America - The Official Thread

[Vegard]

PBS Newshour live stream on YouTube.

 

[Dennisch]

Hypocrisy.

Praying for the victims. And then go on to say that Iran falls victim to the evil that they promote.

You were licking the ass of a Saudi not too long ago, Donald.

Edit.

I think it really is time for Europe to completely shut their southern borders because it's a matter of time before Iran and Saudi Arabia will clash. Imagine what kind of refugee flood that will start.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Hypocrisy.

Praying for the victims. And then go on to say that Iran falls victim to the evil that they promote.

You were licking the ass of a Saudi not too long ago, Donald.

Edit.

I think it really is time for Europe to completely shut their southern borders because it's a matter of time before Iran and Saudi Arabia will clash. Imagine what kind of refugee flood that will start.

Was waiting for that myself, to see how many would come out the wood work and say "well Iran had it coming so that's different" type mentality.

Maybe? Don't know.

It's just really odd to me she was reportedly given top secret clearance despite some of the things she's said. /shrug

Actually looked into it more, the Times says that she wasn't a fan of Trump (who is ) but to the point where the Feds will use it as a motive, and show that she picked that document to prove and get printed that Trumps win is tainted. I mean that's not whistle blowing to me, that's a political bias driving you to try and paint a narrative (she) believes true before proven.

 

[PeterJB]

I'm just sick of Saudi Arabia getting a free pass on everything because oil. It sickens me seeing Western leaders sitting down being best buddies with the Saudi King, when they treat their people no different to those in North Korea but suddenly they're evil because they have nothing to trade.

 

[Dennisch]

I'm just sick of Saudi Arabia getting a free pass on everything because oil. It sickens me seeing Western leaders sitting down being best buddies with the Saudi King, when they treat their people no different to those in North Korea but suddenly they're evil because they have nothing to trade.

We need more people like Elon Musk, spending their money on alternative energy resources and such. Imagine if all those billionaires started to work together, pouring all that sweet money into that cause. Saudi Arabia and all the other oil plants of the world will be out of money within a decade.

 

[SlipZtrEm]

We need more people like Elon Musk, spending their money on alternative energy resources and such. Imagine if all those billionaires started to work together, pouring all that sweet money into that cause. Saudi Arabia and all the other oil plants of the world will be out of money within a decade.

Elon 2020!

 

[Danoff]

I'm just sick of Saudi Arabia getting a free pass on everything because oil. It sickens me seeing Western leaders sitting down being best buddies with the Saudi King, when they treat their people no different to those in North Korea but suddenly they're evil because they have nothing to trade.

We need more people like Elon Musk, spending their money on alternative energy resources and such. Imagine if all those billionaires started to work together, pouring all that sweet money into that cause. Saudi Arabia and all the other oil plants of the world will be out of money within a decade.

Same with Mexico... oh wait...

 

[Dennisch]

Same with Mexico... oh wait...

Edit. Ding dong. I got it.

 

[Danoff]

What does that pie show?

I kinda thought that was self-explanatory based on the context, my bad. It's US oil sources.

 

[FoRiZon]

Hypocrisy.

Praying for the victims. And then go on to say that Iran falls victim to the evil that they promote.

You were licking the ass of a Saudi not too long ago, Donald.

Edit.

I think it really is time for Europe to completely shut their southern borders because it's a matter of time before Iran and Saudi Arabia will clash. Imagine what kind of refugee flood that will start.

Breaking news: Apparently UK and France also 'falling victim to the evil they promote'.

Silly Trump had no idea what he just said, or act.

 

[mustafur]

Iran, Supporting the wrong terrorists since 1979.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I remain aware that referring to "Presdunt Trump" is bad form but note that his lawyer calls him "Predisent Trump". http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-40193177

 

[Vegard]

I remain aware that referring to "Presdunt Trump" is bad form but note that his lawyer calls him "Predisent Trump". http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-40193177

That's fake news ok! Total fake. It's the fakest news ever! Enough of this negative press covfefe.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

The most worrying part of Comey's testimony is that Trump apparently didn't react when told that Russia attempted to interfere with the election - he didn't ask any follow-up questions or raise the issue again.

 

[McLaren]

Of course that's the most worrying part on your end.

Not the fact Comey was deliberately leaking information and no one bothered to ask who this other person was he gave info to so he wouldn't "feed the seagulls", or that Comey was leaking information that gave the view Trump was under investigation rather than leak that actual bit of info. Or that Lynch asked Comey to not refer to Hillary's email as an investigation.

