world

Trump aides ask of Russian meddling: Does it matter?

102 Comments
By ANNE FLAHERTY

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

102 Comments
Login to comment

How rich, watched a CNN debate on it last night with everyone up in arms over the " Russian meddling in the election ". How many elections do the US intelligence agencies meddle in every year? Probably much easier to count the ones they don't interfere in. Would anyone believe they don't try to undermine Putin by covertly supporting his opponents every chance they get? Ditto for the ex Soviet republics or rest of Eastern Europe. " This whole thing is a spin " line in the article above seems pretty accurate, seems like the forces behind team Hillary just can't let the loss go. Also, everyone in the debate seemed bent on painting Russia and Putin as public enemy no.1 and an evil empire...really echoed the cold war rhetoric. Beats me why having better relations with Russia should be a bad thing in the eyes of those " experts ".

-16 ( +6 / -22 )

Democrats say it’s unlikely the public will ever hear detailed evidence because doing so would disclose classified sources and methods. But with last week’s declaration by CIA Director John Brennan that there was “strong consensus” that Russia hacked Democrats to try to sway the election,

It's WMD all over again.

We have evidence but we just can't show you.

"Strong consensus" means some people who want to agree, agree.

-15 ( +7 / -22 )

Well, you can bet that if Hillary had won the election "fair and square" the whinging and accusations from "Camp Donald" would be loud and relentless. Lawsuits would be flying like confetti at a wedding. Indeed, "There's going to be things that individually people may believe in their hearts or in their mind;" however, we are so far down the rabbit hole that the truth doesn't seem to matter. The Apprentice is moving to the White House. And no one gets fired until four years pass.

12 ( +15 / -3 )

"Where’s the evidence?” asked Kellyanne Conway, another close Trump adviser.

Its in the CIA and FBI reports. Where's your evidence of 3 million illegals voting for Clinton? Twitter?

We will see what Trump and the Republicans can do to stop the investigations. I think they are probably willing to give the Russians a pass on this one.

18 ( +20 / -2 )

Donna Brazile, interim head of the Democratic National Committee, said the DNC was no match for a sophisticated foreign power in cyberspace that “weaponized” private emails to “sow misinformation and to sow discord” between Clinton and her primary rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5205

Utterly shameless.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Encouraging foreign espionage on America is the new patriotism.

17 ( +20 / -3 )

Donna Brazile was fed the questions hillary would get in the CNN debates by CNN. Both she and the Clinton News Network have any credibility.

-16 ( +3 / -19 )

And no one gets fired until four years pass.

Maybe, but there is the option of impeachment if Trump self-destructs.

13 ( +14 / -1 )

Donald Trump’s top aides on Sunday said the president-elect isn’t ready to accept the finding by intelligence officials that Moscow hacked Democratic emails in a bid to elevate Trump. Even if it’s true, they said, Trump still won the White House fair and square.

Even if its true means "we know its true."

Donna Brazile, interim head of the Democratic National Committee, said the DNC was no match for a sophisticated foreign power in cyberspace that “weaponized” private emails to “sow misinformation and to sow discord” between Clinton and her primary rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders.

What a pile of manure!!! The DNC is mainly responsible for Trump becoming president. If that shrew Debbie Wasserman Schultz hadn't been so biased and one sided, Bernie Sanders would have beaten Hillary EASILY and would have schooled Trump in a general election. Now we hear the DNC is purging all the Bernie style progressives from positions of power. It seems that they still haven't learned their lesson. The DNC is trying to win on a republican-light platform, and that isn't going to cut the mustard. Sanders needs to leave the DNC, take all the super progressives with him like Elisabeth Warren, and run against Trump as an independent. 4 years of this clown and the US will be ready to elect Felix the Cat over Trump. Bernie is famous and popular enough. He doesnt need the DNC.

-4 ( +6 / -10 )

Trump aides ask of Russian meddling: Does it matter?

Only if you care your national election being manipulated by a foreign country.

14 ( +15 / -1 )

Trump 'isn't ready to accept the finding by intelligence officials that Moscow hacked Democratic emails in a bid to elevate Trump.'

Let's hope he starts getting ready to accept it!

9 ( +10 / -1 )

Its in the CIA and FBI reports.

Not quite as enjoyable as the Harry Potter novels. And the Harry Potter novels required less suspension of disbelief.

-12 ( +3 / -15 )

Trump 'isn't ready to accept the finding by intelligence officials that Moscow hacked Democratic emails in a bid to elevate Trump.'

Let's hope he starts getting ready to accept it!

Odds are he's got major financial ties to Russia, so he's not going to do anything to damage those ties. His own wallet takes priority over the presidency.

9 ( +13 / -4 )

If this was about hacking the computer to obtain emails, then it doesn't really matter in terms of the election. It's just like spreading a form of propaganda to influence voters. If this is about hacking the voting machines, well, that's a different story.

-5 ( +1 / -6 )

McCain made some wise remarks Sunday, particularly noting that cyber security policy in congress is spread over four committees. Perhaps setting up a joint, unified cyber security committee which could liaison and offer aid to public and party-related tech groups would be good as it would necessarily be bipartisan; entrusting this to some group like the CIA or FBI would be bad. Fixing this problem should not be too difficult, and McCain is on the right track.

He was wrong, though, when he criticized Obama for not coming out more forcefully against the Russians before the election.Imagine if he had forcefully accused Putin of mining data and systematically releasing it to elect a certain party - that certain party (McCain included) would have gone nuts. Vast, vast precedent (note, the spelling, Don!) exists to support this - it would have torn the country apart.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Ah, forgot about the anti-Hillary bots. They, with the Putin supporters and Republicans, will work overtime to discredit any report of Russian hacking. It's a tall mountain for Democrats to climb, but it's a fight worth fighting.

A recent survey showed 52% of Republicans erroneously believe Trump won the popular vote. Something like 70% believe the elections were rigged against Trump, 40% believe Obama was born outside of the US, and 53% believe Planned Parenthhod should be stripped of funding due to the fake fatal sale video.

That's the gullible mentality we are up against. Its not going to be pretty.

12 ( +14 / -2 )

Trump may be a loud, brash, orange piece of fertilizer raw material with racist and sexist tendencies, but on this one, he's the broken clock showing the right time. An American election is like two megaphone wielding people trying to shout each other down, each surrounded by a hundred people trying, at the top of their lungs, to repeat everything their megaphone weilder shouts, with a hundred more mixed in yelling the greatest hits, while hundreds of pitchmen, nut jobs, and con artists try and find something in what is being said that will attract attention to them, all happening in a video arcade, at rush hour, outside the busiest rail station in Tokyo, on New Years, while someone is testing the earthquake warning sirens. Over $6 BILLION was being spent by the most ruthless and venal Americans trying to sway the voters by every means possible, including every thing Putin is accused of doing, and worse, but you are expected to believe that Putin, spending less than a million dollars, dictated the outcome.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

“If my many supporters acted and threatened people like those who lost the election are doing, they would be scorned & called terrible names!”

Who's being threatened?

Has someone said "I'd like to punch him in the face?"

http://www.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-punch-protester-2016-2

5 ( +6 / -1 )

you are expected to believe that Putin, spending less than a million dollars, dictated the outcome.

Influenced, not dictated.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

There needs to be a full-fledged joint investigation by Congress not only into Russian hacking, but also into what relationships & interaction happened between Trump's campaigns & Russian operatives. It would not surprise me if there was collusion.

Also, there needs to be an investigation into Trump's finances and an insistence on the tradition of separating the President from his personal/business finances while he is President. (And that includes his children.) The stakes are too high. Trump has shown no loyalty to our country in his lifetime; what he has always shown is his desire to enrich himself at the expense of others.

