that position

This is fake news because the RINOs are butthurt over an anti-Establishment type winning the election, so they fabricate stories with no basis in reality.

TheWorstPoster posted...

This is fake news because the RINOs are butthurt over an anti-Establishment type winning the election, so they fabricate stories with no basis in reality.

there is a tape of the house leader saying these things and Paul Ryan demanding secrecy

what is fake other than calling it a joke? you don't swear people to secrecy over a baseless joke
---

"This is fake news because I don't like it. I am not employed."
---

It wouldn't be the first time that a man named McCarthy spuriously accused people of having ties to Russia >_>

ssj4supervegeta posted...

the russia thing is one of the weirdest things i've seen. the majourity of american politicians seem to REALLY want to go to war with russia and use anything they can to do it.

tbh, it was foreshadowed by the Blacklist a few years ago which probably noticed this trend.

chaosbowser posted...

ssj4supervegeta posted...

the russia thing is one of the weirdest things i've seen. the majourity of american politicians seem to REALLY want to go to war with russia and use anything they can to do it.

It makes sense to want to go to war with a country that is actively trying to interfere with our elections. People like deflect this by saying that we tend to also interfere with elections but that doesn't mean we should be okay when it occurs to us. Our wrongs don't really negate their wrongs. So ya. Wanting war makes sense.

Even BEFORE the so-called hack, the government was pushing for another cold war and Hillary was leading that charge. Even now, a small part of me half-wonders if the government itself might have orchestrated the hack to justify conflict with Russia because that's the kind of shit our government does at times and, realistically speaking, even with the leak they probably expected Hillary to win anyway which would then allow her to come into office swinging at Russia.

Mead posted...

Veedrock- posted...

This is tiresome.

The lack of the checks and balances in washington? Agreed.

...ignoring that said checks and balances have wrongly been used to obstruct Trump every step of the way, including trying to shut down his SCOTUS nominee through filibuster the same way they tried to shut down GWB's pick. And, you know, all of the shit Republicans did to Obama in relation for the shit Democrats did to GWB.
---

Dude's fucked. Investigations will find out what Trump and his campaign have done, no matter how much they try to obstruct it. He'll get impeached.

Zeus posted...

...ignoring that said checks and balances have wrongly been used to obstruct Trump every step of the way, including trying to shut down his SCOTUS nominee through filibuster the same way they tried to shut down GWB's pick. And, you know, all of the shit Republicans did to Obama in relation for the shit Democrats did to GWB.

By wrongly used I guess you mean working as intended. I won't deduct any points as I am sure that is what you meant. You really are doing a superb job.
---

How can Trumpers unironically pretend that Putin isn't a piece of shit.
---

Blighboy posted...

How can Trumpers unironically pretend that Putin isn't a piece of shit.

Because at least he's not a DEMOCRAT(boo! hiss!).
---

Blighboy posted...

How can Trumpers unironically pretend that Putin isn't a piece of shit.

You can't use logic and facts to move someone from a position that they put themselves in with no logic or facts.

They're mad. No details matter. Fuck liberals, anything they do or say is just them being mad that they lost an election so haha we win they lose. Their fingers are plugged firmly in their ears.

Luckily we have left leaning posters like Zeus, doing a great job.
---

Michael T. Flynn told President Trump's transition team weeks before the inauguration that he was under federal investigation for secretly working as a paid lobbyist for Turkey during the campaign, according to two people familiar with the case.

Despite this warning, which came about a month after the Justice Department notified Mr. Flynn of the inquiry, Mr. Trump made Mr. Flynn his national security adviser. The job gave Mr. Flynn access to the president and nearly every secret held by American intelligence agencies.

Mr. Flynn's disclosure, on Jan. 4, was first made to the transition team's chief lawyer, Donald F. McGahn II, who is now the White House counsel. That conversation, and another one two days later between Mr. Flynn's lawyer and transition lawyers, shows that the Trump team knew about the investigation of Mr. Flynn far earlier than has been previously reported.

