U.S. election 2016 was a big win for Russia in a decades-long war

by Ben Reilly Fri Nov 25, 2016 9:48 pm

Lots has been written about “fake news” in the U.S. election cycle, often tinted by the idea that much of it was the creation of money-grubbing, unethical loners exploiting people’s political leanings for a quick buck. But at least some of the false news that spread in the last few months of the campaign appears to have had much more serious geopolitical implications and was spread thanks to “a sophisticated Russian propaganda campaign,” reports the Washington Post, which cites two recent expert reports on the issue.

The campaign, which included thousands of botnets, a network of propaganda-friendly sites and social media accounts, relied on U.S.-made technology platforms to essentially attack U.S. democracy and make Americans question the trustworthiness of their voting system. Among the claims that were pushed by the propaganda efforts there was a particular focus on Hillary Clinton’s supposedly declining health, the supposed payment of anti-Trump protesters, and lots of efforts at pushing the storyline that the election was “rigged,” as Trump often claimed during the campaign.

Although eroding faith in American democracy has long been one of the top goals of the Kremlin since the Cold War days, this has suddenly become a lot easier in the social media era. “They want to essentially erode faith in the U.S. government or U.S. government interests,” said Clint Watts, a fellow at the Foreign Policy Research Institute who has tracked Russian propaganda for years. “This was their standard mode during the Cold War. The problem is that this was hard to do before social media.”

Before, the propaganda efforts had to rely on actual people and organizations. Now Moscow can directly target those they know are eager to believe what they’re selling. “During the Cold War, gray measures used semi-covert Communist parties, friendship societies, and non-governmental organizations to engage in party-to-party and people-to-people campaigns. Today, gray measures on social media include conspiracy websites, data dump websites, and seemingly credible news aggregators that amplify disinformation and misinformation,” write Watts, Andrew Weisburd and JM Berger in a paper that is one of the sources the Post uses for its story.

The Post also got an advanced look at a report by a group called PropOrNot that is dedicated to identifying Russian propaganda online. The report “identifies more than 200 websites as routine peddlers of Russian propaganda during the election season, with combined audiences of at least 15 million Americans,” reports the Post. “On Facebook, PropOrNot estimates that stories planted or promoted by the disinformation campaign were viewed more than 213 million times.”

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/11/25/how_russian_propaganda_used_facebook_to_spread_fake_news_during_the_election.html

by Tommy Monk Fri Nov 25, 2016 11:02 pm

Yawn...

by Ben Reilly Fri Nov 25, 2016 11:08 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:Yawn...

Fuck you. If you're going to take the typical right-wing tactic of refusing to debate things that cast your movement in a negative light, then at least do what you usually do and don't comment at all.

by Ben Reilly Fri Nov 25, 2016 11:08 pm

BTW Tommy, you and your fellow idiots fell for and spread a LOT of Russia's bullshit.

by Victorismyhero Fri Nov 25, 2016 11:09 pm

what can you do about it?

by Ben Reilly Fri Nov 25, 2016 11:11 pm

Lord Foul wrote:what can you do about it?

I don't know, maybe circulate this information so that American voters will know it when the 2020 elections roll around?

by Tommy Monk Fri Nov 25, 2016 11:27 pm

The op is propaganda...

Bookface is full of propaganda...

I remember hearing one pro Democrat argument that consisted entirely of this pathetic waffle...

"Yeah... go and vote trump... cos that's what Putin wants you to do!"

Laughing

by Victorismyhero Fri Nov 25, 2016 11:29 pm

Hmmm...I doubt that will make one iota of difference

folks are too idle to think these days...

if it says xyz on the internet and it fits within their pov it must be true (confirmation bias)

they dont want to take the trouble to think about things...

why do you think I vote for the party who, when I have considered their overall policies and attitude to a number of issues, from a number of sources...I choose the one I think best serves MY purpose...and my purpose alone...

sod fred up the road...its up to HIM to vote for whoever best represents HIS interests...i vote on My behalf...not his or anyone elses....

by Tommy Monk Fri Nov 25, 2016 11:31 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

The op is propaganda...

Bookface is full of propaganda...

I remember hearing one pro Democrat argument that consisted entirely of this pathetic waffle...

"Yeah... go and vote trump... cos that's what Putin wants you to do!"

And as luck would have it... Ben just posted this on another thread...

"Both Brexit and Trump's "election" are awfully good outcomes for Putin as well."

lol!

by Original Quill Sat Nov 26, 2016 12:37 am

Lord Foul wrote:what can you do about it?