This is our country we are talking about!! Not some reality tv show!! The consequences are grave. Wars can be started, many lives can be lost. Buck up, Congress, and do your job! That includes you, you hypocritical Republicans, who would have already castigated Hillary Clinton for doing one-tenth of the no-nos Donald Trump has.

6 ( +8 / -2 )

Once again, the hacking is being made into a greater evil than the ill-doings contained in the emails, which it was not. Had Hillary not been a dirty candidate, she would not have been soiled by the exposure of the emails.

Personally, I would love if every candidate'e emails (including Trump's) were hacked, and we could see more about what these candidates were really like, and what they were really doing.

As it was, none of the voting machines were hacked (they can't be, they are never connected to a network), so the election itself wasn't hacked, just a crooked candidate who deserved to be exposed.

That's the gullible mentality we are up against. Its not going to be pretty.

It was not the republicans who elected Trump, but independents and swing voters, a great deal of whom voted for Obama in the last two elections. You yourself are part of the problem, seeing yourself as educated and informed, and seeing anyone who is not like yourself as "gullible" or worse. In the past, the democrat party was the party of the gullible working class, the blue collar America which at one time made up the majority of the population of America. You know absolutely nothing at all about the reality which exists in the 95% of America which exists outside the large cities. You are not as informed and educate as you think.

The modern democrat party is the party of the super rich. All of Wall Street supported Hillary, almost all of the tech industry supported her, and all of Hollywood and the entertainment industry also supported Hillary. These groups of people today are the richest people which the world has ever seen. They make more in a week than blue collar people make in a year, or several years. The hypocrisy of the democrat party simply became too much for middle America to bear.

The democrat party has to stop being the party of Elon Musk, Jamie Dion, Steven Spielberg, Beyonce, and Jay Z, it has to return to being the party of George, Joe, and Janet.

3 ( +9 / -6 )

That is how Hillary and her feminism at work: Bigotry with I spite on your grave madness!

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

I'm really enjoying watching this MSM driven "fake news" story about Putin and Russia.

The emails were not hacked, they were leaked. The NSA knows this.

Craig Murray, who is the former UK ambassador to Uzbekistan and associate of Julian Assange,

“flew to Washington, D.C. for emails….He claims he had a clandestine hand-off … near American University with one of the email sources. Murray said the leakers’ motivation was ‘disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the ’tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders’…

Murray says: ‘The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks’. ‘Regardless of whether the Russians hacked into the DNC, the documents Wikileaks published did not come from that,’ Murray insists.” ….

http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/12/16/ah-so-putin-didnt-hack-those-emails-after-all/

US Intel Vets Dispute Russia Hacking Claims

All signs point to leaking, not hacking. If hacking were involved, the National Security Agency would know it – and know both sender and recipient.

https://consortiumnews.com/2016/12/12/us-intel-vets-dispute-russia-hacking-claims/

-6 ( +4 / -10 )

No it doesnt matter. None of the votes of the people were affected and actually Trump was found to have gotten even more votes than he was credited with during the silly recount. It was also found that the districts where Hillary won could not match the number of votes to the number of ballots, somehow Hillary got more votes than ballots cast for her.

THAT is the concern, how did she get more votes than the number of people who voted for her. Not the fact that Russia did or did not give us visibility of what was really going on behind the scenes that was hidden from the voters.

Your argument is that you are mad you lost because people found the TRUTH from your emails? Did anyone ever say that anything in those mails was untrue? So, you would have won if only the truth could have remained hidden? Thats a pretty weak and immoral argument.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

Your argument is that you are mad you lost because people found the TRUTH from your emails?

No, the argument is that it's dangerous for foreign governments to be influencing American elections.

Hillary lost - it is what it is. As many have said, if she didn't have so much baggage, the emails wouldn't have mattered.

But regardless of the candidate, foreign governments influencing elections is dangerous, whether the hacked party had been Trump or Clinton or some other candidate.

And for all you righties whinging about this issue, don't even try to pretend you wouldn't be freaking out if it had been Trump's campaign emails that had been hacked.

4 ( +8 / -4 )

Do I understand this correctly. President Obama and his allies would never dream of trying to influence an election by issuing threats or sidelining a country, causing their electorate to fear the outcome if they voted a certain way, sided with warnings of dire consequences if such an election result went against his wishes but using constantly words like could, or might, was thought that etc etc........?

President elect Trump has a very good friend who will no doubt be only too pleased to inform anyone how sincere the soon departing President Obama is when it comes to illegal and subversive conduct....ask Nigel Farage.

Lets start with the "The UK will go to the back of the queu for a Trade agreement with the USA if they voted to 'Leave' the EU. Or Lybia was a 'mistake'. 'Guantanamo Bay will be closed'. 'We will defeat ISIL' (instead of funding them!)...plenty more where that came from.

Give Trump a chance instead trying to put obstacles in his way that can only harm the USA in doing that. Forget what part of the election Hillary won. They both took part in the same contest with HC having considerably more money and mainstream support to hand...and she still couldn't win. And she can not cope with losing. Hillary darling...you lost. Got it? Now SHUT UP !

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

sangetsu03 - As it was, none of the voting machines were hacked (they can't be, they are never connected to a network),

Looking at the info available on the internet about the machines, the skill set needed and access needed is the same as for those people who provide modded chips for automotive ECUs (Electronic Control Units), and there are lots of companies who sell those. No internet access to the machines is required. The two or three articles I saw after a brief browse are not about actual hacking that was done, but about buying used voting machines online and scoping out how hard it would be to hack them. I think one guy posted some preliminary results. These are not high-volume machines (for high volumes think 'number of iPhone 7s produced'), and so they don't have the advantage of testing in the wild. Also one of the major manufacturers with a number of machines still in the field was HQ'd in Venezuelans, later headed in London by a CEO with long associations under Soros.

People hack gas pumps, inserting their own devices to skim information off credit cards, and I think that'd be a lot harder than hacking a voting machine would be.

On the other side, you'd think it'd be silly for people to actually try. But maybe it depends on how much they can get paid, and how much cover is provided for them.

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Notice the DNC has never denied all the racist, sexist things were found in the hacked emails; they are only upset that American voters got to see the pure evil that is the Democratic Party's leadership.

It doesn't matter who/what Team Clinton wants to blame for their loss (Anthony Weiner, James Comey, the recount, the Russians, someone different next week). The important thing is that with a final count of 306-232 electoral votes, Mrs. Bill Clinton Hillary got spanked. . . .

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

I manage servers. They are constantly being attacked. CONSTANTLY. I know this. My team takes steps to protect against the attacks, but mainly we have a plan that has been discussed with the CEO and CIO as to what we will do when we see any successful crack. WE HAVE A PLAN. Mainly, we limit the attack vectors with layered security access controls.

We've learned that Ms. Clinton doesn't like that, based on her using a private email server for govt business against strong suggestions that she shouldn't. Russia appears to have hacked that box too. Hacked once? That means you are a target and need to take extraordinary steps to prevent future successful hacks. This is standard. They knew they were a target.

RNC and DNC servers are private servers, run by private organizations. They are NOT government systems. They were not properly managed and secured, it appears. I don't have enough information to make a responsible critique of their security and honestly don't care.

It is really simple to me - if you don't want the world to read nasty things that you've said, then don't write them. I just wish that Mr. Trump would learn this too.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Notice the DNC has never denied all the racist, sexist things were found in the hacked emails; they are only upset that American voters got to see the pure evil that is the Democratic Party's leadership.

Duh... It's amazing how you guys always seem to miss the point. No one denies the veracity of the leaks. The concern is over that fact that a foreign government actively sought to affect the outcome of a US election.