His legal issues have been a problem for the White House from the beginning and are at the center of a growing political crisis for Mr. Trump. Mr. Flynn, who was fired after 24 days in the job, was initially kept on even after the acting attorney general, Sally Q. Yates, warned the White House that he might be subject to blackmail by the Russians for misleading Vice President Mike Pence about the nature of conversations he had with the Russian ambassador to Washington.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/politics/michael-flynn-donald-trump-national-security-adviser.html

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/17/former-us-security-adviser-flynn-reportedly-warned-trump-presidential-transition-team-he-was-under-investigation.html

As opposed to the old story

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/02/16/trump-no-i-didnt-tell-flynn-to-talk-about-sanctions-with-russia.html

"What was wrong was the way that other people, including yourselves in this room, were given that information, because that was classified information given illegally, that's the real problem."
The video at about 30 seconds. Right from Trump. Heh
---

Mead posted...

Zeus posted...

...ignoring that said checks and balances have wrongly been used to obstruct Trump every step of the way, including trying to shut down his SCOTUS nominee through filibuster the same way they tried to shut down GWB's pick. And, you know, all of the shit Republicans did to Obama in relation for the shit Democrats did to GWB.

By wrongly used I guess you mean working as intended. I won't deduct any points as I am sure that is what you meant. You really are doing a superb job.

Wrongly used meaning against the original intent and being used for obstructionist purposes.

Blighboy posted...

How can Trumpers unironically pretend that Putin isn't a piece of shit.

More importantly, why do you consider him a piece of shit? Every world leader who doesn't kowtow to the US isn't necessarily the most evil guy in history.
---

Zeus posted...

Wrongly used meaning against the original intent and being used for obstructionist purposes.

Literally working as intended.
---

SushiSquid posted...

Dude's fucked. Investigations will find out what Trump and his campaign have done, no matter how much they try to obstruct it. He'll get impeached.

you mean like how's he's been under investigation since he announced he was running for office and oh look what's come out of it

his presidency.
---

Zeus posted...

More importantly, why do you consider him a piece of shit? Every world leader who doesn't kowtow to the US isn't necessarily the most evil guy in history.

He's corrupt as hell? He doesn't care about his citizens and basically actively maintains the current oligarchy that effectively owns the government. He has the media in his pocket and basically has it only cover things directly in his favor.
---

chaosbowser posted...

It makes sense to want to go to war with a country that is actively trying to interfere with our elections. People like deflect this by saying that we tend to also interfere with elections but that doesn't mean we should be okay when it occurs to us. Our wrongs don't really negate their wrongs. So ya. Wanting war makes sense.

well there's still no actual proof russia did the hacking. the only bits of "proof" shown publically are that it was done on a russian keyboard and it was done during russian business hours. therefore russia did it and putin personally ok'd it.

not only that but i don't see what they did as "interfering" with the election. whoever did the hack exposed corruption and let that info out to the public. instead of addressing that tho the blame is shifted to russia.
---

helIy posted...

SushiSquid posted...

Dude's fucked. Investigations will find out what Trump and his campaign have done, no matter how much they try to obstruct it. He'll get impeached.

you mean like how's he's been under investigation since he announced he was running for office and oh look what's come out of it

his presidency.

You have more confidence than he does, considering all the screaming that has been heard coming from his offices.

The investigators have ahold of a string and he is doing stupid thing after stupid thing because he know it leads to evidence of wrongdoing and he doesn't know how to make them stop pulling it.
---

Zeus posted...

More importantly, why do you consider him a piece of shit? Every world leader who doesn't kowtow to the US isn't necessarily the most evil guy in history.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/oct/15/russia.chechnya

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35385445

He said: "We've seen him enriching his friends, his close allies, and marginalising those who he doesn't view as friends using state assets. Whether that's Russia's energy wealth, whether it's other state contracts, he directs those to whom he believes will serve him and excludes those who don't. To me, that is a picture of corruption."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/17/putin-is-destroying-russia-why-base-his-regime-on-corruption-asks-navalny

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-33734525

Russian President Vladimir Putin "personally ordered" the killing of Alexander Litvinenko, the inquiry into the former spy's death has heard.

Ben Emmerson QC, for Mr Litvinenko's family, said in his closing statement that Russian state responsibility had been proven "beyond reasonable doubt".

Not to mention the anti-gay laws, when he banned Americans from adopting orphans in retaliation for the US Sergei L. Magnitsky Act, Crimean aggression, nepotism, leaving citizens to starve while he takes all he wants... he is a corrupt leader and by no measure a good man or fair politician

Compare that to, say, Justin Trudeau, who got endless shit for formerly being a drama teacher.
---

If that doesn't convince you Zelretch, I hear Putin once voiced support for casting a black actor as a white character.
---

ssj4supervegeta posted...

chaosbowser posted...