For sure, insulate the electronics from the Internet and any Wi-Fi access. I doubt the 2016 election results will be reversed or amended.

by Ben Reilly Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:04 am

Lord Foul wrote:Hmmm...I doubt that will make one iota of difference

folks are too idle to think these days...

if it says xyz on the internet and it fits within their pov it must be true (confirmation bias)

they dont want to take the trouble to think about things...

why do you think I vote for the party who, when I have considered their overall policies and attitude to a number of issues, from a number of sources...I choose the one I think best serves MY purpose...and my purpose alone...

sod fred up the road...its up to HIM to vote for whoever best represents HIS interests...i vote on My behalf...not his or anyone elses....

I vote my own best interest too, and I decided it's not in my best interest to have Putin's puppet as president.

by Ben Reilly Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:09 am

Tommy Monk wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

The op is propaganda...

Bookface is full of propaganda...

I remember hearing one pro Democrat argument that consisted entirely of this pathetic waffle...

"Yeah... go and vote trump... cos that's what Putin wants you to do!"

And as luck would have it... Ben just posted this on another thread...

"Both Brexit and Trump's "election" are awfully good outcomes for Putin as well."

It's true, jackass! Without the UK allied with the rest of Europe, Putin can continue to make inroads in Eastern Europe. And did you miss the one where the veteran spy reported to the FBI that Russia may have gotten leverage over Trump?

If you did, here's a refresher:

On Sunday, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid upped the ante. He sent Comey a fiery letter saying the FBI chief may have broken the law and pointed to a potentially greater controversy: "In my communications with you and other top officials in the national security community, it has become clear that you possess explosive information about close ties and coordination between Donald Trump, his top advisors, and the Russian government…The public has a right to know this information."

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/10/veteran-spy-gave-fbi-info-alleging-russian-operation-cultivate-donald-trump

You can stick your fingers in your ears and go "na na na" but it won't change a thing.

by Tommy Monk Sat Nov 26, 2016 12:20 pm

People have had enough of the corrupt eu dictatorship and it's 5th column agenda.

by Ben Reilly Sat Nov 26, 2016 4:40 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:

People have had enough of the corrupt eu dictatorship and it's 5th column agenda.

That's really not the issue at hand. I made the simple observation that Putin stands to benefit from a weaker Europe -- am I wrong?

by Raggamuffin Sat Nov 26, 2016 4:47 pm

Bae the Cray wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:Hmmm...I doubt that will make one iota of difference

folks are too idle to think these days...

if it says xyz on the internet and it fits within their pov it must be true (confirmation bias)

they dont want to take the trouble to think about things...

why do you think I vote for the party who, when I have considered their overall policies and attitude to a number of issues, from a number of sources...I choose the one I think best serves MY purpose...and my purpose alone...

sod fred up the road...its up to HIM to vote for whoever best represents HIS interests...i vote on My behalf...not his or anyone elses....

I vote my own best interest too, and I decided it's not in my best interest to have Putin's puppet as president.

So a lot of people decided that it was their own interest to have Trump as President, whatever that interest is. U.S. election 2016 was a big win for Russia in a decades-long war 2190311264

U.S. election 2016 was a big win for Russia in a decades-long war 2190311264

Before you say it, I know that he didn't win the popular vote.

by Raggamuffin Sat Nov 26, 2016 4:52 pm

Trump being elected was a win for Russia because he doesn't want to interfere with the regime in Syria, and that's good for Putin. That much is obvious.

by Ben Reilly Sat Nov 26, 2016 4:55 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Bae the Cray wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:Hmmm...I doubt that will make one iota of difference

folks are too idle to think these days...

if it says xyz on the internet and it fits within their pov it must be true (confirmation bias)

they dont want to take the trouble to think about things...

why do you think I vote for the party who, when I have considered their overall policies and attitude to a number of issues, from a number of sources...I choose the one I think best serves MY purpose...and my purpose alone...

sod fred up the road...its up to HIM to vote for whoever best represents HIS interests...i vote on My behalf...not his or anyone elses....

I vote my own best interest too, and I decided it's not in my best interest to have Putin's puppet as president.

So a lot of people decided that it was their own interest to have Trump as President, whatever that interest is. Before you say it, I know that he didn't win the popular vote.

That's not all, though. He only won the Electoral College by about 112,000 votes spread over three states ... and Clinton's lead in the popular vote is now up to 2.1 million -- that's far and away the most votes for anybody who ever won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College. Gore's margin of victory in 2000 was only around 540,000 votes.

by Ben Reilly Sat Nov 26, 2016 4:56 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:Trump being elected was a win for Russia because he doesn't want to interfere with the regime in Syria, and that's good for Putin. That much is obvious.

