Home | About | Donate

Trump Widely Rebuked for Remarks About Alleged Election Interference by Russians


#21

Maybe Putin didn’t interfere with the election, and that Trump was not complicit. Maybe Clinton did not interfere with the election either. Is it within the realm of possibility that no one interfered with the election, and that the Democrats just blew it?

Because no one has offered any evidence that the election was tampered with–except, of course, by the DNC and by any number of Democratic and Republican state Secretaries of State (who are charged with executing the elections), and the Supreme Court, who gutted the Voting Rights Act of 1965. And the companies that produce electronic black box voting machines and the elections boards who use (and sometimes mandate) them.

Dirty, stinking, rotten system we’re got here, and now we want to blame the Russians…?


#22

There is no evidence that the election was tampered with, despite what the US “intelligence” agencies would have us believe. If it wasn’t, than, by default, Putin and Trump are telling the truth (despite what other lies they have told), which means that the Democrats are lying.

Democrats lying? Hard to believe, huh?


#23

I trust the US intelligence agencies on this but it is isn’t only them, a number of states have reported Russian interference with the voting process last year although they all claim not votes were altered as a result. In addition, several Silicon Valley companies such as Facebook, Twitter, and Google have reported Russian interference with the election. From my experience this comment section is one of the few places where people are still holding on the view that there is no evidence of Russian interference. It appears no amount of evidence will convince people are opposed to the Democratic Party that there was Russian interference. For all I know, the Russians could have people posting here posing as leftists in order to fight the claim of Russian interference with the election. And now we know they have been using fake accounts after the election to widen fractures in American society. They even funded actual street protests in the US pretending to be black activists concerned about the way police treat blacks. Even the Republicans in Congress are convinced that the Russians interfered.


#24

Oh finally that smoking gun y’all been waiting for


#25

And the US intelligence agencies have proven themselves trustworthy…how, exactly? I’m remembering a certain middle eastern nation that not only absolutely, positively had weapons of mass destruction but were primed to use them. Oops. Well over a million people died because of their lies, and many more millions of lives were irrevocably affected. And that’s the first of countless numbers of inconsistencies and lies.

Even if it turn out that the Russians were able to hack the election…so what? How much attention has been paid to this issue in the past year as compared to those I mentioned? We’ve had serious election issues going back centuries (and electronic voting has only made the situation exponentially worse), yet we are quick to point the finger “out there” instead of looking at how fucked up we are.


#26

Um, I think the whole world benefits from a friendly attitude between the U.S. and Russia. Like, you know, the two nations with the most nuclear weapons?

It is thanks to two Soviet military officers–Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov in 1962 https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/03/you-and-almost-everyone-you-know-owe-your-life-to-this-man/ , and Stanislav Petrov in 1983 http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/09/russian-officer-prevented-nuclear-disaster-1983-170928031911163.html --that you and the people you love are alive today. Each of these men faced a situation in which the protocol called for launching the nuclear missiles, and each of these men refused to do it.

We may not be so lucky the next time.


#27

I was constantly on facebook in 2016, yet somehow I didn’t see a single one of these terrific ads. I totally would have shared the Jesus one; it is one of the funniest things I have ever seen: “Press ‘like’ to help Jesus win!” LOL!

Maybe I missed these ads because I was so busy sharing great footage, recorded over decades by the corporate news media and available on youtube, of Hillary Clinton saying and doing one thing after another that made her a completely unacceptable candidate to me and many other progressives.


#28

I was hoping he’d take on Feinstein.


#29

I hear you can do bad things with uranium. Really bad things.


#30

It was Dubya and Cheney who disputed the intelligence community. Intelligence services did not support the centrifuges lie, or the yellow cake lie. Those calls were made only at the political levels.


#31

For free? I take it that means you are not a supporter of this site. Why don’t you buddy “liters” just move along, freeloaders?


#32

Doltish vomit. Sure, make snarky about the whole “KGB agent” thing, as opposed to the apparently eminently trustworthy CIA agent thing.

It’s hard to know which is dumber: Trump braying out of turn again or these gullible tools not even being bright enough to see the obvious hypocrisies two inches from their noses.


#33

any port in a Democratic election rigging storm, I guess.

Red baiting–the fashion accessory that never goes out of style!


#34

Red baiting? You mean like Pete Seeger, Zero Mostel, Dalton Trumbo? Putin was certainly KGB, but he is definitely no Red. Have you been sleeping for the past 30 years?


#35

I never cite intelligence services in any of my comments. That’s your job. I rely entirely on what Trump and his gang themselves have to say. Which has proven to be an uninterrupted stream of self revealed lies.


#36

Actually, I think we should be counting the verifiable times he has told the truth – that would be a much smaller number; in fact, I believe it’s so small as to be nonexistent :lying_face:


#37

The intelligence agencies were not the problem with the weapons of mass destruction. Yes, they went over the evidence for weapons of mass destruction but they also qualified their statements indicating that there was uncertainty about the claims. What Bush did was to take what the intelligence agencies were saying but he eliminated the qualifiers making it look like certainty when it was anything but that. The people in the intelligence agencies are very professional when it comes to gathering intelligence information. The problem in the case of Iraq was their statements were filtered through a politician, George W. Bush. So blame Bush, not the agencies.

A foreign country interfering in a US election is very different from domestic problems with elections. I think there will always be some problems with elections. But elections must be run without outside interference. Foreigners can’t give money to candidates. Clearly the internet has enabled foreign countries to interfere with elections in a way that was impossible before. Both the Democratic Party and Republican Party are very concerned about this and Congress is holding hearings. Your “so what” statement about Russian interference makes not sense. It is a very big deal. Russia is a US adversary. If winning candidates are the candidates that Russia supports we are in very deep trouble. One only has to mention Trump to understand the problem. This is a problem that has to be addressed.


#38

Sure Pompeo stands by an intelligence assessment that provides zero evidence and no conclusions. How hard is that? It’s all part of the bread and circus provided by our overlords. Move along, nothing to see here.


#39

I went there and took a walk in the weeds, saved it is a PDF for some ungawdly reason…Thanks.


#40

:-)))…yepper.