logo Sign In

Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo — Page 805

This topic has been locked by a moderator.

Author
Time

There is no comparing Obama’s relationship with Russia versus Trump’s. They are in a completely different league. Obama never publicly called on Russia to hack into an opponent’s system. Obama didn’t have the depth of business ties. And Obama most certainly never openly trusted Putin’s word over his own intel.

If you want hypocrisy, look no further than Fox News’ vitriol when Obama floated the idea of meeting with North Korea.

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I guess the pee tape is for real after all. When Trumpy believes an ex-KGB thug over his own people what other explanation is left?

Forum Moderator

Where were you in '77?

Author
Time

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

There is no comparing Obama’s relationship with Russia versus Trump’s. They are in a completely different league. Obama never publicly called on Russia to hack into an opponent’s system.

Neither did Trump, to be accurate. At the time of Trump’s statement the server was wiped but believed to have been hacked before that point.

Accordingly the NYT, at the time, described Trump as saying that “he hoped Russian intelligence services had successfully hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, and encouraged them to publish whatever they may have stolen.”

Notice use of the past tense. Also the DNC also had already been hacked at that point.

Trump’s comments were inappropriate and encouraging of bad behavior by foreign adversaries, but it was understood, at the time, that he was asking for release of materials already presumed stolen because of negligence by Clinton.

Now that the context is forgotten, the NYT claims, “Donald J. Trump made a direct appeal to Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails and make them public.”

So now we’ve shifted to a future request for hacking, rather than a request to publish what was already hacked, only because people are ignoring the context.

Obama didn’t have the depth of business ties. And Obama most certainly never openly trusted Putin’s word over his own intel.

If you want hypocrisy, look no further than Fox News’ vitriol when Obama floated the idea of meeting with North Korea.

I don’t care to relitigate all of Obama’s failures with Russia, but the inconsistency of many on both sides is distressing.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

There is no comparing Obama’s relationship with Russia versus Trump’s. They are in a completely different league. Obama never publicly called on Russia to hack into an opponent’s system.

Neither did Trump, to be accurate. At the time of Trump’s statement the server was wiped but believed to have been hacked before that point.

Accordingly the NYT, at the time, described Trump as saying that “he hoped Russian intelligence services had successfully hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, and encouraged them to publish whatever they may have stolen.”

Notice use of the past tense. Also the DNC also had already been hacked at that point.

Trump’s comments were inappropriate and encouraging of bad behavior by foreign adversaries, but it was understood, at the time, that he was asking for release of materials already presumed stolen because of negligence by Clinton.

Now that the context is forgotten, the NYT claims, “Donald J. Trump made a direct appeal to Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails and make them public.”

So now we’ve shifted to a future request for hacking, rather than a request to publish what was already hacked, only because people are ignoring the context.

Obama didn’t have the depth of business ties. And Obama most certainly never openly trusted Putin’s word over his own intel.

If you want hypocrisy, look no further than Fox News’ vitriol when Obama floated the idea of meeting with North Korea.

I don’t care to relitigate all of Obama’s failures with Russia, but the inconsistency of many on both sides is distressing.

I am not sure there is any difference between requesting someone to perform a hack, or to release data from a hack they already performed.

Author
Time

dahmage said:

Mrebo said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

There is no comparing Obama’s relationship with Russia versus Trump’s. They are in a completely different league. Obama never publicly called on Russia to hack into an opponent’s system.

Neither did Trump, to be accurate. At the time of Trump’s statement the server was wiped but believed to have been hacked before that point.

Accordingly the NYT, at the time, described Trump as saying that “he hoped Russian intelligence services had successfully hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, and encouraged them to publish whatever they may have stolen.”

Notice use of the past tense. Also the DNC also had already been hacked at that point.

Trump’s comments were inappropriate and encouraging of bad behavior by foreign adversaries, but it was understood, at the time, that he was asking for release of materials already presumed stolen because of negligence by Clinton.

Now that the context is forgotten, the NYT claims, “Donald J. Trump made a direct appeal to Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails and make them public.”

So now we’ve shifted to a future request for hacking, rather than a request to publish what was already hacked, only because people are ignoring the context.

Obama didn’t have the depth of business ties. And Obama most certainly never openly trusted Putin’s word over his own intel.