I'd add that Trump's NATO skepticism also stands to benefit Putin.

by Raggamuffin Sat Nov 26, 2016 4:58 pm

Bae the Cray wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

So a lot of people decided that it was their own interest to have Trump as President, whatever that interest is. Before you say it, I know that he didn't win the popular vote.

That's not all, though. He only won the Electoral College by about 112,000 votes spread over three states ... and Clinton's lead in the popular vote is now up to 2.1 million -- that's far and away the most votes for anybody who ever won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College. Gore's margin of victory in 2000 was only around 540,000 votes.

Yes. When I have more energy I'll look at how he won with such a discrepancy re the popular vote. It needs a certain amount of brain power to understand it. Laughing

by Ben Reilly Sat Nov 26, 2016 5:41 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Bae the Cray wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

So a lot of people decided that it was their own interest to have Trump as President, whatever that interest is. Before you say it, I know that he didn't win the popular vote.

That's not all, though. He only won the Electoral College by about 112,000 votes spread over three states ... and Clinton's lead in the popular vote is now up to 2.1 million -- that's far and away the most votes for anybody who ever won the popular vote but lost the Electoral College. Gore's margin of victory in 2000 was only around 540,000 votes.

Yes. When I have more energy I'll look at how he won with such a discrepancy re the popular vote. It needs a certain amount of brain power to understand it.

Even Trump says the Electoral College system should be abolished -- and that's after it got him the victory.

by Tommy Monk Sat Nov 26, 2016 6:01 pm

Bae the Cray wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

People have had enough of the corrupt eu dictatorship and it's 5th column agenda.

That's really not the issue at hand. I made the simple observation that Putin stands to benefit from a weaker Europe -- am I wrong?

The people of European countries and democracy stand to benefit from a weaker eu!

by Ben Reilly Sat Nov 26, 2016 6:02 pm

Tommy Monk wrote:
Bae the Cray wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

People have had enough of the corrupt eu dictatorship and it's 5th column agenda.

That's really not the issue at hand. I made the simple observation that Putin stands to benefit from a weaker Europe -- am I wrong?

The people of European countries and democracy stand to benefit from a weaker eu!

More deflection -- the issue I raised is what Brexit means for Putin.

by Ben Reilly Sat Nov 26, 2016 6:32 pm

Bae the Cray wrote:
Lord Foul wrote:Hmmm...I doubt that will make one iota of difference

folks are too idle to think these days...

if it says xyz on the internet and it fits within their pov it must be true (confirmation bias)

they dont want to take the trouble to think about things...

why do you think I vote for the party who, when I have considered their overall policies and attitude to a number of issues, from a number of sources...I choose the one I think best serves MY purpose...and my purpose alone...

sod fred up the road...its up to HIM to vote for whoever best represents HIS interests...i vote on My behalf...not his or anyone elses....

I vote my own best interest too, and I decided it's not in my best interest to have Putin's puppet as president.

Wanted to expand on this a bit -- I want to live in a safer neighborhood. I was recently burglarized, a neighbor had her window broken, another neighbor had his door kicked, I found a gang tag spray-painted on a house a block from me, and packages have been stolen from people's porches in my neighborhood.

I also want my fellow citizens to have more economic opportunities. Income inequality is at an all-time high in the U.S., and the Democratic Party makes reducing that a priority.

Studies have shown that as income inequality increases, crime increases. So I found a self-interest that dovetails with the interests of the nation, and voted for the party that pledged to work on that problem.

As far as Putin goes -- if you Britons had an election in which one party was continuously hacked by the Russians and attacked with fake news from the Russians, wouldn't you be suspicious of the party that benefited from its efforts?

by Independent Thoughts Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:53 am

This article represents the exact reason why Democrats lost big this past election. And the mid-term election before that. And why Pelosi is finally getting the boot from being Minority Leader.

The Democratic Party's insulting arrogance knows no bounds. They produce 8 straight years of stagnant squat, yet they want to talk down to people. People are too stupid to tell real news from fake? Of course the Democrats say that nonsense. In their heads, bigger government is necessary to better herd the sheeple that don't know any better. Pfft.

No, not everybody steered clear of the Nigerian Prince email scams that promised millions of dollars, in return for a "processing fee". However, we don't have a rampant problem with people draining their savings to wire money to Nigeria. Why? Because people are smart enough to figure out it's a scam. Just as they are able to distinguish real news from fake news.

Hillary didn't lose because of "fake news". She lost because she represented 4 more years of the past failed 8. The Democrats are falling apart. They're eating their own. After Trump hit them with the shock and awe of election day, they've been going nuts. Errr... going nuttier.