It makes sense to want to go to war with a country that is actively trying to interfere with our elections. People like deflect this by saying that we tend to also interfere with elections but that doesn't mean we should be okay when it occurs to us. Our wrongs don't really negate their wrongs. So ya. Wanting war makes sense.

well there's still no actual proof russia did the hacking. the only bits of "proof" shown publically are that it was done on a russian keyboard and it was done during russian business hours. therefore russia did it and putin personally ok'd it.

not only that but i don't see what they did as "interfering" with the election. whoever did the hack exposed corruption and let that info out to the public. instead of addressing that tho the blame is shifted to russia.

Its pretty dumb to give Russia the benefit of the doubt because of the "lack of evidence." Clapper and congress have all come to the consensus that Russia definitely tried to steer our election in a certain direction. Not to mention Clapper has stated that the Russian has a history of attempting US election interference and even named their tactics used for our election last year. The only things that's really up for discussion is how much their actions impacted our election.

As for addressing corruption. You act as though the Republicans don't have their own dirty nonsense that could be hacked.The fact of the matter is they targeted one party over the other and its likely they had a significant influence of the election as a result. Of course I would like us to address the DNC corruption and i'm pretty miffed the Democrats have failed to learn their lesson.
---

chaosbowser posted...

The fact of the matter is they targeted one party over the other

did it ever occur to you that they did that because only one party was worth targeting?
---

helIy posted...

chaosbowser posted...

The fact of the matter is they targeted one party over the other

did it ever occur to you that they did that because only one party was worth targeting?

Did it ever occur to you that is highly unlikely? Honestly, the republican party has nothing of note to reveal to the public? really?
---

chaosbowser posted...

helIy posted...

chaosbowser posted...

The fact of the matter is they targeted one party over the other

did it ever occur to you that they did that because only one party was worth targeting?

Did it ever occur to you that is highly unlikely? Honestly, the republican party has nothing of note to reveal to the public? really?

now now, never bite the hand that feeds you
---

chaosbowser posted...

Its pretty dumb to give Russia the benefit of the doubt because of the "lack of evidence."

while i did read the rest. this is really really bothersome...you are basically saying you don't care if they did it or not. you are saying that since the government agrees it was russia they don't have to prove it. therefore it's ok to start wars and put lives in danger simply because you think it was the russian government.

the only reasons the hacks hurt the democrats was because they were doing shady shit in the first place. if they weren't doing shady shit they wouldn't have to worry about hacks like that. showing us their dirty laundry, no matter who the source was, did not HURT america. it only hurt the people who did shady stuff. i honestly dont see anything wrong with the hacks. and by all means hack the republicans too. i want WANT corruption to be called out more. accepting the corruption is really really sad in my eyes. and the fact we accept it so much that it takes a back seat to who exposed the corruption is even sadder.
---

ssj4supervegeta posted...

chaosbowser posted...

Its pretty dumb to give Russia the benefit of the doubt because of the "lack of evidence."

while i did read the rest. this is really really bothersome...you are basically saying you don't care if they did it or not. you are saying that since the government agrees it was russia they don't have to prove it. therefore it's ok to start wars and put lives in danger simply because you think it was the russian government.

the only reasons the hacks hurt the democrats was because they were doing shady shit in the first place. if they weren't doing shady shit they wouldn't have to worry about hacks like that. showing us their dirty laundry, no matter who the source was, did not HURT america. it only hurt the people who did shady stuff. i honestly dont see anything wrong with the hacks. and by all means hack the republicans too. i want WANT corruption to be called out more. accepting the corruption is really really sad in my eyes. and the fact we accept it so much that it takes a back seat to who exposed the corruption is even sadder.

You realize that Russia is excellent at cover ups right. Also your whole response reeks of government tin foil hat conspiracy distrust. At that point does evidence even have value since even that can be forged. Expecting clean evidence and results is pretty naive when it comes to this shit. it can be assumed we'll never know the whole story so expecting publicly presented evidence is just absurd.
---

chaosbowser posted...

It makes sense to want to go to war with a country that is actively trying to interfere with our elections. People like deflect this by saying that we tend to also interfere with elections but that doesn't mean we should be okay when it occurs to us. Our wrongs don't really negate their wrongs. So ya. Wanting war makes sense.

So you think the countries whose elections we interfere with should also go to war with the US? That that's the course of action they should take?

Is that really the stance you want to take?
---

Smarkil posted...

chaosbowser posted...