If you want hypocrisy, look no further than Fox News’ vitriol when Obama floated the idea of meeting with North Korea.

I don’t care to relitigate all of Obama’s failures with Russia, but the inconsistency of many on both sides is distressing.

I am not sure there is any difference between requesting someone to perform a hack, or to release data from a hack they already performed.

There’s a huge difference.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

dahmage said:

Mrebo said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

There is no comparing Obama’s relationship with Russia versus Trump’s. They are in a completely different league. Obama never publicly called on Russia to hack into an opponent’s system.

Neither did Trump, to be accurate. At the time of Trump’s statement the server was wiped but believed to have been hacked before that point.

Accordingly the NYT, at the time, described Trump as saying that “he hoped Russian intelligence services had successfully hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, and encouraged them to publish whatever they may have stolen.”

Notice use of the past tense. Also the DNC also had already been hacked at that point.

Trump’s comments were inappropriate and encouraging of bad behavior by foreign adversaries, but it was understood, at the time, that he was asking for release of materials already presumed stolen because of negligence by Clinton.

Now that the context is forgotten, the NYT claims, “Donald J. Trump made a direct appeal to Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails and make them public.”

So now we’ve shifted to a future request for hacking, rather than a request to publish what was already hacked, only because people are ignoring the context.

Obama didn’t have the depth of business ties. And Obama most certainly never openly trusted Putin’s word over his own intel.

If you want hypocrisy, look no further than Fox News’ vitriol when Obama floated the idea of meeting with North Korea.

I don’t care to relitigate all of Obama’s failures with Russia, but the inconsistency of many on both sides is distressing.

I am not sure there is any difference between requesting someone to perform a hack, or to release data from a hack they already performed.

There’s a huge difference.

Those instances are both encouraging illegal Behavior against our country.

There’s also the fact that simply obtaining data from a server and getting access to that data do not always happen at the same time.

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

Puggo - Jar Jar’s Yoda said:

There is no comparing Obama’s relationship with Russia versus Trump’s. They are in a completely different league. Obama never publicly called on Russia to hack into an opponent’s system.

Neither did Trump, to be accurate. At the time of Trump’s statement the server was wiped but believed to have been hacked before that point.

Accordingly the NYT, at the time, described Trump as saying that “he hoped Russian intelligence services had successfully hacked Hillary Clinton’s email, and encouraged them to publish whatever they may have stolen.”

Notice use of the past tense. Also the DNC also had already been hacked at that point.

Trump’s comments were inappropriate and encouraging of bad behavior by foreign adversaries, but it was understood, at the time, that he was asking for release of materials already presumed stolen because of negligence by Clinton.

Now that the context is forgotten, the NYT claims, “Donald J. Trump made a direct appeal to Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s emails and make them public.”

So now we’ve shifted to a future request for hacking, rather than a request to publish what was already hacked, only because people are ignoring the context.

Trump clearly said, and I quote: “Russia, I hope you’re able to find” Hillary’s emails. I remember seeing the interview live at the time, and couldn’t believe a candidate could talk like this and not be run out of town. It’s up for posterity on the BBC channel:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-b71f2eYdTc

"Close the blast doors!"
Puggo’s website | Rescuing Star Wars

Author
Time

Yay for more Trump apologisticery.

Author
Time

Oh hey Frink. Getting the facts right isn’t apologetics.

Puggo, the quote is also in the articles I linked. The context and the understanding is what’s missing from the current discussion. Thus the NYT expressed a different understanding 2 years ago.

dahmage, that’s true. But asking someone to engage in future hacking is different from asking for information that’s already in the hands of shady people.

Consider that asking someone to steal the Pentagon Papers = bad; wanting them published = less bad.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mrebo said:

Oh hey Frink. Getting the facts right isn’t apologetics.

Puggo, the quote is also in the articles I linked. The context and the understanding is what’s missing from the current discussion. Thus the NYT expressed a different understanding 2 years ago.

dahmage, that’s true. But asking someone to engage in future hacking is different from asking for information that’s already in the hands of shady people.

Consider that asking someone to steal the Pentagon Papers = bad; wanting them published = less bad.