Liberal policies have failed. They've failed everyone. Can anyone genuinely say that their lives have improved under Obama's administration? Anyone? I, personally, feel that I've managed to do good for myself, despite Obama. Not because of him. His administration watched a record number of Americans become dependent on welfare. The poverty rate hit its all time high under his watch. The economy is "growing" at its most sluggish rate in history.
Yes, it's that bad. Perhaps we should have spent more money? Haha. Within Obama's first term, he doubled our national debt. All that spending... and this is all we get? Really?

Obama Has Now Increased Debt More than All Presidents from George Washington Through George H.W. Bush Combined | October 5, 2011
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-has-now-increased-debt-more-all-presidents-george-washington-through-george-hw

This is why Liberals are pure ideologues -- everything they dream up only "works" in theory, inside their heads. When it comes to real-world application, it sputters out... and then the blame game begins.

by 'Wolfie Wed Nov 30, 2016 8:11 am

MORE OUTRIGHT LIES from Lordy Indepedendent Faults...

What a surprise !!!

The USA's record debt is from GWB's war efforts..
That is the simple truth. Despite LIT's ongoing lies..

Neither poverty nor unemployment are at "record" highs in America.. Far from it..

Any shortfalls on Obama's watch have been down to a Repub' controlled Congress and Senate -- not because of any of the GOP inspired rubbish spouted there...

AS FOR Obama's centre-right team being considered in any way "liberal" just goes to show how delusional LIT's far right beliefs actually are..

by Tommy Monk Wed Nov 30, 2016 12:01 pm

Bae the Cray wrote:
Tommy Monk wrote:

The people of European countries and democracy stand to benefit from a weaker eu!

More deflection -- the issue I raised is what Brexit means for Putin.

UK out of eu is good for uk... and as the eu is the problem then it can't be a bad thing for anyone... except the eu dictatorship that is...

by Tommy Monk Wed Nov 30, 2016 12:02 pm

L0RD Independent Thoughts wrote:This article represents the exact reason why Democrats lost big this past election. And the mid-term election before that. And why Pelosi is finally getting the boot from being Minority Leader.

The Democratic Party's insulting arrogance knows no bounds. They produce 8 straight years of stagnant squat, yet they want to talk down to people. People are too stupid to tell real news from fake? Of course the Democrats say that nonsense. In their heads, bigger government is necessary to better herd the sheeple that don't know any better. Pfft.

No, not everybody steered clear of the Nigerian Prince email scams that promised millions of dollars, in return for a "processing fee". However, we don't have a rampant problem with people draining their savings to wire money to Nigeria. Why? Because people are smart enough to figure out it's a scam. Just as they are able to distinguish real news from fake news.

Hillary didn't lose because of "fake news". She lost because she represented 4 more years of the past failed 8. The Democrats are falling apart. They're eating their own. After Trump hit them with the shock and awe of election day, they've been going nuts. Errr... going nuttier.

Liberal policies have failed. They've failed everyone. Can anyone genuinely say that their lives have improved under Obama's administration? Anyone? I, personally, feel that I've managed to do good for myself, despite Obama. Not because of him. There are record number of people are on welfare. The poverty rate is at its all time high. The economy is "growing" at its most sluggish rate in history.
Yes, it's that bad. Perhaps we should have spent more money? Haha. Within Obama's first term, he doubled our national debt. All that spending... and this is all we get? Really?

Obama Has Now Increased Debt More than All Presidents from George Washington Through George H.W. Bush Combined | October 5, 2011
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-has-now-increased-debt-more-all-presidents-george-washington-through-george-hw

This is why Liberals are pure ideologues -- everything they dream up only "works" in theory, inside their heads. When it comes to real-world application, it sputters out... and then the blame game begins.

Sounds about right!

by Independent Thoughts Wed Nov 30, 2016 2:52 pm

@Who's Yur Daddy
You should be silent and take notes while in class. Your ignorance doesn't entitle you to fabricate for what you don't know. Don't question Daddy's facts, boy. Especially when you have nothing to back you up.

Poverty
Poverty level under Obama breaks 50-year record

In 2011, child poverty reached record high levels, with 16.7 million children living in food insecure households, about 35% more than 2007 levels.