It makes sense to want to go to war with a country that is actively trying to interfere with our elections. People like deflect this by saying that we tend to also interfere with elections but that doesn't mean we should be okay when it occurs to us. Our wrongs don't really negate their wrongs. So ya. Wanting war makes sense.

So you think the countries whose elections we interfere with should also go to war with the US? That that's the course of action they should take?

Is that really the stance you want to take?

Uh...no? but i can't exactly be surprised if they're hostile
---

Mead posted...

Zeus posted...

Wrongly used meaning against the original intent and being used for obstructionist purposes.

Literally working as intended.

The original intent wasn't to break the government by ensuring that people wouldn't be able to work together, ESPECIALLY because the original system didn't have parties.

chaosbowser posted...

Zeus posted...

More importantly, why do you consider him a piece of shit? Every world leader who doesn't kowtow to the US isn't necessarily the most evil guy in history.

He's corrupt as hell? He doesn't care about his citizens and basically actively maintains the current oligarchy that effectively owns the government. He has the media in his pocket and basically has it only cover things directly in his favor.

The problem is that all of those stories are put forth by individuals who disagree with his politics, particularly the US media which has an agenda in trying to topple him (and keep in mind that this same media effectively collaborated in pushing through wars in the Middle East by not questioning the US's narrative, both during Desert Storm and Operation Iraqi Freedom). And, while he's likely corrupt, the claim that he doesn't care about his citizens is bullshit.
---

Doctor Foxx posted...

Zeus posted...

More importantly, why do you consider him a piece of shit? Every world leader who doesn't kowtow to the US isn't necessarily the most evil guy in history.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2000/oct/15/russia.chechnya

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35385445

He said: "We've seen him enriching his friends, his close allies, and marginalising those who he doesn't view as friends using state assets. Whether that's Russia's energy wealth, whether it's other state contracts, he directs those to whom he believes will serve him and excludes those who don't. To me, that is a picture of corruption."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/17/putin-is-destroying-russia-why-base-his-regime-on-corruption-asks-navalny

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-33734525

Russian President Vladimir Putin "personally ordered" the killing of Alexander Litvinenko, the inquiry into the former spy's death has heard.

Ben Emmerson QC, for Mr Litvinenko's family, said in his closing statement that Russian state responsibility had been proven "beyond reasonable doubt".

Not to mention the anti-gay laws, when he banned Americans from adopting orphans in retaliation for the US Sergei L. Magnitsky Act, Crimean aggression, nepotism, leaving citizens to starve while he takes all he wants... he is a corrupt leader and by no measure a good man or fair politician

Compare that to, say, Justin Trudeau, who got endless shit for formerly being a drama teacher.

Actually, the orphans issue stemmed more from the HORRIFIC treatment of several orphans which made headlines some years ago (including a child who was adopted by US parents who, after deciding they couldn't handle the kid, sent him back ALONE to Russia), but the fact that you believe that it's in retaliation shows how effectively you've bought into propaganda.

The "Crimean aggression" overlooks the acts of genocide perpetrated by Kiev which was facilitated by the UN providing helicopters used to attack civilians. More importantly, our decision to side with Kiev rather than work towards a two-state solution is based solely on ideology where we want to push capitalism. Historically, Crimea itself is Russian land which is why the number of ethnic Russians is so high. The Week -- a left-leaning publication which I read back when friends still subscribed to it -- ran a lengthy feature on the history of the land.

The starvation claims are silly and unwarranted, especially when you consider that the US is a primary culprit in that starvation thanks to sanctions.

The "anti-gay laws" essentially amount to bans on PDAs which is a cultural issue between our nations; we expect that they should feel the same as us because they're a white nation, which is both condescending and racist.

As for the assassination allegations, we've all heard them but I'm not sure how legitimate it is given the motivation of media elements to lie. Keep in mind that the US still has people in DC believing that the Clintons had Vince Foster killed which, for all we know, could be true, but allegations of crimes don't carry the same merit as actual findings or confessions.
---

Blighboy posted...

If that doesn't convince you Zelretch, I hear Putin once voiced support for casting a black actor as a white character.

What the fuck is up with the stupid names you create, Blimeyboy?

chaosbowser posted...

ssj4supervegeta posted...

chaosbowser posted...