You can debate over how effective the hacks/leaks really were or whether the US is being hypocritical regarding interfering in foreign politics, but regardless of all that, this should concern everyone. Just pretend for a moment that Trump had been hacked and Clinton had won. You know full well what you reaction would be. I can honestly say that I would be concerned in that scenario too.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

@theFu

I agree with your comment - completely and in its entirety.

Ms. Clinton and the DNC appear to have been quite sloppy with how information was handled on private servers (she even admitted this was a "mistake") and thus the information was leaked. As you say, we do not have enough information to perform a technical analysis or full critique but something did go awry.

Some of the leaked information indicated that they did say some pretty bad things about folks and also we found out she was given debate questions in advance, etc.

Furthermore, as you have pointed out, Mr. Trump has also said some pretty stupid things as well and his use of Twitter needs to be stopped. Running a country is not like managing hotels or running construction jobs. He is in a different arena now and likely out of his league.

I supported neither candidate but I would welcome a full investigation of this, including the root cause and where the information was harvested from and if the information was harvested from private servers.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I would be concerned if this is actually proven true as well. But I am not really concerned because (1) it sounds like sour grapes from losing and (2) the lack of common sense and security awareness of Clinton and her team allowed it to happen.

All the flack that Trump got for saying the election could be rigged, he got made fun of by everyone on the DEM side. Now they want an investigation because they lost?

When he said he might not accept the results of the election due to concerns of fairness, he got crucified. But now that Hillary lost, it is possible the election wasnt fair? I have even heard people on TV saying the MSM was biased AGAINST Hillary. Obama says he told Russia to stop the hacking that he claimed wasnt happening when Trump brought it up? Michelle Obama says all hope is gone?

Yeah right.....anyway welcome to our next president who is already making America Great Again!

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

(1) it sounds like sour grapes from losing

I agree, it kind of does. But is there a way that it wouldn't in this situation? The situation is what it is. It doesn't mean we should ignore concerns like Trump seems to be doing.

(2) the lack of common sense and security awareness of Clinton and her team allowed it to happen.

Again, not a very good reason for ignoring the concerns. Say Clinton and her team were negligent. Does that in anyway diminish the possibility/concern that Russia may have been involved in affecting US elections?

All the flack that Trump got for saying the election could be rigged, he got made fun of by everyone on the DEM side. Now they want an investigation because they lost?

He was ridiculed for preemptively making excuses about rigging at the voting booths. Very different from one-sided Russian hacking.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Trump 'isn't ready to accept the finding by intelligence officials that Moscow hacked Democratic emails in a bid to elevate Trump.' Let's hope he starts getting ready to accept it!

Maybe Trump doesn't have to accept the finding because he condones it (or if you want to believe the worst without proof, he engineered it).

4 ( +4 / -0 )

StrangerlandDEC. 19, 2016 - 09:36AM JST you are expected to believe that Putin, spending less than a million dollars, dictated the outcome.

Influenced, not dictated.

What time you flushed the toilet last year also influenced the outcome of the election. But pretending that that, or my PM's (Trudeau) answers to questions about who he wanted to win, or your PM's answers to the same questions (I assume he was just as diplomatically neutral while still finding a way to signal he'd have an easier time if Clinton won) or whatever Putin did had a big enough influence to even measure shows a profound level of distrust in the very foundation of democracy, a serious overestimation of the possible impact of what Putin supposedly did, and a degree of disconnect from the volume of noise an American election produces that I (stuck right next door) envy. Try standing between the runways at Narita while a jumbo takes off and yelling profanities (or declarations of love) at someone standing at arms length away from you as it passes. Guess what, unless the person is a skilled lip reader, you're not going to notice the influence you have on them.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Those 'protests' on American streets lost momentum quiet easily and on it's own...Wouldn't you say?

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Every concern Trump had pre-election so I feel he is correct in ignoring their concerns now. Doesnt mean he wont take action once he becomes President to prevent this from happening to him like it might have happened to Obama and the Dems. He is smartly just not allowing any excuses, especially ones that he was ridiculed for when he was the one suggesting it could happen. Wasnt it Obama who said stop whining and go get people to vote for him? well he DID.

If Russia actually was able to become involved (I doubt it), Clinton team negligence allowed it to happen. No emails with secret info and dirty tactics, then any possible hacking is meaningless. Because if nothing to find that can be used to influence anything, no influence can happen.
-3 ( +0 / -3 )

So, the team the vehemently denied any hacking is now asking, "Does it matter?" What this says is three things: 1) they are now admitting it is true. 2) they admit they don't care about foreign governments hacking the inner-most recesses of American Democracy. 3) they don't care about Democracy.

Quite the party.

commanteer: "And the Harry Potter novels required less suspension of disbelief."

Things that are fiction require suspension of disbelief, and so naturally something that is not requires more for you to not believe it. But of course for you guys, thick with denial, it requires a whole lot more wringing of those sponges in your noggins to try and MAKE fact into fiction. The CIA, FBI, White House, and other sources now confirm Russia's involvement in the election. The people who don't? those who claimed up to the day of the election that everything was rigged, decried the electoral college, and cried about conspiracies and said they would never let issues with Clinton go; Trump and supporters, and that's all.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Americans preferring Soviet-style active measures and aggressive attacks on their country over their own democratic process? That is the worst form of treason and you can bet these traitors are on watch lists now

5 ( +5 / -0 )

The name of the game is "VOTER SUPPRESSION", NOT "Russian hackers. Hundreds of thousands of voters (mainly Black and Minorities) were defrauded by not having their votes counted or not even allowed to exercise their right to vote for a variety of reasons that violate every democratic principle of fairness. This is a toxic TABOO topic that the MSM won't go anywhere near because they fear to divulge the dirty big secret which would tarnish the carefully constructed myth that the USA with its "free" elections is a model to be emulated by all nations aspiring to democracy. In reality, the US elections have been compromised and corrupted for many years and the US Presidential Election is, in the words of Greg Palast, merely "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy"!

6 ( +6 / -0 )

oblique weapons: "At least they are showing some kind of democracy."

How so? and as opposed to whom? I'm sorry, but closing down voting stations so that poor people and ethnic minorities is not democracy, by the way. And if the GOP has its way, ignores the daily intel briefings, and keeps up their "who cares" attitude about China and Russia, the last vestiges of any democracy in the US will be gone soon enough, as you clearly hope. Don't pretend you care; especially as a supporter of a man who's already vowed to ignore the Constitution by keeping his companies.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The Republicans are pushing for a border-free world! Tear down the firewalls! Let anyone from any country try to manipulate an election anywhere; push fake news to undermine those who disagree with you! The US does it, so therefore anyone should be able to do so. FREEDUMB!

Trump-istas believe, as true believers throughout history have, that dishonesty, situational ethics and moral flexibility are defensible, anything goes in supporting their political messiah.

And the only defense they seem to have of their messiah is whattaboutHillaryObama, or same-to-you-and-more-of-it, or I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I, or if you disagree you're a tool of the MSM.

Has Trump released his tax info yet? Hillary and Obama did. LMAO

7 ( +7 / -0 )

I love how one of Connelly's defense of Trump and Co. becoming bed-buddies was to threaten to re-open Clinton's emails for the millionth time beside her boss saying the issue is, once again, finished.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

Blacks and minority votes werent counted? actually the recount shows they were counted more than once in some places.

Blacks and minorities were unable to vote? Funny, they were able to vote for Obama twice. What happened this time that didnt allow them to vote? Was there some new law or something I missed that has made it difficult for these groups to vote since the last time in 2012 when they turned out in record numbers?

