Did Russians interfere in the 2016 U.S. elections and is such interference acceptable?

[chloride]

No.

This about sums up the allegations.

*On April 1, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs posted a spoof voicemail offering “Russian hackers services” and “election interference.” And the mainstream US media appears not amused.

“You have reached the Russian embassy, your call is very important to us. To arrange a call from a Russian diplomat to your political opponents, press one,” the message posted on the ministry’s official Facebook page says, playing first in Russian, then in English.

“To use the services of Russian hackers press two,” it goes on.

“To request election interference, press three and wait until the next election campaign. Please note that all calls are recorded for quality improvement and training purposes.”*

rt.com/news/383098-russia-foreign-ministry-spoof-hackers/

That’s pretty funny, in a cheeky kind of way.

dvdjs:

And how odd that you can’t press three, four, and five to murder opposition leaders, incarcerate protesters, and ruin journalists, respectively.

I imagine six does all three to someone, seven denies it, and eight requests an autographed picture of Putin, shirtless.

 

[St_Francis]

Can you point out a right-wing group that is directly advocating for the destruction of the environment? Not a call that advocates for things that may have a side effect of damaging the environment, but actual, direct calls for increasing climate change and harming the environment as ends in themselves. That would be a group equivalent to these groups on the left that directly advocate for abortion.

Ahhh, “direct” advocacy. OK. Then we should be able to stop the nonsense about democrats advocating abortion. Directly.

The Democrats’ environmental plans have had and continue to have a disproportionate effect on the poor.

Moreover, their aid to the poor was structured in such a way as to destroy the families of those in poverty.

No one can avoid these consequences; they are stuck.

OTOH, it is not difficult for the vast majority of people to avoid the problem of the inability to get an abortion, an intrinsic evil, according to the Catholic Church.

Moreover, I would suggest that what the Republicans advocate is moral according to the principle of double effect: it enhances human dignity by not creating areas of joblessness, and has an unintended side-effect, according to some long chain of events, of possibly causing some deaths. Yes, naturally we do not want these deaths. But the Democrats fight every bill or law which would make women obtaining an abortion uncomfortable, and the Republicans are nowhere near that intent on allowing the destruction of the environment.

Seriously, Democrats have voted against the requirement for health inspections and the sort of medical requirement found in any other medical facility offering out-patient procedures, and parental notification, as well as everything else.

 

[lynnvinc]

Can you point out a right-wing group that is directly advocating for the destruction of the environment? Not a call that advocates for things that may have a side effect of damaging the environment, but actual, direct calls for increasing climate change and harming the environment as ends in themselves. That would be a group equivalent to these groups on the left that directly advocate for abortion.

Most politicos don’t actually says they want to destroy the life-sustaining environment. You have to understand their code language.

“Get rid of regulations,” mainly means get rid of environmental regulations.

“Infrastructure projects to create more jobs” mainly means building roads and pipelines, etc for fossil fuel industries to create more wealth for the rich…and a few temporary jobs for the working class.

However, this president is different. He comes right out and says he thinks climate change is a hoax and has already cut a lot of programs to mitigate it and plans to cut more, so as to benefit his friends in the fossil fuel industries and put blockages for a clean, green economy based on alt energy. He is also planning to cut climate science, thinking that will end any evidence that CC is happening.

In other words, he is willing to let the world increasingly fall into disaster and destruction over the decades, centuries and millennia.

 

[dvdjs]

The Democrats’ … aid to the poor was structured in such a way as to destroy the families of those in poverty …

Yup. I note the immediate abandonment of the idea of the importance of direct advocacy. Not surprised.

 

[Ion]

Most politicos don’t actually says they want to destroy the life-sustaining environment. You have to understand their code language.

“Get rid of regulations,” mainly means get rid of environmental regulations.

“Infrastructure projects to create more jobs” mainly means building roads and pipelines, etc for fossil fuel industries to create more wealth for the rich…and a few temporary jobs for the working class.

However, this president is different. He comes right out and says he thinks climate change is a hoax and has already cut a lot of programs to mitigate it and plans to cut more, so as to benefit his friends in the fossil fuel industries and put blockages for a clean, green economy based on alt energy. He is also planning to cut climate science, thinking that will end any evidence that CC is happening.

In other words, he is willing to let the world increasingly fall into disaster and destruction over the decades, centuries and millennia.

Yup, I wonder why did not the early settlers go green and start living a hunter gatherer life…
You think that the chinese will make steel for Americans, forever?

 

[St_Francis]

Yup. I note the immediate abandonment of the idea of the importance of direct advocacy. Not surprised.