Welfare

The Washington Times wrote:According to the annual federally mandated report “Welfare Indicators and Risk Factors,” published by the Department of Health and Human Services, the welfare dependency rate “peaked” under Mr. Obama’s watch in 2010 when 5.3 percent of the total population was receiving half of its total income in a one-year period from the government, and that figure has only “declined slightly since,” according to the report.
The overall dependency rate dropped dramatically under President Bill Clinton, from 5.9 percent in 1993 to 3.1 percent in 2001, and remained steady under President George W. Bush, at 3.5 percent until 2007. During the 2008 financial crisis, the rate jumped a half point to 4, but that number has since increased 1.2 points under Mr. Obama from 2009 to 2011.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/4/obama-economy-welfare-dependency-peaks-as-rich-get/

by eddie Wed Nov 30, 2016 3:49 pm

Who are you talking to, IT?

by Independent Thoughts Wed Nov 30, 2016 4:12 pm

The site's resident troll: WhoseYourWolfie

by Guest Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:10 pm

Good grief, a fool who actually admits to backing Trump, who obviously wants his country in the hands of a madman, who doesn't give a fuck about respect for his womenfolk, doesn't care if people drop down dead or suffer through not being able to access healthcase, who must agree with white power and is therefore a real excuse for a human being. LORD Independent Thoughts, you have to be kidding me, Lord of the Bloody Flies is nearer the mark.

I sincerely hope you get everything that is coming from the loon you have supported You will deserve all of it.

by Original Quill Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:17 pm

IT wrote:This article represents the exact reason why Democrats lost big this past election. And the mid-term election before that. And why Pelosi is finally getting the boot from being Minority Leader.

The Democratic Party's insulting arrogance knows no bounds. They produce 8 straight years of stagnant squat, yet they want to talk down to people. People are too stupid to tell real news from fake? Of course the Democrats say that nonsense. In their heads, bigger government is necessary to better herd the sheeple that don't know any better. Pfft.

To the contrary, this is illustrative of how much Republicans have become showmen, detracting from affairs of state. Remember when I told you:

Original Quill wrote:Wrong again. Dr. Obama is no doubt the most affable and successful president the US has ever had. In 1999, the Republican Congress, led by Newt Gingrich and the paedophile Dennis Hasart, passed the Commodity Futures Modernization Act, which forbade regulation of derivatives, and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, or Financial Services Modernization Act, which eliminated New Deal barriers to mergers of stockbrokers, commercial and investment banks and insurance companies. Combined, these laws had the effect of abolishing all of the significant rules put in place at the time of the Great Depression designed to prevent a repeat. As predicted, in 2008, we were on the brink of another Great Depression, which the Democrats had to come in and fix.

Concomitant with these get-rich-quick laws for the wealthy, were immense tax breaks…for example, Donald Trump, as wealthy as he his, paid no taxes during this time. Tax breaks have the effect of pouring a nation’s wealth into the pockets of one class, and only one class. Hence, you see today that 1% of the nation control the wealth of 99% of the world.

Dr. Obama saved us from all of this, and righted the keel of the US. The Republicans (Bush and Cheney) had left the country in an ugly, purposeless war, on the brink of the next depression, with double-digit unemployment, a $17-trillion deficit and bin Laden still alive and running around. Obama got the country out of Iraq, saved America from the next Depression, brought unemployment down from 10.5% to 4.2%, oversaw the creation of 9-million jobs, oversaw the American stock market soar to over $22,000 average in the Dow Jones (highest ever), saved the American Auto industry, bailed out the world financial system, and finally, created a highly successful medical care system (despite the sour grapes of Republicans)...and, don't forget, he got bin Laden when the Republican administration was completely inept at finding him. Ms. Clinton, as Secretary of State, was a part of the immensely successful team that did all that. All of this, mind you, over a Republican Congress that vowed to work against American interests, as long as a black man presided in the White House (the McConnell-Boehner doctrine), because party and race trumped their loyalty. That's a hell of a record. The only reason Republicans don't like Dr. Obama is because of his race. That's their problem.

Republicans represent nothing but blight and misery, which they are about to visit again in the Middle East. But before they can, they have been intercepted by a third-party movement, which will finish them. Trumpsters are not Republicans, but an entirely different front. They reject establishment Republicans--witness the nasty fights of the debates--as much as Democrats.

We will watch with interest the early months of the Trump administration: if he goes with his base and tries to implement his Alt Right program, he will be at odds with Republicans, in particular Paul Ryan; but if he starts kowtowing to establishment Republicans, his base will dissolve into the thin air.

In any case, Democrats will have nothing to do but watch this fiasco play itself out...they can't lose. It will be most amusing.

Now, a couple of weeks later, we see ol' Pussy-Grabber has appointed alt-right Steven Bannon (who has no experience) as WH advisor, and he has drained the swamp with RNC Chair Reince Priebus. If I am smiling cynically, forgive me. Indeed, the Builder of Walls is considering the ultimate swamp rat, former Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, for Secretary of State. This is the guy who called him a "fraud". So much for change.