You know why Hillary didnt get the black and minority turnout that Obama did? Because she isnt black or a minority. I think she and her inner circle forgot that. A lot of the black and minority vote either chose to stay home or couldnt be bothered to make an effort to go vote because the MSM said Hillary was 99 percent sure to win. Big mistake.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Looking at the info available on the internet about the machines,

And yet there have been no claims that the voting machines have been hacked. The results produced by the machines coincide with the results of the exit polls almost precisely, is that not so?

The voting machines became mainstream after the 2000 election, when it was decided that people had become too stupid to use simple paper ballots (which have been used for a couple centuries), and state governments saw an opportunity to squander millions of taxpayer dollars to solve a problem which didn't really exist.

The problem here is the email issue, and this has to do with the candidate, not the voting method, or the vulnerability of the voting process. The "hacked" emails exposed Hillary and her staff as dishonest, conniving tricksters who would pull out all of the stops to win. Rather than complain that these emails were leaked, we should be grateful that the were.

As for influencing elections, that is nothing new. The sanctions imposed against Russia and other countries are direct influencing, are they not? The logic is that the sanctions cause economic hardship to the people, and the people then rise up and either pressure their leaders for change, or vote them out of power (when such is possible). America and Europe have tried applied sanctions to Russia to punish Putin, and anyone who thinks Putin will just sit on his hands and do nothing in response is less than smart. "Turnabout is fair play," as they say.

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

what "influenced" the election was Hillarys poisonous load of baggage.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

The "hacked" emails exposed Hillary and her staff as dishonest, conniving tricksters who would pull out all of the stops to win.

I don't think the information exposed was all that damning or shocking, and I was a Sanders supporter. Even Sanders himself was willing to look over it if the alternative was Trump. I have no doubt we would've seen worse if RNC emails were leaked. But they weren't. It was completely one-sided because the perpetrators wanted one side to win.

The sanctions imposed against Russia and other countries are direct influencing, are they not?

You're comparing sanctions to hacking/leaking emails? Sanctions are the equivalent of withholding money from a drug addict. But the US has done much worse than sanctions in the past. It may not be the paragon of moral authority, but all of us as citizens should be concerned when we're the target of an "attack."

5 ( +7 / -2 )

Counting the hours until the Clinton Super Pac -- aka, the MSM -- shows leftists heads exploding around this nation again after the electoral votes are cast tomorrow. It will be very entertaining to watch snowflakes melting one more time. . . .

-9 ( +2 / -11 )

@Tex aka, the MSM

The map below shows where the expression MSM is used most frequently on Twitter in the US. It pretty clear show it's used in the US's many 'poorly educated' belts, not in urban areas where there tend to be more people with higher levels of education. Notice how frequently it's used in Texas. I wonder why.

http://qz.com/862325/the-great-american-word-mapper/#int/words=msm_msm&smoothing=3

6 ( +7 / -1 )

sangetsu03: And yet there have been no claims that the voting machines have been hacked. The results produced by the machines coincide with the results of the exit polls almost precisely, is that not so?

There were claims the machines were toggling voters' votes. Followed by claims from local election officials that such was impossible and they'd recalibrated the machines. I doubt the credentials of most election officials to validate voting machines themselves, or to detect tampering at the hardware/firmware level.

As far as exit polls, I thought I saw claims that, similar to Hillary's positive discrepancies in the Democratic primaries of an unexplained plus 9 percent in result-vs-polls in states with no paper ballot trail versus those with paper ballot trails, there were claims that Trump also saw a positive discrepancy in result-vs-polling. I don't remember if the claims 'remembered' that Hillary saw similar discrepancies in the primary. But google news search of "trump exit poll discrepancies" shows the articles.

As far as detection, any examination of whether machines were tampered with would have to be undertaken with the initiation of election officials, who so far claim no interference.

It seems unlikely that they would. When the Chicago voting fraud ring was broken by the federal AG there in the 90s, they and the AG were in opposite parties (Dem vs Repub).

Look at this fine example of a Snopes article. It examines a post of photos of showing warranty stickers tampered with on election machines. In the first part of the article, Snopes tries to explain it away with:

... Both posts lacked details about the process of sealing voting equipment in Wisconsin or elsewhere, evidence the machines were photographed in St. Croix during recount efforts, or any information above and beyond those brief remarks. ... Another inconsistency about the site's claim was that it appeared to show a different type of machine from the type reported by the Wisconsin Elections Commission web site. ... The images depicted two seals that read "REMOVAL OF LABEL VOIDS WARRANTY," and while both images depicted worn labels, neither was removed.

This is clearly bogus. One photo shows stickum where a sticker was totally removed. Another photo shows a sticker that is cut in half at the case cover line and that is also missing the part of the sticker in the area over the case screw, all evidence of tampering with the seal. Obviously the case may have been opened, and it doesn't look like the sticker is "worn out" at all, but tampered with.

In the second part of the article, post-update, without any apparent irony or notice of correction, Snopes snopes itself, and disproves its own points from the first part of the article: The county election officials say the indicated machines from the indicated vendor ARE from that county. The voting machine company said their technician HAD opened the case and had not replaced the stickers.

You'll note those stickers don't seem difficult to counterfeit. No holograms a la every single cheap boxed copy of MS-Windows in recent memory, for example. They're warranty anti-tamper stickers, not election day security seals.

But this article shows how easy it is to defeat the security seals, and how easy it is to buy bags of seals to experiment with (to determine how to defeat them):

https://freedom-to-tinker.com/2011/02/08/seals-nj-voting-machines-october-december-2008/

What should happen is that federal law require ballots be scanned and the record of ballots kept, so that any fraud can be detected and addressed after the fact. Right now some states scan, some states don't, some states scan but discard the scans per state law.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

Hillary was never going to be US president. Why? Because shes hillary.

-8 ( +2 / -10 )

@PTownsend

You stated, "The map below shows where the expression MSM is used most frequently on Twitter in the US. It pretty clear show it's used in the US's many 'poorly educated' belts, not in urban areas where there tend to be more people with higher levels of education. Notice how frequently it's used in Texas. I wonder why."

I am not a Trump supporter, however are you implying that those who may not have had an opportunity to attend a university and work in labor related or factory jobs should have less of a say in the process? Or are you implying that they may be not as smart as you or those supporting Clinton? I know alot of factory workers in the "poorly educated" belt with a heck of a lot of common sense and who are smarter than guys I met in my university days (including graduate studies).

I am trying to understand where you are going with this. I do not see how these types of arguments help convince anyone of anything. If I am missing something here please let me know.

As far as the so called "fake news" I remember when Benghazi was initially blamed on a video, which was spread by the so called "MSM" and then eventually proven to be false.

It seems to me the best course of action is to obtain information from all sources possible and then try to determine for oneself what reality is.

-4 ( +2 / -6 )

seems to me the best course of action is to obtain information from all sources possible and then try to determine for oneself what reality is.

Have actually read what Texas Agg wrote? His comments speak for themselves. You are correct people should collect information from various sources, and then make a decision, but judging by his comments, he quite clearly does not. Which is what leads up to PT's comment.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Hillary was never going to be US president. Why? Because shes hillary.

Even on the left, I think most people outside of Clinton and her close aides acknowledge she was a deeply flawed candidate. You and others (including Trump) seem to have trouble accepting even the remote possibility that having private emails exposed would damage any candidate.

But again, that's not the point. It's not about whether they had an effect, it's that they actively tried. A foreign government may have attempted to influence a US election via hacking, and the President-elect refuses to condemn it.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@takeda - It would seem to me that it would be more appropriate to state what the person from Texas has written and then discount what is actually said rather than try to imply superiority over an entire group of people? In the long time I have roamed the planet I have never found attacking an entire group of people personally to be effective. This is also one reason that turned alot of people off about the President elect as well.

