Conservatives, let's try a little thought experiment

[Landon Caeli]

You don't see how a hostile foreign government hacking US citizens and organizations trying to swing an election to their preferred candidate could be an issue?

Not really, no. I think high level government officials who put top secret information in places where they could be hacked are just stupid, and deserve to loose elections.

Anyone could have hacked what the Russians did. That just makes us look like idiots to the world.

 

[Landon Caeli]

What's worse is that now Trump is being tied to the Russian "spies" because the DNC is basically idiots.

<HINT> if you don't want your car stolen, don't always be leaving the keys in it with the windows rolled down.

Even worse, don't leave your files in there with your SS#, birth certificate house keys, etc. Unless you want all that stuff taken.

 

[Landon Caeli]

...Maybe Hillary had a plan for losing against Trump, where a way of ousting him was thought out way ahead of time.

...Or is she really just that dumb. IDK.

 

[Kentonio]

Not really, no. I think high level government officials who put top secret information in places where they could be hacked are just stupid, and deserve to loose elections.

Anyone could have hacked what the Russians did. That just makes us look like idiots to the world.

Ah, so Russia hacking 36 states voting systems and in at least one cse trying to amend voter information doesn't bother you either? Their own fault too?

 

[Landon Caeli]

Ah, so Russia hacking 36 states voting systems and in at least one cse trying to amend voter information doesn't bother you either? Their own fault too?

I'm not sure what that entails, but it's pretty sad we can't secure our own voting system from basic hackers. Very, very sad and pathetic.

Is Russia rude? Yes, but in another sense, this should be a wake up call.

...I'm not going to sit here and throw a temper tantrum about Trump winning when so many loopholes were left unchecked. Who's in charge of securing this stuff? Someone get fired?

 

[Veritas]

Since when are the NYT and WAPO considered liberal media? And how is Wikipedia even considered a media source in the sense we're talking about here? It's an online encyclopedia for goodness sake, the clues in the name.

The fact that you say this is an indication that you are completely unaware of your own bias. We all have them. You even admitted as much in your OP. The NYT and WAPO have had to retract or correct numerous stories that turned out to be "fake news", particularly regarding this whole Russian collusion issue. Some of their statements are totally fabricated or fed via the grapevine.

As for Wikipedia, it's not a real encyclopedia. The content is controlled by people and bots who hide behind pseudonyms. They edit articles according to their personal or corporate bias. And they determine which sources to use. In fact, many are asto-turfers, trolls and shills who are paid by industry insiders to create and maintain a narrative. It's so bad, even articles about people who go in to edit information about themselves, have it re-edited back to what the site's anonymous editors want it to be.

Study reveals bot-on-bot editing wars raging on Wikipedia's pages

 

[Kentonio]

The fact that you say this is an indication that you are completely unaware of your own bias. We all have them. You even admitted as much in your OP. The NYT and WAPO have had to retract or correct numerous stories that turned out to be "fake news", particularly regarding this whole Russian collusion issue. Some of their statements are totally fabricated or fed via the grapevine.

I was completely transparent in this thread about having biases. We all do. The point about correcting or retracting stories is that this is actually a positive. It's good that these media admit their mistakes and strive for accuracy. It's something I wish the right wing media would even attempt occasionally.

As for Wikipedia, it's not a real encyclopedia. The content is controlled by people and bots who hide behind pseudonyms. They edit articles according to their personal or corporate bias. And they determine which sources to use. In fact, many are asto-turfers, trolls and shills who are paid by industry insiders to create and maintain a narrative. It's so bad, even articles about people who go in to edit information about themselves, have it re-edited back to what the site's anonymous editors want it to be.

Study reveals bot-on-bot editing wars raging on Wikipedia's pages

Wikipedia has many flaws, but all discussions and edits are publicly viewable for everybody to read and judge. The reason people are not permitted to edit their own entries is to avoid people using them as self promotional pieces and to try and stop them removing unflattering information. Wikipedia is a LONG way from perfect, but its processes are transparent.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Not really, the thread just never took off in the way intended. How could I draw a conclusion to anything when other people didn't provide a contrary perspective for me to consider?

Page 4, read carefully. This is an OFFICIAL government document.

House Intelligence Committee Report On FISA Abuses

 

[Kentonio]

Page 4, read carefully. This is an OFFICIAL government document.