There's all sorts of worrying information learned from Comey today.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Of course that's the most worrying part on your end.

No, it's the most worrying. You've got a foreign power attempting to interfere with the democratic process and a President who doesn't care that it happened, much less that it is part of an ongoing strategic process. His response to Comey's testimony made that much clear, insisting that there is no evidence that Russian interference changed so much as a single vote. This is despite the assertion that the Russians planted suspicious news stories to sway the public's perceptions and Trump repeatedly characterising media outlets as publishing fake news. So during the campaign, everyone was being misled - but now that Trump is under fire, everyone was smart enough to have figured it out all along.

 

[McLaren]

No, it's the most worrying. You've got a foreign power attempting to interfere with the democratic process and a President who doesn't care that it happened, much less that it is part of an ongoing strategic process. His response to Comey's testimony made that much clear, insisting that there is no evidence that Russian interference changed so much as a single vote. This is despite the assertion that the Russians planted suspicious news stories to sway the public's perceptions and Trump repeatedly characterising media outlets as publishing fake news. So during the campaign, everyone was being misled - but now that Trump is under fire, everyone was smart enough to have figured it out all along.

This is hilariously ironic considering you chastised Trump for claiming the media was doing the same to sway public opinion.

Trump continues to insist that the election is being rigged by the media:

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-18/donald-trump-warns-of-rigged-us-election/7941412
Perhaps he should shut up for five minutes.

It's actually, deliciously, ironic. People like you making fun of Trump for claiming the election would be rigged/swayed, and now you cling so desperately to the same argument hoping one day, it will impeach him.

Maybe the Cheeto in Chief was right.

 

[mustafur]

At the end of the day if Russia did ''hack'' the election by exposing information about candidates(Hillary) that was true, how exactly is this a problem?
It's a problem for the government yes, but if anything it's a plus for the voters if they want information about who they are going to vote for.

 

[McLaren]

At the end of the day if Russia did ''hack'' the election by exposing information about candidates(Hillary) that was true, how exactly is this a problem?
It's a problem for the government yes, but if anything it's a plus for the voters if they want information about who they are going to vote for.

Because for 1 particular member wanted, it influenced the election for the candidate he didn't want. The same member who dismissed Assange exposing said information b/c he wanted a pardon by Trump, but to date, has never proved said claim.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

This is hilariously ironic considering you chastised Trump for claiming the media was doing the same to sway public opinion.

I wasn't aware that the President and the press had the same responsibilities.

At the end of the day if Russia did ''hack'' the election by exposing information about candidates(Hillary) that was true, how exactly is this a problem?

Except that wasn't the case at all. James Clapper pointed out in his National Press Club address that the Russians wanted to disrupt the election and erode public confidence in the democratic process. The whole "Russia only exposed Clinton" story is how the Republicans spun it to legitimise their own victory.

The same member who dismissed Assange exposing said information b/c he wanted a pardon by Trump, but to date, has never proved said claim.

I theorised. If you cannot read my posts, that's on you.

 

[McLaren]

I wasn't aware that the President and the press had the same responsibilities.

More like a rule right out Prisonermonkeys' Playbook: Hold a different view when your side of the argument fits the narrative.

I theorised. If you cannot read my posts, that's on you.

You didn't theorize anything.

He didn't need to get it. He just needed to try.

Based on no reasoning other than, "Trump will invite him with open arms because he's releasing Hillary's documents" even after being told by others that Assange had no political affiliation.

Here we are 6 months later, you being completely wrong. Much like you claiming that Trump bullied Comey or he fired him to stop an investigation, to which yesterday's hearing showed there was no investigation into Trump himself, nor did he ask Comey to stop investigating Flynn; the 2 biggest topics that kept revolving the two men.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

nor did he ask Comey to stop investigating Flynn

You know as well as I do that words have a subtext. Trump might not have said "I want you to stop investigating Flynn", but that doesn't mean that he didn't ask.

You didn't theorize anything.

I did. You just took my words out of context. From the very beginning, I theorised that Assange had information on both Trump and Clinton, given that he threatened the release of information if anything should happen. And I put forward that theory in support of my argument that Assange should not be protected if he is acting as a whistleblower for his own personal gain - ie agreeing not to release damaging information on a presidential candidate in exchange for a pardon if and when said candidate won the election.

You're well aware that this was a theory, but you've cherry-picked and misrepresented my comments.

 

[Danoff]

At the end of the day if Russia did ''hack'' the election by exposing information about candidates(Hillary) that was true, how exactly is this a problem?
It's a problem for the government yes, but if anything it's a plus for the voters if they want information about who they are going to vote for.