You sound like you’re grasping for reasons why Trump’s public call for Russia to get directly involved in American politics, through shady means and for sinister purposes, isn’t really as bad as it sounds. It’s like you’re saying “If you think about it, he didn’t really say what you think he said, and so he’s really not that bad a guy. Especially compared to Obama.”

I mean, seriously? Come on.

TV’s Frink said:

chyron just put a big Ric pic in your sig and be done with it.

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-helsinki-summit/index.html

Thoughts:

Conservatives got mad at Obama for blaming America and being overly conciliatory to hostile nations (including Russia), so this reverse is darkly amusing.

But does it really even matter anymore?

Do we want more Cold War?

And I find it amusing how you’ve tied yourself in a rhetorical knot to avoid simply stating something to the effect of ‘liberals want more war’, since that would get you laughed out of the room.

You probably don’t recognize me because of the red arm.
Episode 9 Rewrite, The Starlight Project (Released!) and ANH Technicolor Project (Released!)

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mrebo said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-helsinki-summit/index.html

Thoughts:

Conservatives got mad at Obama for blaming America and being overly conciliatory to hostile nations (including Russia), so this reverse is darkly amusing.

Oh my God. Is that really how you’re interpreting this? People aren’t mad at Trump for being conciliatory to Russia. They’re mad at him for being treasonous! Even if you disagree with that assessment, don’t fucking lie about why they’re mad at him!

Do we want more Cold War?

Do we want an illegitimate president? Trump has been alienating all of our allies since he took office so why do you suddenly care about diplomatic relations?

If the Republican Congress had any principles or any love for this country then they would immediately impeach this treacherous bastard.

The Person in Question

Author
Time
 (Edited)

Mrebo said:

Freedom means that people are going to be intolerant.

What do you honestly care about freedom? You see no problem with the sitting American president allowing one of the world’s most oppressive dictators to meddle in our elections. Do not, for one second, act as though you care at all about American freedoms.

I don’t see much reason to respond to your post beyond this since it doesn’t even have anything to do with what we’re talking about. We’re talking about discrimination, not intolerance, which are separate issues.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

NeverarGreat said:

Mrebo said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-helsinki-summit/index.html

Thoughts:

Conservatives got mad at Obama for blaming America and being overly conciliatory to hostile nations (including Russia), so this reverse is darkly amusing.

But does it really even matter anymore?

Do we want more Cold War?

And I find it amusing how you’ve tied yourself in a rhetorical knot to avoid simply stating something to the effect of ‘liberals want more war’, since that would get you laughed out of the room.

Have we not laughed him out of the room already?

I’m starting to think Putin has a pee tape of Mrebo as well.

Author
Time

I honestly don’t find any of this Trump phenomenon to be the least bit funny.

The Person in Question

Author
Time
 (Edited)

The good things to come out of Trump’s traitorous behavior at his conference with Putin are that he’s sealed his fate as a one-term president and now his defenders and supporters can be immediately, and accurately, labeled as unAmerican.

The Person in Question

Author
Time

chyron8472 said:

Mrebo said:

Oh hey Frink. Getting the facts right isn’t apologetics.

Puggo, the quote is also in the articles I linked. The context and the understanding is what’s missing from the current discussion. Thus the NYT expressed a different understanding 2 years ago.

dahmage, that’s true. But asking someone to engage in future hacking is different from asking for information that’s already in the hands of shady people.

Consider that asking someone to steal the Pentagon Papers = bad; wanting them published = less bad.

You sound like you’re grasping for reasons why Trump’s public call for Russia to get directly involved in American politics, through shady means and for sinister purposes, isn’t really as bad as it sounds. It’s like you’re saying “If you think about it, he didn’t really say what you think he said, and so he’s really not that bad a guy. Especially compared to Obama.”

I mean, seriously? Come on.

Whatever it “sounds like,” it was the NYT that originally recognized that Trump wasn’t asking Russia to hack the Democrats. As I said: what Trump said was inappropriate and encouraging to our adversaries to do bad things.

This is simply a matter of accuracy and honesty and not what it “sounds” like I’m trying to say. When my posts are not so selectively read, this is all very clear. The fact that the NYT now asserts that Trump was directly asking for the Russians to hack the Dems, contrary to what the NYT previously understood shows an agenda at work. My attempt to be clear about what actually happened while at the same time recognizing Trump was wrong isn’t apologetics or whatever else.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

NeverarGreat said:

Mrebo said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-helsinki-summit/index.html

Thoughts:

Conservatives got mad at Obama for blaming America and being overly conciliatory to hostile nations (including Russia), so this reverse is darkly amusing.