In this case (about the Russian meddling) I have family living in the so called poorly educated belts and who work in labor and/or in factories. I have opportunities to speak with and communicate with these people on these issues. They are by no means less intelligent than someone who just happened to go to college/university. Some support Trump, some do not. Many, however, do not see the meddling as an issue as it did not directly impact votes (voting machines were not hacked) and the information released actually did occur (was said/written) and has not been discounted by the DNC.

I personally think this should be investigated and it should be determined if Russia intentionally released this information before the election to impact the outcome and where the information obtained came from (i.e. did it come from a private server?). Most of me relatives and acquaintances from the so called 'poorly educated' belt feel the same...this seems reasonable.

If the objective is to state your point of view and hopefully bring people around to your way of thinking then I just do not see this type of discourse as being effective.

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

We will see what Trump and the Republicans can do to stop the investigations. I think they are probably willing to give the Russians a pass on this one.

First liberals gripe about Russian being our enemy and we should try harder to make better relationships with the country and now all of a sudden, we need to stay away from the Russians and trust and not trust them because they fiddled with our elections? Good lord!

It was completely one-sided because the perpetrators wanted one side to win.

How do you know the Russians didn't look? Can you verify they didn't? Maybe they did and saw that the Democrats were far sneakier and more untrustworthy than the GOP.

How so? and as opposed to whom? I'm sorry, but closing down voting stations so that poor people and ethnic minorities is not democracy, by the way.

She you're saying in EVERY county where minorities live, they were blocked from voting? How about many minorities just weren't interested in Clinton. She didn't exactly ooze a lot of confidence and excitement in them either.

And if the GOP has its way, ignores the daily intel briefings,

Obama ignored his generals which is far worse. He fired Gen. Flynn and Madison because he wasn't happy with hearing how ISIS and the war in Syria was spreading.

and keeps up their "who cares" attitude about China and Russia, the last vestiges of any democracy in the US will be gone soon enough, as you clearly hope.

Obama killed democracy a loooong time ago.

Don't pretend you care; especially as a supporter of a man who's already vowed to ignore the Constitution by keeping his companies.

When Obama ignored the constitution and ignored the will of the people, congress, I didn't see you complain about it.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

If the objective is to state your point of view and hopefully bring people around to your way of thinking then I just do not see this type of discourse as being effective.

I don't believe in the notion of bringing around people to my way of thinking. I write my for myself.

I was mocking the expression MSM and those who use it. MSM is used as a pejorative by people who seem to have little ability to think critically about info presented in traditional publications and instead trust - who knows. JT posters who use that expression won't say which publications they trust. I wonder why. It's interesting that the term is used by Rupert Murdoch's various media outlets and also by the alt right media. As a way of discrediting their competition?

I read a range of publications daily. Who knows which particular publication is closest to reporting the truth (whatever that might be). I have also read a lot of history. Who knows whose interpretation of history is closest to the truth. However, through reading a lot and especially a lot of history and also having been directly involved in major historical events I have come to trust my own interpretations and learnt to despise right wing revisionism and manipulation of media, including those who use the expression MSM.

The 'poorly educated' is a group called out by Trump. He knowingly manipulated them. In my opinion. They tend to be 'true believers' and if you don't know that term I suggest you read Eric Hoffer. True believers scare me. I have little interest in what they have to say. Having been around them all my life I know full well it's futile to try to reason with them.

You called 'democracy' and when I was young I read John Adam's warning that we should be concerned about the tyranny of the majority. I am, especially the poorly educated - with huge private arsenals. They're one of the main reasons I live in Japan.

And back at ya: I don't think making condescending schoolmarmish responses is a very effective way to communicate.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

bass4funk: "When Obama ignored the constitution and ignored the will of the people, congress, I didn't see you complain about it."

Where did he ignore the Constitution, my friend?

6 ( +7 / -1 )

@Mr. Townsend

"I don't believe in the notion of bringing around people to my way of thinking. I write my for myself."

Fair enough however you are posting in a public forum however.

"I was mocking the expression MSM and those who use it. MSM is used as a pejorative by people who seem to have little ability to think critically about info presented in traditional publications and instead trust - who knows. JT posters who use that expression won't say which publications they trust. I wonder why."

I have always been of the impression the "MSM" consists of the news outlets owned by the big six who control over 90% of the media in the U.S., i.e. (Comcast, Newscorp, Disney, Viacom, Time Warner, and CBS) - this includes both left and right wing publications.

I do not see this (or mean to use this) as a pejorative I just see this as an acronym for the six huge corporations that control must of Americans' news consumption.

"I read a range of publications daily......."

On this we agree

"The 'poorly educated' is a group called out by Trump."

I know many well educated people who supported Trump. I know many poorly educated who supported Clinton. I think it is futile to reason with members of both sides of the spectrum who radically cling to one parties point of view or rhetoric.

"You called 'democracy'....."

Not sure what you are referring to

"And back at ya: I don't think making condescending schoolmarmish responses is a very effective way to communicate."

Fair enough but I am not going to assume anything about your intelligence or level of education.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Fair enough however you are posting in a public forum however.

Public forums, in my opinion, are for individuals to express their own opinion, maybe try out new ideas, many things. Why would I want to convince anyone to think the way I do? Individuals use public forums for many reasons. I'm not anti-PC like many posters claim to be, but care zero how what i say might effect you.

For you MSM is not used as a pejorative. For me it is. ideolects, connotations and all that.

Apologies on saying you mentioned democracy.

Fair enough but I am not going to assume anything about your intelligence or level of education.

Condescension taken.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

we need to stay away from the Russians and trust and not trust them because they fiddled with our elections?

Seems like a pretty good reason to me. Everyone at the top with the exception of Trump seems to agree.

How do you know the Russians didn't look? Can you verify they didn't? Maybe they did and saw that the Democrats were far sneakier and more untrustworthy than the GOP.

Come on... I don't have proof, but we only saw leaks for one side.

Obama ignored his generals which is far worse.

At least he listened to them first.

He fired Gen. Flynn and Madison because he wasn't happy with hearing how ISIS and the war in Syria was spreading.

Did he now? Because people like Colin Powell say he was fired because he was "abusive with staff, didn’t listen, worked against policy, bad management, etc." and has been a "right-wing nutty" ever since. (This is kind of supported by his son's involvement in Pizzagate.)

Also who's Madison?

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Also who's Madison?

He was the fourth president of the United States and was fired by Obama because he'd stopped showing up at the office for some 200 years.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

@PTownsend

No condescension intended

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Of course it matters. Beggars belief it's even a question.

t's not about whether they had an effect, it's that they actively tried. A foreign government may have attempted to influence a US election via hacking, and the President-elect refuses to condemn it.

Exactly right.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Where did he ignore the Constitution, my friend?

I knew you were going to ask that so.....

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428882/obama-violate-constitution-top-ten-2015

He was the fourth president of the United States and was fired by Obama because he'd stopped showing up at the office for some 200 years.

It was a typo, my bad, "Mattis."

Seems like a pretty good reason to me. Everyone at the top with the exception of Trump seems to agree.

Apparently, not everyone thinks so and not everyone in his camp and by the way, I wish you lefties were that outspoken about Castro and Iran as well, but....I know it's a lot to ask for consistency when talking to liberals and Dems.

At least he listened to them first.

Yeah, but what good is it to listen to the people that know more about war and the enemy and you take it upon yourself to NOT take any action whatsoever. It's funny how the two most knowledgeable Generals were completely overlooked, ignored and subsequently replaced.