Its pretty dumb to give Russia the benefit of the doubt because of the "lack of evidence."

while i did read the rest. this is really really bothersome...you are basically saying you don't care if they did it or not. you are saying that since the government agrees it was russia they don't have to prove it. therefore it's ok to start wars and put lives in danger simply because you think it was the russian government.

the only reasons the hacks hurt the democrats was because they were doing shady shit in the first place. if they weren't doing shady shit they wouldn't have to worry about hacks like that. showing us their dirty laundry, no matter who the source was, did not HURT america. it only hurt the people who did shady stuff. i honestly dont see anything wrong with the hacks. and by all means hack the republicans too. i want WANT corruption to be called out more. accepting the corruption is really really sad in my eyes. and the fact we accept it so much that it takes a back seat to who exposed the corruption is even sadder.

You realize that Russia is excellent at cover ups right. Also your whole response reeks of government tin foil hat conspiracy distrust. At that point does evidence even have value since even that can be forged. Expecting clean evidence and results is pretty naive when it comes to this shit. it can be assumed we'll never know the whole story so expecting publicly presented evidence is just absurd.

The problem with the whole Russia angle is a matter of the fact that most people are forced to take the US intelligence agencies -- which had stated problems with Russia and bias against them -- effectively at their word when, the issue first broke, they instantly blamed Russia. That's not to say that Russia isn't a likely culprit (or the most likely one), but the problem is the whole context where Russia was already the go-to scapegoat. It's too easy to fall into patterns of blaming without evidence, where repeated allegations are stacked up and used in lieu of proof. Again, that doesn't mean it wasn't Russia because, even after we learned how bad their information was about things like Iraq, I'm still gullible enough to believe in US intelligence agencies especially when they have outside contractors agreeing with them. I'm certainly not going to fault people for skepticism, though.

And, in general, it's a little scary that we have to rely on an intelligence community with no moral compass -- which spies on Americans with impunity and, thanks to that privileged position, could hypothetically fabricate any evidence it wants -- that often operates with little or no oversight (or, at least, oversight willing to check its power)
---

No input on this topic, I just think it's hilarious in the mind of Icoyar billionares can't be bought off.

You're just wrong on that, buddy. Billionares on their deathbeds are bought all the time.

chaosbowser posted...

Smarkil posted...

chaosbowser posted...

It makes sense to want to go to war with a country that is actively trying to interfere with our elections. People like deflect this by saying that we tend to also interfere with elections but that doesn't mean we should be okay when it occurs to us. Our wrongs don't really negate their wrongs. So ya. Wanting war makes sense.

So you think the countries whose elections we interfere with should also go to war with the US? That that's the course of action they should take?

Is that really the stance you want to take?

Uh...no? but i can't exactly be surprised if they're hostile

There is a reason why most countries hated the US and still do. Obama somewhat improved the relationships and worldview but that all flew out the window.

Lil69Leo posted...

chaosbowser posted...

Smarkil posted...

chaosbowser posted...

It makes sense to want to go to war with a country that is actively trying to interfere with our elections. People like deflect this by saying that we tend to also interfere with elections but that doesn't mean we should be okay when it occurs to us. Our wrongs don't really negate their wrongs. So ya. Wanting war makes sense.

So you think the countries whose elections we interfere with should also go to war with the US? That that's the course of action they should take?

Is that really the stance you want to take?

Uh...no? but i can't exactly be surprised if they're hostile

There is a reason why most countries hated the US and still do. Obama somewhat improved the relationships and worldview but that all flew out the window.

Improved that by blowing up wedding processions and countless civilians with the out-of-control drone program? By shrugging when mass surveillance was discovered? By continuing the legacy of GWB's foreign policy? If Obama won over anybody, it was only the most gullible right when he was elected. Most of that was undone by his actions, which included tapping world leaders' phones.
---

helIy posted...

SushiSquid posted...

Dude's fucked. Investigations will find out what Trump and his campaign have done, no matter how much they try to obstruct it. He'll get impeached.

you mean like how's he's been under investigation since he announced he was running for office and oh look what's come out of it

his presidency.

Surely even you can understand how much of an incredible oversimplification this is.
---

Kana posted...

helIy posted...

SushiSquid posted...

Dude's fucked. Investigations will find out what Trump and his campaign have done, no matter how much they try to obstruct it. He'll get impeached.

you mean like how's he's been under investigation since he announced he was running for office and oh look what's come out of it

his presidency.

Surely even you can understand how much of an incredible oversimplification this is.