But does it really even matter anymore?

Do we want more Cold War?

And I find it amusing how you’ve tied yourself in a rhetorical knot to avoid simply stating something to the effect of ‘liberals want more war’, since that would get you laughed out of the room.

What rhetorical knot? It was an honest question. It may dictated by events or there may be some creative way out of it. Liberals don’t have a monopoly on distrusting Russia.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-helsinki-summit/index.html

Thoughts:

Conservatives got mad at Obama for blaming America and being overly conciliatory to hostile nations (including Russia), so this reverse is darkly amusing.

Oh my God. Is that really how you’re interpreting this? People aren’t mad at Trump for being conciliatory to Russia. They’re mad at him for being treasonous! Even if you disagree with that assessment, don’t fucking lie about why they’re mad at him!

The target of my comment were conservatives who support Trump. You can tell that because that is who I wrote about. I said nothing about the people who are mad at Trump. You can tell that because I wrote nothing about them. I’m saying that Trump supporters are showing inconsistency. You can tell that because that was what I actually wrote.

Do we want more Cold War?

Do we want an illegitimate president? Trump has been alienating all of our allies since he took office so why do you suddenly care about diplomatic relations?

Okay. Strange that an open-ended question about a realistic possibility is met with accusations.

If the Republican Congress had any principles or any love for this country then they would immediately impeach this treacherous bastard.

Cool.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

NeverarGreat said:

Mrebo said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-helsinki-summit/index.html

Thoughts:

Conservatives got mad at Obama for blaming America and being overly conciliatory to hostile nations (including Russia), so this reverse is darkly amusing.

But does it really even matter anymore?

Do we want more Cold War?

And I find it amusing how you’ve tied yourself in a rhetorical knot to avoid simply stating something to the effect of ‘liberals want more war’, since that would get you laughed out of the room.

Have we not laughed him out of the room already?

I’m starting to think Putin has a pee tape of Mrebo as well.

Your posts help me understand why people voted for Trump.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

NeverarGreat said:

Mrebo said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-helsinki-summit/index.html

Thoughts:

Conservatives got mad at Obama for blaming America and being overly conciliatory to hostile nations (including Russia), so this reverse is darkly amusing.

But does it really even matter anymore?

Do we want more Cold War?

And I find it amusing how you’ve tied yourself in a rhetorical knot to avoid simply stating something to the effect of ‘liberals want more war’, since that would get you laughed out of the room.

Have we not laughed him out of the room already?

I’m starting to think Putin has a pee tape of Mrebo as well.

Your posts help me understand why people voted for Trump.

Which ones?

Author
Time

TV’s Frink said:

Mrebo said:

TV’s Frink said:

NeverarGreat said:

Mrebo said:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/07/16/politics/donald-trump-putin-helsinki-summit/index.html

Thoughts:

Conservatives got mad at Obama for blaming America and being overly conciliatory to hostile nations (including Russia), so this reverse is darkly amusing.

But does it really even matter anymore?

Do we want more Cold War?

And I find it amusing how you’ve tied yourself in a rhetorical knot to avoid simply stating something to the effect of ‘liberals want more war’, since that would get you laughed out of the room.

Have we not laughed him out of the room already?

I’m starting to think Putin has a pee tape of Mrebo as well.

Your posts help me understand why people voted for Trump.

Which ones?

The superficial, sarcastic, and personal ones. Hard to narrow it down I guess.

The blue elephant in the room.

Author
Time

moviefreakedmind said:

Mrebo said:

Freedom means that people are going to be intolerant.

What do you honestly care about freedom? You see no problem with the sitting American president allowing one of the world’s most oppressive dictators to meddle in our elections. Do not, for one second, act as though you care at all about American freedoms.

What a silly and erroneous response. I expect more from you.

I don’t see much reason to respond to your post beyond this since it doesn’t even have anything to do with what we’re talking about. We’re talking about discrimination, not intolerance, which are separate issues.

Discrimination is a manifestation of intolerance.

The blue elephant in the room.