He has appointed two, and is considering a third "Rubbish" general for his group. Now ol' Pussy-grabber his told us how the American soldier is a "loser", and yet he picks three of them to help him clean the swamp. Lincoln picked a team of rivals; Trump picks a team of losers. Rolling Eyes

And the populist Mr. Trump, who wants to improve the working man's lot in America, picks Mr. Foreclosure, Goldman banker and former Soros employee Steven Mnuchin, for Secretary of the Treasury. The out-of-work workers in Michigan and Pennsylvania will be thrilled.

In sum, it's going to be life as usual, with all the money flowing upstairs, all the heavy load on middle and lower class shoulders, and a few more costly wars to keep the Romans cheering. When, as is inevitable, the Republicans again throw America into bankruptcy, they will call on the Democrats to be the adults in the room, begging them to fix things. Remember October, 2008?

by nicko Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:19 pm

My Grandma would never say Fuck, women then were a bit more refined.

by Guest Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:24 pm

No, woment then had no freedom and had to make sure they were good little women.

by Independent Thoughts Wed Nov 30, 2016 6:53 pm

@sassy
On what grounds do you justify your concerns and prophesies of doom? That sounds like hysteria, to me.

Can you point to anything Trump has done in the past or present to support your claims?

It's just like when Obama won the election in 2008. All the right wing kooks and their angry conservative talk-show hosts predicted the end of the USA as we knew it. The world was going to explode and it was because someone they believed to be a radical socialist Muslim leftist had become POTUS.

Guess what? America is still here. Not much has changed since Obama took office because he wasn't much for doing things. Except golf. He loved golf.

Point is, most on the left are already agonizing a horrific and dark future... and the guy hasn't even been sworn into office yet.

You lefties need to chillax. You're predicting a book's story after only glancing over the cover.

by eddie Wed Nov 30, 2016 7:23 pm

L0RD Independent Thoughts wrote:The site's resident troll: WhoseYourWolfie

I don't always agree with wolf but he's not a troll.

by Original Quill Wed Nov 30, 2016 8:18 pm

L0RD Independent Thoughts wrote:@sassy
On what grounds do you justify your concerns and prophesies of doom? That sounds like hysteria, to me.

Can you point to anything Trump has done in the past or present to support your claims?

It's just like when Obama won the election in 2008. All the right wing kooks and their angry conservative talk-show hosts predicted the end of the USA as we knew it. The world was going to explode and it was because someone they believed to be a radical socialist Muslim leftist had become POTUS.

Guess what? America is still here. Not much has changed since Obama took office because he wasn't much for doing things. Except golf. He loved golf.

Point is, most on the left are already agonizing a horrific and dark future... and the guy hasn't even been sworn into office yet.

You lefties need to chillax. You're predicting a book's story after only glancing over the cover.

You mean besides the pussy-grabbing? The rape of Ivana Trump? The sexual assault of Jill Harth? The Jeffrey Epstein paedophilia? The racial discrimination in his rentals? Trump hasn't been in the public political eye for long enough to make political trouble, besides the verbal assaults. But let me ask you: if you saw a drunk getting behind the wheel of a motorcar, would you be asking how many accidents he has been in? The circumstances spell disaster, and we are discussing his record??

Aside from his actions, broken promises and threats, he will be in violation of the emolument clause the minute he takes office. This is the man who just got through promising (broken, now) to jail Hillary Clinton for receiving benefits for a real charitable enterprise, and now he's about to do 100-fold as much with his profit making ventures. He has as much as admitted that his situation puts him in violation of the highest law in the land through his accusations toward Clinton.

Unless he divests his assets completely, and puts the yield in a blind trust, he is in violation. Here is the man who will appoint the head of the General Services Administration (GSA), which signed a contract with the Trump organization to turn the old Post Office Building into the Trump Hotel in Washington, and the contract has a clause that no political authority shall have an interest in the business. He's in violation of his own contract.

But he's got bigger problems: Article I, section 9, clause 8, says it's unconstitutional to accept any benefit from a foreign government:

US Constitution wrote:No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Several Middle Eastern leaders have admitted that they have switched accounts to Trump assets in anticipation that he will be president. Why, even if their police and fire, or military services have to show up to protect a Trump asset, is he going to guarantee personally payment therefore?

Placing the assets in the hands of the children is of no use. His son-in-law will work in the WH while his daughter heads Trump Hotels. Let me know how that works. If he doesn't divest of his assets, and while in a blind trust they appreciate in value, will he not be profiting?

The Constitution doesn't define "high crimes and misdemeanors", but I have a feeling that Trump will be in perpetual fear of impeachment if he commits his whole life to being in violation of the highest law of the land. And he'd better bring the "swamp" guys back into the administrative fold, because they control Congress...which hears impeachment proceedings.