To be fair, Sushi was completely talking out of his ass so the remark wasn't unwarranted, as Sushi's attitude embodied the scoffing derision that Trump faced at every step of the election.
---

Nah, he's fucked.

And stop defending Putin. That shit's creepy. The dude is a murderer and liar.

It's clear our government doesn't like it when one of their puppets isn't running the show. If you don't think our government is behind the media propaganda then you're blind. I don't think it's coincidence that they destroy every outsider who runs for office

Trump's not some magical outsider that's gonna bring balance to the force, he's an nutbag that said that right sort of shit at the right time when people wanted to stick it to the system. He has no qualifications for the position and has shown every inclination he doesn't even want the job, he's no goddamn hero.

How do you know for certain he isn't magical tho
---

OhhhJa posted...

It's clear our government doesn't like it when one of their puppets isn't running the show. If you don't think our government is behind the media propaganda then you're blind. I don't think it's coincidence that they destroy every outsider who runs for office

Why'd ya close your account to come back fam?
---

Zeus posted...

Blighboy posted...

If that doesn't convince you Zelretch, I hear Putin once voiced support for casting a black actor as a white character.

What the fuck is up with the stupid names you create, Blimeyboy?

chaosbowser posted...

ssj4supervegeta posted...

chaosbowser posted...

Its pretty dumb to give Russia the benefit of the doubt because of the "lack of evidence."

while i did read the rest. this is really really bothersome...you are basically saying you don't care if they did it or not. you are saying that since the government agrees it was russia they don't have to prove it. therefore it's ok to start wars and put lives in danger simply because you think it was the russian government.

the only reasons the hacks hurt the democrats was because they were doing shady shit in the first place. if they weren't doing shady shit they wouldn't have to worry about hacks like that. showing us their dirty laundry, no matter who the source was, did not HURT america. it only hurt the people who did shady stuff. i honestly dont see anything wrong with the hacks. and by all means hack the republicans too. i want WANT corruption to be called out more. accepting the corruption is really really sad in my eyes. and the fact we accept it so much that it takes a back seat to who exposed the corruption is even sadder.

You realize that Russia is excellent at cover ups right. Also your whole response reeks of government tin foil hat conspiracy distrust. At that point does evidence even have value since even that can be forged. Expecting clean evidence and results is pretty naive when it comes to this shit. it can be assumed we'll never know the whole story so expecting publicly presented evidence is just absurd.

The problem with the whole Russia angle is a matter of the fact that most people are forced to take the US intelligence agencies -- which had stated problems with Russia and bias against them -- effectively at their word when, the issue first broke, they instantly blamed Russia. That's not to say that Russia isn't a likely culprit (or the most likely one), but the problem is the whole context where Russia was already the go-to scapegoat. It's too easy to fall into patterns of blaming without evidence, where repeated allegations are stacked up and used in lieu of proof. Again, that doesn't mean it wasn't Russia because, even after we learned how bad their information was about things like Iraq, I'm still gullible enough to believe in US intelligence agencies especially when they have outside contractors agreeing with them. I'm certainly not going to fault people for skepticism, though.

And, in general, it's a little scary that we have to rely on an intelligence community with no moral compass -- which spies on Americans with impunity and, thanks to that privileged position, could hypothetically fabricate any evidence it wants -- that often operates with little or no oversight (or, at least, oversight willing to check its power)

Eh. There's a lot of things you can use besides hard evidence to come to a similar conclusion. You don't need to be some far left liberal to find this whole deal really sketchy and lean towards Russia as a likely instigator. There are other weird things like a string of seemingly random dying Russian officials after the election. Trump's general responses that are nearly an implicit admission of guilt (as he has an idiotic tendency to do like "even if I did tell the Russians highly classified information I totally was allowed to do it.") Also, his behavior is something you'd expect from a guilty individual.
---

There's also the whole Flynn compromised by Russia problem where the DoJ went out of their way to inform them they need to take action and the white house did nothing until the press broke the news. Then the most recent news break that Trump was aware that Flynn was being investigated for connections to Russia before tapping him.

The whole things reeks even without hard evidence. Which you'll be hard pressed to ever find.
---

TheWorstPoster posted...

Because, a man with billions of dollars can be bought off? All with absolutely no evidence at all?

I smell fake news.

A man with multiple bankruptcies has trouble getting new loans can't be bought off?

Also you saying "no evidence" does not mean none exists.

Time to learn french and live in the quebec wilderness.
---