Did he now? Because people like Colin Powell say he was fired because he was "abusive with staff, didn’t listen, worked against policy, bad management, etc." and has been a "right-wing nutty" ever since

I keep forgetting he was dealing with a bunch of millennials and progressives, my bad!

-9 ( +0 / -9 )

Where did he ignore the Constitution, my friend?

I knew you were going to ask that so.....

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428882/obama-violate-constitution-top-ten-2015

The author of that article obviously doesn't know the constitution from the toilet paper he wipes his butt with, because none of the things he listed, if true (I didn't even bother fact checking) were constitutional violations.

Post truth politics strikes again! And Bass is at the head of the pack in spreading post truthisms.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

It is quite funny how politically brainwashed people are. Since Hillary was the liberal democrat candidate, in the eyes of liberal democrats she could do no wrong. That hers was the foremost voice in the senate for the war in Iraq, and that her and her husband have banked $150,000.000 via their foundation is conveniently overlooked. That Hillary is cozy with the bankers on Wall Street (no heads rolled after the 2008 financial crisis), and that she is the definition of "pay to play" in Washington doesn't matter, she and her party styled her as a liberal democrat, and the liberal democrat sheep bleat as they are conditioned to bleat.

Before anyone says I am unfair, the exact same is true of the republican party, and they also bleat as they are conditioned to bleat. Republicans voted for Trump because he was styled as a conservative republican, even though he has never been much of either during his entire life.

Hillary was a terrible candidate, she should never have been the democrat's candidate in the first place. It is quite funny that in the leaked emails her campaign thought that she would have had trouble beating Ted Cruz. The republicans put up the weakest field of candidates in decades, perhaps in history. But even so, Hillary's campaign didn't think she could win against any of them, and secretly hoped that Trump would be her opponent. As the saying goes, "be careful what you wish for, you must might get it."

Rather than rail against republicans or Trump for Hillary's, democrats should be railing against their own party for choosing probably the worst candidate they had available. No one can argue that Hillary was anything but a terrible candidate, her loss to the like of Donald Trump is evidence enough.

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

Post truth - the art of lying and conning a disgruntled sector of the public into believing things are worse than they actually are in order to get the result you want. Brexit and Trump being prime examples.

As far as the Russian thing goes - they don't care if the Russians engineered the vote, they won and that's an end to it. They clearly have no conscience... or self respect.

8 ( +8 / -0 )

As far as the Russian thing goes - they don't care if the Russians engineered the vote, they won and that's an end to it. They clearly have no conscience... or self respect.

It's not a question of caring - Trump is working with or more likely for the Russians.

Leak reveals Rex Tillerson was director of Bahamas-based US-Russian oil firm

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/dec/18/leak-rex-tillerson-director-bahamas-based-us-russian-oil-company

Meet the new Swamp. Trump's billionaire swamp. Far more corrupt and evil than the old Swamp.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

Thunderbird, you brought up an interesting question with Brexit. An interesting Guardian opinion piece today begins with:

The only thing worse than sore losers are sore winners. They have the victory, the field is theirs, but still they scream bitter abuse at the defeated.

The author postulates that both Brexit and Trump supporters are haunted by the fact that they're on the wrong side of history - that a hundred years from now, the populace will collectively wonder "What the hell were these people thinking?" - and also that, in the age of fake news, hacking, and manipulation, that their slim victory margins are not as legitimate as they seem, particularly considering the earthshaking changes their agendas will cause. To compensate, they lash out not with logic but with schoolyard bully insults, thinking that grinding down a defeated opponent will somehow change things.

It will not. Trump is destined to have the largest asterisk next to his name of any in history regardless of what he does. The opposition will get up, dust itself off, and continue the fight - and that is what they are afraid of. Good read here:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/dec/18/brexit-leavers-fear-their-lies-will-haunt-them

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Post truth politics strikes again! And Bass is at the head of the pack in spreading post truthisms.

Interesting, so now I'm to blame for Obama's screw ups and him walking over the constitution? Oh, well, another 4 weeks and insanity and all the madness will come an end and Obama will become a distant memory as well as what he or libs might call a legacy?

It's not a question of caring - Trump is working with or more likely for the Russians.

Ahhh, the way Obama was secretly working with the Iranians and Castro?

Meet the new Swamp. Trump's billionaire swamp. Far more corrupt and evil than the old Swamp.

I'm not buying that for a minute. I think the decision was a well thought out and calculated move, Kudos! But the thing that is currently clogging the swamp should be reeled out when Trump is sworn in on the 20th of next month.

-10 ( +0 / -10 )

About 18 months ago the radical alt left all chanted over and over in their liberal echo chambers "Run, Donald, Run" when PE Trump was considering a bid to be the 45th U.S. President.

In around nine hours from now their wish will officially come true. . . .

-11 ( +0 / -11 )

Interesting, so now I'm to blame for Obama's screw ups and him walking over the constitution?

Why would I blame you for something that doesn't exist?

You're to blame for spreading post-truth politics - aka right-wing lies.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

bass4funkDEC. 19, 2016 - 08:16PM JST How do you equate "spreading post truthisms" with being to blame for "Obama's screw-ups?" Looks like a bit of a non sequitur to me.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Good insight here on the mindset of many Trump voters from the beyond-the-grave Hunter Thompson: https://www.thenation.com/article/this-political-theorist-predicted-the-rise-of-trumpism-his-name-was-hunter-s-thompson/

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Trump said he is one of the smartest person! Therefore he does not need to listen intelligence briefing for another 8 years ( perhaps 4 years or 2 years) during his TV interview. He is so busy with transition and he has no time to talk with CIA. However he has plenty of time for tweeting and twisting. He also has some short memory for he has never said that Japan and South Korea should arm with nuclear arsenal for themselves for their security. It was said during his primaries. If POTUS is demented and losing memory, it will be waste of time for CIA for briefing.

CIA should be better unemployed rather than being said by own President as fabricated WMD organization.

Trump used to call Hilary as Crooked Hilary. He also said she is the most corrupted person of earth. In fact Hilary has Mother Theresa heart and Saintly forgiving manner. Trump said, he will lock her up when he win. If he will. she will not blink and she will accept her destiny with pride. If Trump will send her to electric chair, she will be martyr as Jone of Arc of USA. She will not beg for sparing her life. Crooked Donald should realize that he is not Roman Emperor who can determine the rival fate. He is the most corrupted president for building his hotel near white house. All foreign guests will stay at his hotel for pleasing him no matter there are better hotels near by. It is the conflict of interest for promoting business with political power.

Trump Inc will prosper with new swamp From Russia with Love. New Secretary of States appointed by Trump is Putin Close friend. He will be controlled by Putin. Not Trump who is fraudulent history. The fate of USA has been already sealed with unpresidented and unpredictable swamp in next month.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

How do you equate "spreading post truthisms" with being to blame for "Obama's screw-ups?" Looks like a bit of a non sequitur to me.

In the case of Trump, we don't know for sure, how long will the Liberals beat this drum, is the race card drum finally behind you guys and now you all have another grievance to throw out as red meat? As for Obama, we don't really need to stress out about that anymore in the weeks to come. This is the best Christmas present ever.

-8 ( +0 / -8 )

About 18 months ago the radical alt left all chanted over and over in their liberal echo chambers "Run, Donald, Run" when PE Trump was considering a bid to be the 45th U.S. President.

I always prefered both parties to find the best candidates possible. Neither did. Wasn't clever for some Democrats to wish for the worst. Because as it turns out the white nationalist hyper partisan alliance was quite prepared to elect the worst. Now we're saddled with PG Trump.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Glad the US isn't my country. Wouldn't want mine to be run by another country half way round the world. Amazing - if it were Clinton in Trump's place, she'd be called a dirty treacherous Commie. Not long ago, Sarah Palin was crapping herself at the thought of being able to see Russia from her window. Now she's probably inviting them over for coffee.