I never said anything about direct advocacy.

 

[Monkey1976]

Most politicos don’t actually says they want to destroy the life-sustaining environment. You have to understand their code language.

“Code language”?

“Get rid of regulations,” mainly means get rid of environmental regulations.

Source for this claim? Most Federal regulations have nothing to do with the environment.

“Infrastructure projects to create more jobs” mainly means building roads and pipelines, etc for fossil fuel industries to create more wealth for the rich…and a few temporary jobs for the working class.

Even 100% electric cars charged from solar power need something upon which to drive.

Could you point out the Amazon listing for the Evil Republican/English dictionary we should be using?

 

[Monkey1976]

Ahhh, “direct” advocacy. OK. Then we should be able to stop the nonsense about democrats advocating abortion. Directly.

DNC:

The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.

Care to explain how that isn’t advocating for abortion?

 

[Michael68]

Care to explain how that isn’t advocating for abortion?

Of course the DNC advocates for abortion. They ARE the death party. It is in their platform

 

[pepipop]

Fascinating. Our nation is investigating the work of an adversarial nation to undermine our intitutions and you are quoting from the propaganda organ of that nation. They surely seem to have gotten to you.

And how odd that you can’t press three, four, and five to murder opposition leaders, incarcerate protesters, and ruin journalists, respectively.

Here’s another link:telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/02/russian-foreign-ministry-publishes-election-meddling-april-fool/

Numerous MSM outlets are carrying this hilarious story.

‘Investigating, investigating what!?’

EVEN if the Russians did ‘hack’, whatever it is they were meant to have ‘hacked’, how did they then mind-control over 300 million people into voting how they wanted them to vote.

All negative stories - of which there were many more of Trump in the US national papers, CNN etc… - about Hillary, were they untrue. What was ever said or reported that would have ‘lost’ her votes.

Most votes. it would be assumed, were based on each candidate’s speeches around the country, and their final debates - as it usually the case with previous US democratic elections.

Also, if thee allegations were to be believed, it would entail over 50% of voters being forced to view RT, and/or social media outlets that ‘interfered’ with the DEMs campaign.

What does that even mean? No-one has actually pointed this out, aside from the ‘hacking’, as to how the Russians pulled off this genius move. The entire premise that the Russians could do it, with a population of over 300 million - the majority of which, no doubt, get their news through the US recognised MSM channels - is astounding.

Amusingly, it was US political strategists who helped Yeltsi, in his ‘first’ democratic Russian campaign, to win his election. You couldn’t make it up. Needless to say, this wasn’t viewed as ‘an act of war’.

content.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,19960715,00.html

THE SECRET STORY OF HOW FOUR U.S. ADVISERS USED POLLS, FOCUS GROUPS, NEGATIVE ADS AND ALL THE OTHER TECHNIQUES OF AMERICAN CAMPAIGNING TO HELP BORIS YELTSIN WIN

 

[Michael68]

I don’t know what their trying to make us think. Short of stuffing the ballot boxes, what else could they do? Seriously?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

I don’t know what their trying to make us think. Short of stuffing the ballot boxes, what else could they do? Seriously?

That question has been asked at least 20 times and answered at least that many times in this thread alone. If you don’t think any of those answers were right, then take the best of them and try to refute it instead of pretending yours is a new question.

 

[Monkey1976]

That question has been asked at least 20 times and answered at least that many times in this thread alone. If you don’t think any of those answers were right, then take the best of them and try to refute it instead of pretending yours is a new question.

Asked, yes. Answered? Not so much. Nobody has yet answered why we should blame the Russians for the behavior and attitudes of the DNC.

The problem is not that the DNC emails were revealed. It’s that those emails revealed a pattern of thought and behavior that they didn’t want the public to see.

As said before, it’s the equivalent of a cheating husband’s family being angry with his wife for going through his phone when she found evidence of his adultery.

 

[pepipop]

Asked, yes. Answered? Not so much. Nobody has yet answered why we should blame the Russians for the behavior and attitudes of the DNC.

The problem is not that the DNC emails were revealed. It’s that those emails revealed a pattern of thought and behavior that they didn’t want the public to see.

As said before, it’s the equivalent of a cheating husband’s family being angry with his wife for going through his phone when she found evidence of his adultery.

I admit to not having gone through the entire thread, and the explanations as to ‘how’ the Russians carried this out. However, if the above is the gist of it, then the ‘truth’ hurt their election campaign. Whoops!

However, not all of the US public would scroll through social media to find these emails, or their contents - ‘assuming’ they were not covered by the national US media, TV and print, e.g. CNN etc…

If the contents were reported and analysed, by the MSM, then the US national MSM was to blame!