Here comes Romney...its déjà vu all over again.

by veya_victaous Wed Nov 30, 2016 9:38 pm

I don't see Trump really changing many things.

it is a legitamte issue on his overseas assets, it will be interesting to see how it is resolved

by veya_victaous Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:54 pm

by Ben Reilly Wed Nov 30, 2016 11:49 pm

L0RD Independent Thoughts wrote:This article represents the exact reason why Democrats lost big this past election. And the mid-term election before that. And why Pelosi is finally getting the boot from being Minority Leader.

The Democratic Party's insulting arrogance knows no bounds. They produce 8 straight years of stagnant squat, yet they want to talk down to people. People are too stupid to tell real news from fake? Of course the Democrats say that nonsense. In their heads, bigger government is necessary to better herd the sheeple that don't know any better. Pfft.

No, not everybody steered clear of the Nigerian Prince email scams that promised millions of dollars, in return for a "processing fee". However, we don't have a rampant problem with people draining their savings to wire money to Nigeria. Why? Because people are smart enough to figure out it's a scam. Just as they are able to distinguish real news from fake news.

Hillary didn't lose because of "fake news". She lost because she represented 4 more years of the past failed 8. The Democrats are falling apart. They're eating their own. After Trump hit them with the shock and awe of election day, they've been going nuts. Errr... going nuttier.

Liberal policies have failed. They've failed everyone. Can anyone genuinely say that their lives have improved under Obama's administration? Anyone? I, personally, feel that I've managed to do good for myself, despite Obama. Not because of him. His administration watched a record number of Americans become dependent on welfare. The poverty rate hit its all time high under his watch. The economy is "growing" at its most sluggish rate in history.
Yes, it's that bad. Perhaps we should have spent more money? Haha. Within Obama's first term, he doubled our national debt. All that spending... and this is all we get? Really?

Obama Has Now Increased Debt More than All Presidents from George Washington Through George H.W. Bush Combined | October 5, 2011
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/obama-has-now-increased-debt-more-all-presidents-george-washington-through-george-hw

This is why Liberals are pure ideologues -- everything they dream up only "works" in theory, inside their heads. When it comes to real-world application, it sputters out... and then the blame game begins.

Why don't you just put Obama on horseback in Argentina and then fault him for not winning the Kentucky Derby?

Or have you forgotten where the economy was when he started?

Have a refresher in pictures:

U.S. election 2016 was a big win for Russia in a decades-long war WaPoBanks

U.S. election 2016 was a big win for Russia in a decades-long war WaPoBanks

U.S. election 2016 was a big win for Russia in a decades-long war WaPo%20-%20Front%20Page%20(Sept.%2018,%202008)

U.S. election 2016 was a big win for Russia in a decades-long war WSJ%20-%20Front%20Page%20(Sept.%2015,%202008)%20%232

U.S. election 2016 was a big win for Russia in a decades-long war Art02

Now that I've shown that you fit your own definition of ideologue -- one who clings to a political belief regardless of facts -- may I now point your nose at this headline?

"Trump's $1 trillion plan hits D.C. speed bumps" - http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/trump-infrastructure-plan-washington-reality-231649

IT wrote:Perhaps we should have spent more money? Haha.

More like:

U.S. election 2016 was a big win for Russia in a decades-long war Giphy

Now fuck off and let the grownups talk.

by Independent Thoughts Thu Dec 01, 2016 3:52 am

@OQ
Not sure what your posts are driving at. Does anyone else?

@eddie
Yes. By every definition in the dictionary. He is a troll.

@Bae Ben
Obama is at the end of his 2nd term... and is still blaming Bush?
Take accountability seriously, people. The Democratic Party getting it's butt kicked all over the map should give irrefutable evidence that nobody wants to hear the political double-speak anymore.

by Original Quill Thu Dec 01, 2016 4:11 am

IT wrote:Obama is at the end of his 2nd term... and is still blaming Bush?

Did history change? He faked the cause for a purposeless war. It led to a $17-trillion national debt. He introduced torture, kidnapping, rape and murder into the US military arsenal. He brought the nation to the brink of the second Great Depression. And Obama spent years cleaning up.

Simply amazing...the great job Dr. Obama did. It's going to be fun watching Trump fuck things up. No one has to participate...just watch. Shocked

by Independent Thoughts Thu Dec 01, 2016 4:31 am

Obama served 2 terms. 8 years of the Democrat party in the White House. And nothing to show for it.

Talk all the leftist propagandist crap you want to.
When it matters: America gave a big middle finger to Obama and lefty liberals. Liberals no longer have a say for the next four years. I mean, they can whine about how the Republicans own the White House, Senate, and House... but what can they really do about it?