5 ( +6 / -1 )

Post truth - the art of lying and conning a disgruntled sector of the public into believing things are worse than they actually are in order to get the result you want.

How bad to they have to be? Fully one in three people in America are not working, fully one-third of America collects public assistance. The national debt has been more than doubled in the last 8 years to produce less than 2% economic growth. For the first time in the more than two centuries America has existed, there is not a measurable increase in quality of living. This "disgruntled" sector you hold in such disdain doesn't have to be lied to and deceived about how bad things are, all they need to do is look at their pay stubs and bank statements. Perhaps you should look at your own, and tell us all how well-off you are.

But you white-collar types who live by the sweat of another's brow (mainly Chinese sweat nowadays) have never had to deal with the problems blue collar America has had to live with. Your parents and grandparents broke their asses to create lives where you could go to college and get your educations and well-paying jobs, while the founders of the companies you work at busted their asses to create the jobs you enjoy. You have no idea how the real world works, you have no idea how lucky you are, and how grateful you should be. But you aren't, you think that you are entitled to the lives you enjoy now, never knowing nor caring about the huge cost and effort others expended in your favor.

But most Americans did not go to college, their parents either didn't work hard enough, were unlucky, or simply didn't care. Their children could not go to college, and had to make do with whatever work they could find. Some were successful, many weren't. But that success is getting harder and harder to find, and these people, who democrats used to be call "the backbone of America" and "the salt of the earth" are now called "disgruntled," or "uneducated," or "deplorable."

The main reason I am glad Trump won is not because I think he would be a great president, but because he is a giant middle finger pointed straight at the faces of the self-entitled "elites" who, while purporting to be educated, knowledgeable, and wise, are nothing but a basket of fools. Don't believe it? Almost without exception, the entire lot of you believed Hillary would win last month. You were wrong, weren't you? Projections of a Hillary victory were 84% to 98%, weren't they? Who was really doing the lying?

-2 ( +4 / -6 )

bass4funkDEC. 19, 2016 - 10:25PM JST

In the case of Trump, we don't know for sure, how long will the Liberals beat this drum, is the race card drum finally behind you guys and now you all have another grievance to throw out as red meat? As for Obama, we don't really need to stress out about that anymore in the weeks to come. This is the best Christmas present ever.

Sorry, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You get accused of spreading lies, so you come back with some irrelevant, semi-coherent waffle about being blamed for the shortcomings of the Obama administration, as if that even makes any sense, and then... this. Whatever... "this" is, it makes it very hard to appreciate a conservative point of view. Have you ever thought that perhaps you might be better off leaving these kinds of discussions to people who can actually make a logical and coherent argument? Just limit your activities to voting them up and comments like, "I agree with what so-and-so said?" You would be doing your cause a lot more good than you are at the moment.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

bass4funk: "I knew you were going to ask that so....."

Hahahaha! Quoting an article by a hack at The National Review? I guess you're finally revealing the news sources you have refused to disclose, eh? CLASSIC! Sorry, bud, but not ONE of the things the guy mentions is a violation of the Constitution. Not one. Whereas Trump is flat out going to violate it, and is quite proud of it. You clearly don't care one wit about the Constitution, so please don't ever pretend to uphold its values ever again, because let's say even if the rag you quote from as gospel were indeed gospel, it still means you stand behind Trump doing so because "Obama did it too!".

SimonFoster: "How do you equate "spreading post truthisms" with being to blame for "Obama's screw-ups?" Looks like a bit of a non sequitur to me."

That's all he's got left... along with his news sources like the National Review!

2 ( +3 / -1 )

But that success is getting harder and harder to find

It is, and its been declining for decades regardles of which political party is in power. Now the definition of succes is Trump handing out taxpayer money to save 800 of 2100 jobs from a company is is well in the black with those American workers but just wants to make more anyway. Politicians are stuck stuck in the past as to how the world works.

The main reason I am glad Trump won is not because I think he would be a great president, but because he is a giant middle finger pointed straight at the faces of the self-entitled "elites" who, while purporting to be educated, knowledgeable, and wise, are nothing but a basket of fools.

Trump did manufacturing overseas and imported cheap foreign workers to take jobs from Americans. And you voted for him. Talk of some kind of middle finger to an imaginary enemy probably feel pretty good, tho, so you have that going for you.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Projections of a Hillary victory were 84% to 98%, weren't they? Who was really doing the lying?

No one. Lying requires knowledge that the information being presented is a falsehood. People cannot read the future, so no one knew who would win or lose, and therefore no one could know that they were stating something that would not come to be true. Since they couldn't know that, it's logically impossible to be a lie, because lying would require them to know that their prediction would not come true.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@sangetsu almost a great post. But the GOP's politicking also helped cause this. And those deplorables only apply to those who fully supported Trump due to his smoke and mirror's campaign in their blatant ignorance/arrogance. He's going to continue the wealth funneling to the top system that the GOP loves and treasures. I'm a blue collar worker, college educated. My single mother couldn't afford to send me to college, I used the US federal Grant program, and since the State funded grants are lottery draw only, I didn't get any further assistance but the $5k federal grant that reduced my student loan from $15,000 to $10,000 that I still have to owe. I earn about $27,000 a year which drops down to about $21,000 a year after taxes... Due to inflation, the state says that as a single individual I should be making $47,000+ a year to keep up with the current cost of living, that used to be the average cost for a family of 3... apartment prices have doubled (so much so that even I qualify for subsidized housing with reduced rent control), but even after all that I'm still barely able to make ends meet. Each month I make about $1500 a month to do pretty high skilled labor. I should say $1600 because I just barely started making enough to begin a 401(k) plan... and I've just turned 39.... wasn't able to start one earlier due to job and financial instability. Which means I'm going to have to work much longer after I hit 65+.

Of that $1500 leftover, $1,375 to cover rent (which went up by $42 this year), my monthly public transit pass (which went up from $79 to $99 this year), my utilities and internet (which I have to argue with the ISP every year to force them to reduce the price), monthly groceries, cell phones (half of which I'm paying for my mothers cell plan because shes definitely not making enough), student loan payments (another huge chunk of money that could be saved if only I could get it off my back sooner)

My co-workers ask me why I don't have a car, and it's because I can't afford one, even they are living from paycheck to paycheck. Only difference with most of them is that many of them are either living with their parents still, or have a spouse or significant other that is making the other half or more of their own income. .

The remaining $125 each month I try to save can't even cover it. And a lot of unexpected "unfortunate incedents" and "accidents" likes to happen. If I could cut certain things out of my monthly budget, the first would be "affordable" healthcare. It would save me $124 extra a month (and that is WITH me having Federal tax credit support of $141). Without the tax credits I'd be expected to pay $250 a month to a "non-profit" HMO Kaiser. I used to pay even less $84 (after tax credits) to a different HMO that went bankrupt. Finishing off my student loan payments (which our system tries to lock you into owing debt forever if you don't catch it) would save me an extra $150~175 a month which would drastically reduce a lot more stress and frustration in my life and I'd be more willing to re-allocate funds towards "Affordable" health insurance, savings, and 401(k) and heck, maybe I just might be able to start investing in something!

The biggest issue is our society due to government legislature (and corporate lobbying,) is being funneled into a system designed to keep increasing the cash flow to the top while keeping people in certain income brackets... in those income brackets, or lower (because that's whats happening). Both the GOP and the Democrats are guilty of influencing this system. But the GOP is more than happy to try and permanently lock everyone into this financially insecure hell, while the Democrats are more willing to try and find a better balance. I'm working on creating a 3rd option myself. Over the next 2 years, I'll see how far it will grow.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I always prefered both parties to find the best candidates possible. Neither did.