House Intelligence Committee Report On FISA Abuses

It's a joke. The things he complains about are idiotic and in some cases complete nonsense (Steele wasn't a paid FBI asset, he was a British colleague who offered them help) and if you bothered to read the Simpson senate testimony you'd already know that the reason Steele stopped cooperating with the FBI and went to the media, was because the FBI weren't acting on his information in a timely manner. Having discovered that Trump was knee deep in Russia's pocket OF COURSE he was desperate to avoid Trump being elected. He'd just found information he believed showed that Trump could be being blackmailed by the Russians for goodness sake, what would you expect him to say? 'Oh gee, I don't mind who wins'?

This is ridiculous and frankly I feel like I lost at least 10 IQ points just by reading that idiotic 'memo'.

 

[whatbogsends]

I'm not sure what that entails, but it's pretty sad we can't secure our own voting system from basic hackers. Very, very sad and pathetic.

Is Russia rude? Yes, but in another sense, this should be a wake up call.

...I'm not going to sit here and throw a temper tantrum about Trump winning when so many loopholes were left unchecked. Who's in charge of securing this stuff? Someone get fired?

Right, it should be a wake up call to not treat Russia as an ally, but with someone we need to be stern with in diplomacy. Not inviting them into the Oval office for a photo op.

 

[whatbogsends]

It's a joke. The things he complains about are idiotic and in some cases complete nonsense (Steele wasn't a paid FBI asset, he was a British colleague who offered them help) and if you bothered to read the Simpson senate testimony you'd already know that the reason Steele stopped cooperating with the FBI and went to the media, was because the FBI weren't acting on his information in a timely manner. Having discovered that Trump was knee deep in Russia's pocket OF COURSE he was desperate to avoid Trump being elected. He'd just found information he believed showed that Trump could be being blackmailed by the Russians for goodness sake, what would you expect him to say? 'Oh gee, I don't mind who wins'?

This is ridiculous and frankly I feel like I lost at least 10 IQ points just by reading that idiotic 'memo'.

We're supposed to believe that someone who has found Trump's covert involvement with a foreign adversary isn't supposed to think he shouldn't be elected President, lest that make his findings invalid.

Idiotic is an understatement. But it's being eaten up by Trump supporters.

 

[Tom 1]

Best summation of the crisis thus far, Robert Mueller’s Endless Investigation Is Aimed At The Wrong 2016 Presidential Candidate

Why do you think this is an article that should be taken seriously?

 

[Landon Caeli]

Right, it should be a wake up call to not treat Russia as an ally, but with someone we need to be stern with in diplomacy. Not inviting them into the Oval office for a photo op.

But Iran can kidnap our military personnel, and harass our navy with their Fast boats in open seas. With them, because they’re Poor Muslims, we’re expected to maintain a diplomatic relationship... even though they hang 12 year olds and force women to wear coverings from head to toe.

The left makes no sense.

 

[Tom 1]

No it wasn't.

"Joint Statement from the Department Of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security

The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations. The recent disclosures of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts. These thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process. Such activity is not new to Moscow—the Russians have used similar tactics and techniques across Europe and Eurasia, for example, to influence public opinion there. We believe, based on the scope and sensitivity of these efforts, that only Russia's senior-most officials could have authorized these activities."

In case you weren't aware, the Director of National Intelligence is the head of the United States Intelligence Community (United States Intelligence Community - Wikipedia) comprised of 17 US intelligence agencies including the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency.

It was a statement on behalf of the entire US intelligence community. If you chose to disbelieve them, then I'd ask which of us is really following conspiracy theories.

There is agreement among intelligence agencies across Europe also that Russia is engaged in various attempts to subvert national elections to turn them in favour of their preferred candidates, generally unstable people, or people they have some influence over, or both. There is plenty of direct evidence that many of the stories widely circulated in the more conservative news sites in the US in the lead up to the election were inventions of Russian saboteurs (as well as spotty teenagers in Macedonia)

 

[whatbogsends]

But Iran can kidnap our military personnel, and harass our navy with their Fast boats in open seas. With them, because they’re Poor Muslims, we’re expected to maintain a diplomatic relationship... even though they hang 12 year olds and force women to wear coverings from head to toe.

The left makes no sense.

And, like Trump with Russia, they were invited into the Oval Office by Obama?

And, like Trump with Russia, Obama didn't enforce sanctions against Iran?

It's as if you're presenting very dissimilar facts and trying to make them equivalent. There's gotta be a term for that....

 

[Landon Caeli]

And, like Trump with Russia, they were invited into the Oval Office by Obama?

And, like Trump with Russia, Obama didn't enforce sanctions against Iran?

It's as if you're presenting very dissimilar facts and trying to make them equivalent. There's gotta be a term for that....

The details don’t need to be precisely identical. So, are you now claiming Trump lifted sanctions on Russia?

Report: Obama Seeks Meeting With Iranian President

 

[Tom 1]

I might be some sort of a conservative, but this does not automatically mean I voted for Donald.

First, I expect a candidate to be an example and leader and role model in how to relate with other people and how to communicate while running for office. If a candidate does not meet this basic qualification, the person can't bribe my vote by, for example, bringing up the economy.

And if a candidate is not effectively defending the lives of unborn Americans . . . end of conversation. If a person does not have the basic character to effectively defend our unborn children, Jesus says, "he who is unjust in what is least is unjust also in much", in Luke 16:10. And without Jesus, He says > "you can do nothing," in John 15:5.

So, if a person's character is a mess, to begin with, I don't need to spend my attention and time on a lot of details of the mess which a mess produces.

What about how America has been giving all its work to China? This seems to have a way of not getting much public attention, while ones are calling so much attention to Donald and Russia. I would say there has been some amount of collusion and conspiracy and ignoring voters, if so much work and business has gone to China. But this gets how much attention? ?

"Maybe calling attention to Donald and Russia is part of a conspiracy to keep attention away from the issue of how America is trillions in debt and is one the pole of China because China was allowed to buy that debt."

President Barack Obama was in office for eight years, but how much did he do about China? But I understand ones might say that Congress was Republican and they kept Barack from doing all he could. But . . . voters put in Barack and voters put in the Republicans. And the trillions of America's debt, I think I was told, was purchased by China, and this could have been used to obligate America to give work to China.

And, in any case, how does America pay off its debt while work goes to China, and Americans buy Chinese so their money goes to China so it is not available to pay off the debt?

Maybe it is easier to handle an issue about Russia, so attention is kept from the China thing which could be too hard to handle . . . especially if without Jesus "you can do nothing".

Did Conservatives alone choose to add to the trillions of debt? What sort of character makes people able to keep doing this? I suspect this has been the result of both liberals and conservatives; so why act like they are competing?

Let the one without sin cast the first stone? This goes for me; I have my own correction that I need.

Trump, in distancing former allies across the world and piling into established trade agreements without any sort of coherent plan, has provided the Chinese government with an opportunity I doubt they imagined would ever be handed to them on a plate, the opportunity to step in where US foreign relations and reputation are in chaos and neatly tie up new deals, shifting the balance of power considerably in China’s favour. Any short term growth the US is currently experiencing will not be enough to put things back together again, shifts of economic power towards China and Russia will not easily be won back.

 

[Rion]

Here's a thought experiment for you:

Imagine that a dossier claiming that Obama was in having secret meetings with Iran, and it was written by a foreign agent who hated Obama. Oh, and this was paid for by the RNC and McCain as political research. Now, imagine that Dubya's FBI had used this questionable document to get wiretaps on Obama and some of his staff, while withholding the above information from the FISA court. Obama still wins, but now the Republicans are actively investigating these accusations, and talk radio and FOX spend all day talking about how Obama was Iran's puppet this entire time.

Imagine how you'd react to if this was revealed to you.

 

[Landon Caeli]

Obama talked to Putin too. But Trump isn’t allowed the same privileges as Obama as POTUS.

 

[whatbogsends]

Here's a thought experiment for you:

Imagine that a dossier claiming that Obama was in having secret meetings with Iran, and it was written by a foreign agent who hated Obama. Oh, and this was paid for by the RNC and McCain as political research. Now, imagine that Dubya's FBI had used this questionable document to get wiretaps on Obama and some of his staff, while withholding the above information from the FISA court. Obama still wins, but now the Republicans are actively investigating these accusations, and talk radio and FOX spend all day talking about how Obama was Iran's puppet this entire time.

Imagine how you'd react to if this was revealed to you.

In this thought experiment, did multiple members of Obama's campaign and administration lie under oath about the frequency and nature of their contacts with Iran? Was Iran actively involved in trying to influence the US elections in favor of Obama?

If those 2 additional facts were true, then yes, i'd want there to be an unfettered investigation into the potential criminal wrongdoings of the Obama campaign.