This is what I keep coming back to. If foreign powers want to provide fodder for our political parties to use, I'm actually not sure how we're going to stop them. And of course they might decide they have a vested interest in one candidate vs. another. Ultimately it's up to the voters to decide what's important, and US voters will never go into another election without the knowledge that some of the information leaks they're getting might have originated from outside the country.

Actually, to me, more troubling than releasing information to sway the presidential election would be interference in the primaries - because that's the venue where real opportunity for interference can be had. It gets super red team/blue team after that. For example, puffing up Trump over other Republican candidates and puffing up Hillary over other Democratic candidates would definitely, absolutely, have had a dramatic effect in undermining the faith of the US voter in the democratic process - because we all hated the outcome of the primaries.

 

[McLaren]

You know as well as I do that words have a subtext. Trump might not have said "I want you to stop investigating Flynn", but that doesn't mean that he didn't ask.

Per the hearing, he said he would hope he would drop the investigation. He never asked. You're wrong once more.

I did. You just took my words out of context. From the very beginning, I theorised that Assange had information on both Trump and Clinton, given that he threatened the release of information if anything should happen. And I put forward that theory in support of my argument that Assange should not be protected if he is acting as a whistleblower for his own personal gain - ie agreeing not to release damaging information on a presidential candidate in exchange for a pardon if and when said candidate won the election.

You're well aware that this was a theory, but you've cherry-picked and misrepresented my comments.

A theory with no evidence to support it, and when asked, in typical fashion, you disappeared from the discussion.

It is as was told to you before; you made this "theory" because you have a well established bias, not because you want Assange to be transparent. You'd flip the switch in a heartbeat and justify everything Assange was doing if it concerned Trump information.

The only one misrepresenting is you.

 

[Tornado]

For example, puffing up Trump over other Republican candidates and puffing up Hillary over other Democratic candidates would definitely, absolutely, have had a dramatic effect in undermining the faith of the US voter in the democratic process - because we all hated the outcome of the primaries.

Though the DNC did a good enough job of that themselves presumably without Russian guidance.

 

[huskeR32]

Per the hearing, he said he would hope he would drop the investigation. He never asked.

Come on.

One of the most powerful people in the world, who can end your career on a whim, has you in their office, just the two of you, and says "I hope you can _____," and you're not interpreting that as a request?

That ignores some very basic dynamics of human communication.

 

[Danoff]

Come on.

One of the most powerful people in the world, who can end your career on a whim, has you in their office, just the two of you, and says "I hope you can _____," and you're not interpreting that as a request?

That ignores some very basic dynamics of human communication.

I tend to agree with this interpretation (not that it matters much). I don't think he ways saying "I hope you can___" to actually express hope. It's an application of pressure. This is not "I hope we win" or "I hope we can stop talking about this nonsense". This is your mother saying "I hope you can behave yourself".

 

[TenEightyOne]

Per the hearing, he said he would hope he would drop the investigation.

Not quite... Trump is alleged to have said "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go."

He never asked.

You seem to be alone in your suddenly literal understanding of Trump's alleged words. In this case "hope" is the operative word and can form a legally recognised obstruction of justice.

 

[BobK]

Not quite... Trump is alleged to have said "I hope you can see your way clear to letting this go, to letting Flynn go. He is a good guy. I hope you can let this go."



You seem to be alone in your suddenly literal understanding of Trump's alleged words. In this case "hope" is the operative word and can form a legally recognised obstruction of justice.

Something I found elsewhere on the internet:

Trump tells Comey he hopes an investigation goes away. Democrats: "OMG obstruction of justice! Impeach!"

Hillary destroys documents under subpoena. Democrats: "Nothing to see here! You must be a misogynist!"

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Because for 1 particular member wanted, it influenced the election for the candidate he didn't want. The same member who dismissed Assange exposing said information b/c he wanted a pardon by Trump, but to date, has never proved said claim.

My problem is as much as he tries to paint our leader as a global problem it will always be a domestic problem far greater than that of anything else and by a massive margin. So while he might care, he shouldn't because it's not his government to worry about. I don't worry about the Australian or any other government for that matter during elections.

The most worrying part of Comey's testimony is that Trump apparently didn't react when told that Russia attempted to interfere with the election - he didn't ask any follow-up questions or raise the issue again.

I watched the entire hearing twice, that's not exactly what he said. I don't stand for Trump myself but I stand less for misinformation.