 

[Monte_RCMS]

Asked, yes. Answered? Not so much. Nobody has yet answered why we should blame the Russians for the behavior and attitudes of the DNC.

The problem is not that the DNC emails were revealed. It’s that those emails revealed a pattern of thought and behavior that they didn’t want the public to see.

As said before, it’s the equivalent of a cheating husband’s family being angry with his wife for going through his phone when she found evidence of his adultery.

Your comment: “Answered? Not so much.” is very much correct.

The Democrats do not want the question answered, because what is emerging is not that the Russians interfered with the 2016 elections, but that the Democrats have been engaging in violations of the Espionage Statutes.

We now are getting the NAMES of the Democrats … such as Evelyn Farkas … and others … now looking like two or three names per day of Democrat “operatives” who have been illegally accessing classified material and unmasking American persons AND revealing sources and methods.

These Democrat persons are looking at ten years in Federal prison for EACH violation.

Going back to 2015 easily and as far back as 2011.

And for what purpose?

Interesting gossip?

Prison time looking more and more likely for more and more Democrats.

 

[Michael68]

Right, they keep saying its been answered and no it hasn’t. The media did more to interfere than Russia did!

 

[dvdjs]

I never said anything about direct advocacy.

Precisely. And that was the point.

Monkey 1976 objected to the idea that the policies of right wing groups would leas to environmental destruction, and raised the bar, asking:for evidence of a “right-wing group that is* directly advocating* for the destruction of the environment”. (emphasis added).

I thought that interesting in light of the common allegation that Democrats advocate for abortion, and wondered if the standard of direct advocacy should apply for Democrats as well as Republicans. I anticipated a double standard.

 

[Monte_RCMS]

More bad news for Democrats:

americanthinker.com/articles/2017/04/russia_no_the_pony_in_the_manure_is_the_corruption_of_our_intelligence_officials.html

Gets worse and worse and worse for the Democrats.

lucianne.com/thread/?artnum=908368

Looks like the left is not going to back down. Therefore, it is the responsibility of the Trump administration along with the support of patriotic Americans to fight the sedition which some have called a coup that the left is perpetrating against the United States of America. Apparently, the players are entrenched high level politicians and bureaucrats who have been operating unchecked for decades. The truth will rip the mask off Washington politics and reveal the putrid visage of those at the very highest levels who have traded the rule of law for political power. This has the potential to shake the very foundations of the Republic. We can weather that storm, but what we cannot allow to continue is the deep state and its political cronies to usurp duly elected presidents, the rule of law, and the will of the people. Drain the swamp regardless of who gets flushed out. The bedrock of the Constitution affirms that we are all equal and no one is above the law. No one.

The feckless and feculent fraud Barack Hussein Obama corrupted everything he touched: the Holder/Lynch/Yates Department of JustUs, the Perez fake statistics Labor Department, the Jeh Johnson state elections-hacking and Islamic terrorist-importing DHS, the John Muhammed Brennan CIA, the Koskinen/ LoisLerner IRS, the perjurious Clapper DNI, the Susan Rice/Ben Clapper National Security Council and on and on and on – all led by the Liar-in-Chief Obama himself, and cheered, cuddled, and coddled by the willing, swooning, legs-tingling, pants-crease-obsessing clapping seals of the thoroughly-corrupted Fake News Enemedia Enterpirises. History will be cruel to Barack Obama, and eternity will be even worse.

Perhaps Mr. Obama should stay at his “mens retreat” in Tahiti indefinitely and not come back to the United States.

 

[Michael68]

Precisely. And that was the point.

Monkey 1976 objected to the idea that the policies of right wing groups would leas to environmental destruction, and raised the bar, asking:for evidence of a “right-wing group that is* directly advocating* for the destruction of the environment”. (emphasis added).

I thought that interesting in light of the common allegation that Democrats advocate for abortion, and wondered if the standard of direct advocacy should apply for Democrats as well as Republicans. I anticipated a double standard.

Have you found a right wing group that advocates dirty air and water. I mean flat out says they want to destroy the environment?

 

[Seamus_L]

Watch this piece from CBS cbsnews.com/news/russian-meddling-investigation-misinformation-tactics-senate-intelligence-committee/ It’s unbelievable what frightening paranoia is being spewed by US intelligence agencies. It sounds like a not so subtle suggestion that the internet has to be controlled. And as for the follow the trail of dead Russians statement, before anyone in the US intelligence community was saying this, people in alternative right wing media were speculating that Russian diplomats were possibly being murdered by Western agencies.