Welcome to the real world. The best of the best do not go to Washington, they are too honest, and have too much integrity. There are people who succeed by their own effort, and there are people who succeed by another's effort. The latter group is the type which goes to Washington, and only the most ambitious and unscrupulous of these can lie, cheat, or steal their way to the higher levels. In most cases, the candidates are puppets, like Clinton, Bush and Obama, who end up catching the mud when doing their masters' bidding, while on rare occasions, the puppet masters themselves become the candidates, like Hillary, Reagan, or Nixon.

This year there were no good candidates to choose from. All the puppets were on the republican side, and Hillary was not going to allow anyone else to be the democrat candidate. Until last month, she was the main power in her party. Trump was a wildcard, the republican party did not find him; once discovering him trying to push his way in, they tried to lose him as quickly as possible. Trump slammed their nuts in the door and took the nomination from them.

Hillary never had a chance, she would have lost against any of the republican puppets. It was not Trump nor leaked emails which cost her the election, but Hillary herself. Her ego is far greater than anyone else's in Washington (which is saying a lot), and though her campaign knew that she was a weak candidate, they dared not tell her. Hillary was the cause of Hillary's loss, not the republican establishment (which hates Trump), or republican voters (who would have voted for Cruz, or Rubio, or anyone else with an "R" next to their name). It was not angry white men who elected Trump (more women voted for him than voted for Hillary), and that being the case, his victory was decided by the usual class of swing voters who decide every election, at least since GHB's time.

Warren, another puppet, is being warmed up for 2020. If Trump screws up badly enough, she might have a chance.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

The hissy fits coming from the liberal clown car are hilarious. Their "pin the blame on anyone but Hillary" game is amusement at its best. What will the reason be next week, global warming?

-5 ( +0 / -5 )

StrangerLand: The author of that article obviously doesn't know the constitution from the toilet paper he wipes his butt with, because none of the things he listed, if true (I didn't even bother fact checking) were constitutional violations.

Umm ...

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428882/obama-violate-constitution-top-ten-2015

... by Ilya Shapiro ... ... ... Ilya Shapiro is a senior fellow in constitutional studies at the Cato Institute and editor-in-chief of the Cato Supreme Court Review.

https://www.cato.org/people/ilya-shapiro

... Shapiro has testified before Congress and state legislatures and, as coordinator of Cato’s amicus brief program, filed more than 200 “friend of the court” briefs in the Supreme Court, including one The Green Bag selected for its “Exemplary Legal Writing” collection. ...

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

They've warned about the Russian hacking thing some time ago. In other words, that was the narrative they've prepared just in case things don't go their way and it didn't therefore they had to whip up some "evidence." It's consistent with the story about the "connection" between Trump and Putin or what have you. This whole plot they came up with is so juvenile and stupid, people of the world must be laughing. Seriously people.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

The author of that article obviously doesn't know the constitution from the toilet paper he wipes his butt with, because none of the things he listed, if true (I didn't even bother fact checking) were constitutional violations.

Umm ...

You listed the guy's qualifications, but it doesn't change the fact that he listed 10 things he called constitutional violations, yet none of them actually were violations of the constitution.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@Sangetsu03

You stated,

"But most Americans did not go to college, their parents either didn't work hard enough, were unlucky, or simply didn't care. Their children could not go to college, and had to make do with whatever work they could find. Some were successful, many weren't. But that success is getting harder and harder to find, and these people, who democrats used to be call "the backbone of America" and "the salt of the earth" are now called "disgruntled," or "uneducated," or "deplorable.""

This is the reason Ms. Clinton lost the election and we ended up with Trump as President, who in my opinion is not fit for duty,

It seems some that were fortunate enough to go to college have little respect for those that could not and have to bust their butts in a steel mill or factory and seem to have some type of superiority complex over these folks.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

It's all over anyway, the electors have elected Trump. Ironically, a few refused to vote for Hillary, and voted for other people instead. Not the ending than many had hoped for, despite it's inevitability.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Strangerland: You listed the guy's qualifications, but it doesn't change the fact that he listed 10 things he called constitutional violations, yet none of them actually were violations of the constitution.

That's what you're claiming, but he is the one with the qualifications to interpret constitutional law, also, he is actually describing the basis of his objections.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

If Obama in his capacity as President of the United States has openly and obviously violated the US Constitution in excess of ten times, why has he not been impeached? Does the Republican party have no objections? Does it tacitly agree with his actions? Or can they just not be bothered?

I would suggest they haven't impeached him for violating the Constitution, much as they would love to, for the simple reason that he hasn't violated the Constitution. Just done some stuff some folk who didn't vote for him don't like.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

That's what you're claiming, but he is the one with the qualifications to interpret constitutional law, also, he is actually describing the basis of his objections.

He describes the basis of his objections, he doesn't describe which part of the constitution they supposedly contravene (because they don't).

It's once more an alt-right article with a sensational headline that isn't supported by the contents of the article. Post Truthism strikes again!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I noticed that, too. He didn't bother with reiterating his arguments against Obamacare, because he provides links to his previous articles of lists of constitutional arguments against Obamacare early in his article.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Sorry, I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

We say that about liberals every single waking hour.

You get accused of spreading lies,

Liberals always call the truth lies, so what's new? Seriously!

so you come back with some irrelevant, semi-coherent waffle about being blamed for the shortcomings of the Obama administration, as if that even makes any sense, and then... this. Whatever... "this" is, it makes it very hard to appreciate a conservative point of view. Have you ever thought that perhaps you might be better off leaving these kinds of discussions to people who can actually make a logical and coherent argument?

Like let's say, the supposedly coherent left? LMAO!

Just limit your activities to voting them up and comments like, "I agree with what so-and-so said?" You would be doing your cause a lot more good than you are at the moment.

I was about to say the same to the far left.

Hahahaha! Quoting an article by a hack at The National Review?

I'm sorry, it was too straight and to the point, next time, I'll use the WSJ, my bad.

I guess you're finally revealing the news sources you have refused to disclose, eh? CLASSIC! Sorry, bud, but not ONE of the things the guy mentions is a violation of the Constitution.

The one thing that I do admire about liberals is, they always try and try and try, I love that kind of tenacity.

Not one. Whereas Trump is flat out going to violate it, and is quite proud of it.

Ok, so Trump being direct in what he wants and how he governs in your face is not as good and is offensive, so he should be more like Obama and his minions, sneaky, covert and not be upfront with the people?

You clearly don't care one wit about the Constitution, so please don't ever pretend to uphold its values ever again, because let's say even if the rag you quote from as gospel were indeed gospel, it still means you stand behind Trump doing so because "Obama did it too!".

Smith, with all due respect, how would you know what's sacred to me or what I uphold or don't?

That's all he's got left... along with his news sources like the National Review!

Which is a whole lot.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

Readers, no more bickering please. Focus your comments on the story and not at each other.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I noticed that, too. He didn't bother with reiterating his arguments against Obamacare, because he provides links to his previous articles of lists of constitutional arguments against Obamacare early in his article.

And yet 54 Republican legal attempts at repealing it based on those supposed constitutional arguments have all failed.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

@Laguna... Madison. Dolly Madison...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It didn't seem to matter when Obama tried (unsuccessfully) to prevent the election of Netanyahu in Israel, at least not to the American media:

http://thehill.com/policy/international/236565-netanyahu-pollster-obama-role-in-election-larger-than-reported

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

The DNC hack likely didn't matter much to the election, but it also shouldn't happen in an election

Now the issue is how to keep election hacks from happening

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites