3 ms·

I think that the part you are missing is that the vast majority (like 65%) don't support or respect this President at all. Of all the terrible things the gover

by jMyles 10y ago

I think that the part you are missing is that the vast majority (like 65%) don't support or respect this President at all. Of all the terrible things the government has done in the past 1 / 10 / 100 years, I don't think that a candidate coordinating with Russia about which fake news to publish is even worth mentioning. If Congress has the guts to investigate the Steele dossier (which alleged Trump traded eased regulations for oil interests) then that's great. And if he is impeached on that basis, that's great too, although it leaves us with a probably worse Mike Pence. Better yet is if the entire government falls. I'm not defending Trump or his conduct; I'm just saying this is a distraction.

mirimir 10y ago
Russia's goal is fragmenting the US. Just as the US did to the Soviet Union. Turnabout is fair play, no?
- pessimizer 10y ago
  The confidence with which you express the goals that you're projecting on Russia here is scary. Not only do we have yet to find evidence that Russia did anything involving the election (although we certainly could during these investigations), you seem to have sussed out their goal in doing that which has not been proven, and a motive of revenge. It's weird. Hearing people talk like this is weird, and reminds me of the run-up to Iraq, except that at least then there were claims to evidence.
  - mirimir 10y ago
    I've been following this stuff for decades. Have you read Igor Panarin's work? He and Putin are both "ex"-KGB. But hey, it's just a hypothesis. Let's see what evidence comes out. Edit: http://perezhilton.com/2016-12-29-russia-donald-trump-election-interference-intelligence-officer-suing-federal-agencies-report http://perezhilton.com/2016-12-29-russia-donald-trump-electi...
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
kleinbottlez 10y ago
> I don't think that a candidate coordinating with Russia about which fake news to publish Not to attack your statement in particular, but rather piggybacking on it as an illustration of those who are actually making this claim, to whom I ask: Can you please provide me with an example of a widely publicized "fake news" that might have had a significant impact on the campaign, or otherwise swayed people opinion in favor of DJT? I can think of plenty of flat out misleading insinuations that were constantly being churned out by the left leaning media establishment the minute Trump started to pick up momentum. Because that was the narrative the Obama admin started to run with as election day was getting closer, you know, just in case, and I found it laughable. That's when the whole "fake news" gimmick spontaneously became a thing across all major media outlets. Surely they weren't referring to the dozens of accurate and damning emails published by Wikileaks exposing the corruption and media collusion of the democratic party in favor of one of their candidates, were they? Surely it wasn't related to the money trails and other shady transactions performed by the Clintons as exposed in Peter Schweizer's investigation [1]? Are we to believe that somehow Trump's campaign "coordinated" with Russian operatives? What does that even entail exactly, besides trying to de-escalate the situation exacerbated by Obama when he tried to poison the well by expelling 35 Russians diplomats, as a retaliation for a yet unproven "interference" [2]? Did Trump time his tactical tweets by the second for optimal impact according to good ole Vlad's recommendations? I mean seriously, can you please enlighten me with some sound logic on this? Because you will find that this will inexorably lead you to look inward at your own shitshow of a democratic party [3], and perhaps the cognitive dissonance will cease... or intensify. Full disclosure: I was a Rand Paul supporter. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/us/politics/new-book-clinton-cash-questions-foreign-donations-to-foundation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/us/politics/new-book-clin... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/29/barack-obama-sanctions-russia-election-hack https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/29/barack-obama... [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNZmXhxuThU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNZmXhxuThU
gnaritas 10y ago
Treason is not a distraction, it's as serious as a crime gets.
- dr_ick 10y ago
  Treason? You come to Hacker News to imply that the President of the United States has committed Treason. What proof do you have? This is pure slander. Sorry your preferred candidate lost the election. Next time don't let violent, intolerant, elitist, smug liberals and celebrities take over your political party. Democrats used to be about Unions and the working family. Appears that era is over. As noted in previous comments... There is a reason the Rust Belt voted for Trump, and it has nothing to do with Russia.
  - gnaritas 10y ago
    I implied no such thing, read what I wrote 50 times if you must until you see that I merely said treason is a serious crime, not a distraction. I didn't not imply he was guilty, we don't know that one way or the other; hence the investigation. You really need to learn to have a discussion with someone, without blaming them for all of the perceived faults of the democrats. You don't know my political party, nor my preferred candidate, you're just assuming everything as if everyone who doesn't like Trump is the same. > There is a reason the Rust Belt voted for Trump, and it has nothing to do with Russia. No one thinks it does; the Rust Belt is just gullible and fell for a con man promising them things that cannot occur, those jobs cannot come back, they no longer exist. They heard what they wanted to hear because they're unable to hear the truth.