Democrats now have a brand burned into their butt, much like how cattle owners identify their cows/bulls from other competing cattle owners. It shows that they're owned by the Republicans.

by Ben Reilly Thu Dec 01, 2016 5:58 am

L0RD Independent Thoughts wrote:Obama served 2 terms. 8 years of the Democrat party in the White House. And nothing to show for it.

Talk all the leftist propagandist crap you want to.
When it matters: America gave a big middle finger to Obama and lefty liberals. Liberals no longer have a say for the next four years. I mean, they can whine about how the Republicans own the White House, Senate, and House... but what can they really do about it?

Democrats now have a brand burned into their butt, much like how cattle owners identify their cows/bulls from other competing cattle owners. It shows that they're owned by the Republicans.

Actually, 112,000 voters spread across three crucial swing states gave the finger to the lefty liberals, while 2.37 million Americans gave them the thumbs up.

And you need to read up on REDMAP while you're at it. Otherwise I'll just keep calling you an uninformed idiot, you uninformed idiot.

by 'Wolfie Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:16 am

eddie wrote:
L0RD Independent Thoughts wrote:
The site's resident troll: WhoseYourWolfie

I don't always agree with wolf but he's not a troll.

Of course I'm not a troll...

Despite the lies that those two genuine "trolls" on here --[i? IT and Major [/i]-- keep on spouting about various "liberals" and "lefties" that they may take exception to..

by 'Wolfie Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:23 am

L0RD Independent Thoughts wrote:
...
Yes. By every definition in the dictionary. He is a troll.
....

YOU ARE a liar, IT...

And a raving loon..

Show us all one, just one, genuine example of my supposed "trolling" on here --you honestly can't, can you, you supercilious and meaningless little turd. Rolling Eyes

by 'Wolfie Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:32 am

L0RD Independent Thoughts wrote:
Obama served 2 terms. 8 years of the Democrat party in the White House. And nothing to show for it.

Talk all the leftist propagandist crap you want to.
When it matters: America gave a big middle finger to Obama and lefty liberals. Liberals no longer have a say for the next four years. I mean, they can whine about how the Republicans own the White House, Senate, and House... but what can they really do about it?

Democrats now have a brand burned into their butt, much like how cattle owners identify their cows/bulls from other competing cattle owners. It shows that they're owned by the Republicans.

Simple Fact : Only 25.4% of eligible American voters cast their ballot for the Trumpster...

That means that 74.6% didn't vote for the Dumpster..

You also falsely claim that Obama did nothing over 8 years ?

Problem is, all of your supposed claims against the Democrats are being exposed for the Tea Party/Breitbat lies that you seem to thrive on.

Obama actually managed more positives over his 8 years, then the two Bush's managed over 12..
Despite all of your lying propaganda puff pieces...

Would have been even better, without such an obstructionist and wasteful Congress..

by 'Wolfie Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:45 am

L0RD Republican Thoughts wrote:@Who's Yur Daddy
You should be silent and take notes while in class. Your ignorance doesn't entitle you to fabricate for what you don't know. Don't question Daddy's facts, boy. Especially when you have nothing to back you up.

Poverty
Poverty level under Obama breaks 50-year record

In 2011, child poverty reached record high levels, with 16.7 million children living in food insecure households, about 35% more than 2007 levels.

Welfare
The Washington Times wrote:According to the annual federally mandated report “Welfare Indicators and Risk Factors,” published by the Department of Health and Human Services, the welfare dependency rate “peaked” under Mr. Obama’s watch in 2010 when 5.3 percent of the total population was receiving half of its total income in a one-year period from the government, and that figure has only “declined slightly since,” according to the report.
The overall dependency rate dropped dramatically under President Bill Clinton, from 5.9 percent in 1993 to 3.1 percent in 2001, and remained steady under President George W. Bush, at 3.5 percent until 2007. During the 2008 financial crisis, the rate jumped a half point to 4, but that number has since increased 1.2 points under Mr. Obama from 2009 to 2011.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/4/obama-economy-welfare-dependency-peaks-as-rich-get/

You really are one clueless and gormless nitwit, I/T...

Are you really so stupid, that you believe that quoting from an apparent extremist RW/Tea Party propagandist blog site, in any way equates to actual "facts" !?!

How about finding some genuine and proper statistics to support your pathetic and trolling lies and GOP spam..

Or are you too scared ? Or, maybe simply incompetent..

by veya_victaous Thu Dec 01, 2016 7:13 am

Now Now Wolfie
Lord Indie is not a Troll
just a Republican Razz

Just Like we're not Trolling, we're just Aussie Dickheads lol!

by Ben Reilly Thu Dec 01, 2016 8:25 am

Let me just add that the Washington Times is a joke far-right publication run by a cult leader. Don't believe me? Look it up. Include the search term "Moonies."

by Sponsored content