Donald Trump

Oh, I don't know. Those white nationalist gun freaks who support him are armed and dangerous!

 

How so? Have they gone to Hillary rallies to start riots and beat up her supporters? Of course not. You see plenty of that from the anti-Trump crowd. Using the same voter intimidation and physical violence tactics that was used straight from the Jim Crow era. This type of ongoing fascism is one of many reasons I'm getting my friends and family members in swing states to vote Trump.

 

WikiLeaks has a 100% track record of facticity (I've been watching a lot of Trailer Park Boys.) I didn't really even pay attention to the outlet that was distributing the emails...the emails are real, though.

I think it's fair. If the Russian government were fucking over its people, which it probably is, I wouldn't begrudge the US at all for hacking its officials' emails and telling the people the truth. I think these leaks have proven to be a necessity. We need to know that politicians and elections are being bought. It's imperative, and goes beyond any embarrassment one might feel at having their emails hacked. And frankly, maybe it will make people think twice about the behavior they engage in.

No matter who wins, I can deal with it. I won't be out rioting or in my bedroom crying. I think I'm pretty stupid for thinking there's even a possibility that Trump will win, though. The grand old oligarchy has probably got it that rigged. I mean, as far as what's going to happen, there's nothing to complain about. It has already happened and is happening, and if someone's going to protest, now's as good a a time as any.

 

100%? That's incredible! . Who arrived at that conclusion? Did they include the latest leaks? The leaks seem a bit one-sided, aimed at one political candidate in order to get another elected. Julian Assange never impressed me as a particularly honest man http://www.news.com.au/world/assange-a-dishonest-monster/story-fn6sb9br-1226210722373 http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/09/lowry-julian-assange-is-still-a-creep-214224 and he seems to be on a power trip. Of course, as a former KGB agent, Putin is a master of deceit. Why haven't the Republicans and Trump headquarters been hacked? The Russians are playing us like a Stradivarius.

 

I don't really think the admiration of Assange, or lack thereof is relevant.

The information exists and is available to the public whether or not Assange is a champion for free speech or working for ze russians. And it exists and is available whether or not it came from someone employed by the Russian government, or a lone wolf.

Also it wasn't exactly a private email account, in terms of your metaphor of the private email accounts of regular citizens. It was a professional email account for the campaign manager of the potential future leader of the most powerful country in the world, thus it should be presumed to be vulnerable to hackers. Politics is a dirty business as I think you have mentioned a few times.

I don't really see the point in moralizing it all. Personally I've found some of the emails interesting and I'm going to make use of the information provided. The source shouldn't matter as long as the material is authentic. Sources are meant to be anonymous.

 

and how do you know the material is authentic?...because someone told you it was so?

 

What do you mean "the information exists and is available to the public"? After it's been hacked? What's relevant is that there was a reasonable expectation of privacy that's been violated, and seems to have been done by agents of a foreign power to manipulate a U.S. Presidential election. The concept of "private" extends to professionals. Yes, politics is a dirty business, but giving credence to selective eleventh hour leaks by an agent of a hostile foreign power goes beyond "dirty". We'd better start moralizing or this country will self-destruct. How do you know the material is authentic?

 

Well the fact that no one has ever contested the validity of a leak, and so many of them have been confirmed as being true.

I doubt Assange wants Drumpf to get elected. He just happens to have a lot of damaging info on Hillary, and Hillary is more of a scandal than anything he could produce on Drumpf. Drumpf doesn't have that much power, comparatively.

I don't buy American media when it comes to Assange. The state media will do anything to drag him through the dirt.

Has anyone seen the proof that the Russians are the source of the leaks? I sure haven't. I think the accusations laid against Russia are a ruse to keep us focused on an enemy. People are getting jaded on the whole ISIS thing and now they point to Russia. Just because they're not so clever and their whole idea is to keep us occupied with a foreign threat so we don't focus on the threat at home.

But it doesn't really matter even if it was the Russians. The primaries were as rigged as rigged can be, and pointing to the Russians isn't going to change that. We have a real threat at home and it needs to be dealt with. Deal with the Russians later.

Both Donna Brazil and Hillary Clinton have confirmed the validity of the recent leaks. I'm not sure why they keep admitting the validity. I assume they realize there is some way to confirm whether or not they are true.

 

Hillary said in this last debate...words can be changed, or did I dream that?
I have seen it done myself. just like that.
Doesn't it disturb anyone that people are hacking other's emails.....changing wording to suit themselves and their agendas.....so others will come along next and write false information and find a way to use that to their advantage next time. Pandora's box.
Hacking is illegal. Hacking is illegal....hacking is illegal....

Something is seriously wrong with this world....big time.

 

My hacking pleasure? I am not a hacker......so cool it with the sick, harrassing comments on me.