by jMyles 10y ago

mirimir 10y ago

Russia's goal is fragmenting the US. Just as the US did to the Soviet Union. Turnabout is fair play, no?

pessimizer 10y ago
The confidence with which you express the goals that you're projecting on Russia here is scary. Not only do we have yet to find evidence that Russia did anything involving the election (although we certainly could during these investigations), you seem to have sussed out their goal in doing that which has not been proven, and a motive of revenge. It's weird. Hearing people talk like this is weird, and reminds me of the run-up to Iraq, except that at least then there were claims to evidence.
- mirimir 10y ago
  I've been following this stuff for decades. Have you read Igor Panarin's work? He and Putin are both "ex"-KGB. But hey, it's just a hypothesis. Let's see what evidence comes out. Edit: http://perezhilton.com/2016-12-29-russia-donald-trump-election-interference-intelligence-officer-suing-federal-agencies-report http://perezhilton.com/2016-12-29-russia-donald-trump-electi...

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

kleinbottlez 10y ago

> I don't think that a candidate coordinating with Russia about which fake news to publish Not to attack your statement in particular, but rather piggybacking on it as an illustration of those who are actually making this claim, to whom I ask: Can you please provide me with an example of a widely publicized "fake news" that might have had a significant impact on the campaign, or otherwise swayed people opinion in favor of DJT? I can think of plenty of flat out misleading insinuations that were constantly being churned out by the left leaning media establishment the minute Trump started to pick up momentum. Because that was the narrative the Obama admin started to run with as election day was getting closer, you know, just in case, and I found it laughable. That's when the whole "fake news" gimmick spontaneously became a thing across all major media outlets. Surely they weren't referring to the dozens of accurate and damning emails published by Wikileaks exposing the corruption and media collusion of the democratic party in favor of one of their candidates, were they? Surely it wasn't related to the money trails and other shady transactions performed by the Clintons as exposed in Peter Schweizer's investigation [1]? Are we to believe that somehow Trump's campaign "coordinated" with Russian operatives? What does that even entail exactly, besides trying to de-escalate the situation exacerbated by Obama when he tried to poison the well by expelling 35 Russians diplomats, as a retaliation for a yet unproven "interference" [2]? Did Trump time his tactical tweets by the second for optimal impact according to good ole Vlad's recommendations? I mean seriously, can you please enlighten me with some sound logic on this? Because you will find that this will inexorably lead you to look inward at your own shitshow of a democratic party [3], and perhaps the cognitive dissonance will cease... or intensify. Full disclosure: I was a Rand Paul supporter. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/us/politics/new-book-clinton-cash-questions-foreign-donations-to-foundation.html https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/20/us/politics/new-book-clin... [2] https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/29/barack-obama-sanctions-russia-election-hack https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/29/barack-obama... [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNZmXhxuThU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNZmXhxuThU

gnaritas 10y ago

Treason is not a distraction, it's as serious as a crime gets.

dr_ick 10y ago
Treason? You come to Hacker News to imply that the President of the United States has committed Treason. What proof do you have? This is pure slander. Sorry your preferred candidate lost the election. Next time don't let violent, intolerant, elitist, smug liberals and celebrities take over your political party. Democrats used to be about Unions and the working family. Appears that era is over. As noted in previous comments... There is a reason the Rust Belt voted for Trump, and it has nothing to do with Russia.
- gnaritas 10y ago
  I implied no such thing, read what I wrote 50 times if you must until you see that I merely said treason is a serious crime, not a distraction. I didn't not imply he was guilty, we don't know that one way or the other; hence the investigation. You really need to learn to have a discussion with someone, without blaming them for all of the perceived faults of the democrats. You don't know my political party, nor my preferred candidate, you're just assuming everything as if everyone who doesn't like Trump is the same. > There is a reason the Rust Belt voted for Trump, and it has nothing to do with Russia. No one thinks it does; the Rust Belt is just gullible and fell for a con man promising them things that cannot occur, those jobs cannot come back, they no longer exist. They heard what they wanted to hear because they're unable to hear the truth.