 

The crude video of Don Aldtrump's was humorously shocking. It's hard to understand how he could run for President with this kind of a past . This guy really has a lot of nerve to still continue being in the race with all this chauvinism exposed in front of the whole world shaming his own nation that elected him as a presidential candidate. Or perhaps all that past sensory pleasures could have dulled or deadened his intellectual abilities.

Jesus was indeed right to some extent about the rich dudes on the context of the camel and needle story.


But I must admit I had a lot of laughs becoz of him and so have a soft corner for him.

I wish him bad luck in the presidential race and good luck for the rest of his life, as long as he don't harm anyone.

 

The Tea Party dictating republican party politics is the most serious issue they have. When a handful of Tea Party members of the house threatened to default on the budget they represented 20% of the population declaring war on the rest of the country. Neither their forcing the rest of the party to follow their lead nor their declaring war on the rest of the country were decisions they made because they feel they have the upper hand. Both were desperation moves with any Tea Party member insisting that Washington is ruining the country and if they can't get everything they want they will declare war. Twenty percent of the population declaring war on the rest is not a functional democracy and if they had actually defaulted on the budget Obama would have no choice but to declare martial law and disband the Tea Party.

This kind of insanity is quite common in American politics and in over ten years of asking the simple distinction between a democracy and lynch mob I have yet to hear the correct answer from even academics. People often say the difference is voting or having a constitution, but a lynch mob can do those things. The difference is that a lynch mob can hang even half their own members and still be recognized as a lynch mob, while in a democracy that's known as civil war and revolution when you no longer share a functional government. The idea that all politics is about is fighting for what you want until the bitter end is Three Stooges slapstick and something the black community can relate to since they have no justice in or out of court.

Trump now taking over the republican party against serious objections by many party leaders is another sign that the party is no longer unified and is merely going on inertia and mutual hatred. All the demographics also suggest it is rapidly aging and will be defunct within twenty years. They are largely composed the rural population of the US, while Obama was elected by the major urban centers which, for the first time in US history, outnumbered the rural. That gap will only continue to widen and with the republican party now divided, yet, refusing to acknowledge the situation and come up with an alternative US politics are now spinning down the toilet towards disaster. Its the civil war all over again where a minority of the population, mostly senior citizens, are daring the rest to stomp them into the mud.

 

Thos has already been covered, but Wikileaks has a really good track record for providing authentic documents.

And no one has contested the authenticity.

What I mean by the information exists and is public ..edit, see below please

 

To simplify my point

I know some people think the information contained in the leaks is no big deal, but I personally think some of it offers some interesting insight into the workings of the Democratic party.

And so my opinion evolves relative to new information i learn. I cant devolve my opiniom just because the information MAY come from a dubious source. The source doesnt change the information itself.

 

Wikileaks is reputable and i can only assume if the emails were not authentic the authors of the email would have made this claim already.

 

No agency that dumps stuff like this on the eve of the U.S. election is reputable. The intent is obvious.

 

Le sigh.

Wikileaks has no track record of releasing inauthentic documents, therefore as far as being a source for releasing authentic documents yes they are reputable.

Were you against them when they released classified documents from the Bush administration?

 

I'm against them period. They and people who traffic in them are an insidious threat to democracy and individual liberty. The anit-Clinton crowd seem to agree agree that release of, or even casual handling of, classified information is a threat to our national security. Privacy and confidentiality in personal communications are important rights in a free society. People involved in political campaigns aren't government officials. If I tell someone something in private and some evesdropper broadcasts to the world at large, it has a chilling effect on freedom. There are lots of people who would take a dim view of me if they knew I held some of the views I've expressed in these forums. It should be my right to decide what and to whom I disclose to the public. Without some sense of decency and restraint, society becomes a soap opera.

Trump already used the latest wikidump to denounce the Clinton campaign for "viciously criticizing Catholics and evangelicals". FOX news also highlighted the alleged "anti-Catholic" attacks yesterday. And what was that based on? Two Clinton staffers, John Halperin (a Catholic) and Jennifer Palmieri were discussing via email thrice divorced Rupert Murdoch, the Austalian media mogul and current FOX CEO, described by Newseek International's editor as "the man whose name is synonymous with unethical newspapers, of essentially being a religious hypocrite. Halperin criticized Murdoch for "bastardization of the Catholic faith." Murdock is not himself a Catholic, but he had his children conspicuously baptized in the River Jordan and raised Catholic and was knighted by Pope John Paul II. Palmieri responded that "I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn't understand if they became evangelicals." Tacky, yes; "viciously criticizing Catholics and evangelicals"? I think not. And if people can't freely express such thoughts to each other in private without fear of them becoming public, I think life in America would be pretty repressive.

 

i agree, wholeheartedly, Okie, but it won't stop. It gets worse....It is the new age piracy.......as long as our national security is aware and changes things with how they communicate DRASTICALLY!
There are no moral codes anymore.

insidious is exactly what it is.