WTF? Trump "hopes" Russian Intelligence to find and release HRC's missing emails.

[jonatha]

I used to think that Trump was just in this for the attention, or as a favour to Hillary, but had no intention of actually doing the job as president..... no wait.... I still think that. If he wins he isn't actually going to do anything other than sit on a golden throne and let his minions make all of the actual decisions for him. He did after all offer Kasich direction over foreign and domestic policy.... which only excludes outer space. Maybe trump wants to colonize Mars?

Naw. Probably something more like this

View attachment 7620

It would be more in keeping with his artistic sense to paint the moon gold, except for the black letters spelling out "TRUMP"

 

[fromderinside]

I cannot recall another presidential cycle when a candidate made himself the news story during his opponent's convention. Can you?

RU kidding me? Maybe you missed the Bush, Clinton, Perot where Bush administration got Perot to almost quit because of threats on his daughter's wedding http://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/26/u...y-thwart-gop-dirty-tricks.html?pagewanted=all or Gore attempting to disconnect Bush by glaring tat him during the debates or Clinton administration attempting to infect Bush campaign with rumors of drug use in the eighties or release of movies about Clinton in 1996 http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-seery/the-bush-cocaine-chronicl_b_37786.html or ....

Of course these aren't during the opponents convention but there were events there too. Every day Clinton responded to criticisms during the Bush convention even before he was officially a the candidate and the Bush team responding in Kind. The 1996 campaign was just as dirty as was the 2004 Kerry Bush scuffle.

Who can forget the republican backed veterans decrying Kerry, a silver star awardee, as a traitor during the Kerry convention. 2004 political conventions explain Trump, Obama, Clinton and 2016 http://www.wcsh6.com/news/politics/...xplain-trump-obama-clinton-and-2016/276136565

 

[KeepTalking]

Well, some of us have the ability to discuss multiple topics at once, but in case you haven't noticed there are several threads in this forum about the DNC, and the speeches given there.

Right, during the DNC convention Trump got himself and Clinton's missing emails to be part of the discussion. I mean, I've been following presidential elections since '84. I cannot recall another presidential cycle when a candidate made himself the news story during his opponent's convention. Can you?

Which might have been an awesome thing to pull off, if that news had not been primarily negative for Trump. When was the last presidential cycle when prominent members of a party's nominee referred to that nominee as "unfit for the office", "a menace", or his comments as "tantamount to treason" within a week of their own convention?

 

[Trausti]

Seems the left was all lovey dovey with Wikileaks when it was leaking info that they liked.

Maybe you should take that up with "the left."


This is - to me - no different than the Watergate break in. A felonious attempt to disrupt our election.


Apparently you think it is no big deal.

Welcome to Earth, where even friendly nations spy on each other. http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/07/04/wikileaks-us-bugged-more-two-dozen-brazilian-leaders

There is no evidence (yet) that Russia did the hacking. But Russia has been hacking the US, and the US the same to Russia, for a long time. The self-righteous indignation now about foreign hackers is in stark contract to, just a month or so ago, the instance that worry over sending classified emails using private servers was overblown. In the end, it was Wikileaks that decided to release the emails and it was Wikileaks that decided when to leak them.

 

[James Brown]

I wonder what Trump could say that would make his supporters think, "Whoa, that's over the line. He should retract and apologize." Anything?

 

[Trausti]

Right, during the DNC convention Trump got himself and Clinton's missing emails to be part of the discussion. I mean, I've been following presidential elections since '84. I cannot recall another presidential cycle when a candidate made himself the news story during his opponent's convention. Can you?

Which might have been an awesome thing to pull off, if that news had not been primarily negative for Trump. When was the last presidential cycle when prominent members of a party's nominee referred to that nominee as "unfit for the office", "a menace", or his comments as "tantamount to treason" within a week of their own convention?

All press is good press. Trump seems to understand that well. And at least he's not scared to do press conferences.

 

[KeepTalking]

Which might have been an awesome thing to pull off, if that news had not been primarily negative for Trump. When was the last presidential cycle when prominent members of a party's nominee referred to that nominee as "unfit for the office", "a menace", or his comments as "tantamount to treason" within a week of their own convention?

All press is good press.

As many in the political world will attest, this is incorrect.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Okay, so you have no answer.

Oh, double burn.

This is not an answer.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I wonder what Trump could say that would make his supporters think, "Whoa, that's over the line. He should retract and apologize." Anything?

Don't think so, because I think many of his supporters are simply behind him to destroy the political system as we know it and start over again. I can empathize with that, though I'm not sure he's the guy to do it.

 

[Trausti]

Oh, double burn.

This is not an answer.

But this is a derail.

- - - Updated - - -

All press is good press.

As many in the political world will attest, this is incorrect.

And many others would attest, it is.

 

[KeepTalking]

This is not an answer.

But this is a derail.

- - - Updated - - -

All press is good press.

As many in the political world will attest, this is incorrect.

And many others would attest, it is.

Would Nixon attest to it? You only need one counter example to prove the rule wrong, and there is certainly more than one counter example. It doesn't matter how many idiots parrot the line, it just shows that they are unthinking morons. Bad press has taken down many a politician.

 

[Colonel Sanders]

I wonder what Trump could say that would make his supporters think, "Whoa, that's over the line. He should retract and apologize." Anything?

Don't think so, because I think many of his supporters are simply behind him to destroy the political system as we know it and start over again. I can empathize with that, though I'm not sure he's the guy to do it.

This is what someone I know said. "I just wanna see it get blown up."

I asked him what that meant, and he didn't have an answer. I asked him what he thought the consequences would be and he said the same stupid fucking thing, "It just needs to get blown up."

So many people complain about having to learn history. "When am I ever going to use this?" Well motherfucker, right about now would be a damn good time for you to know it.

 

[Shadowy Man]

I wonder what Trump could say that would make his supporters think, "Whoa, that's over the line. He should retract and apologize." Anything?

Maybe the following needs to be tested:

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," Trump said at a campaign rally here.

 

[fromderinside]

And many others would attest, it is.

"Trust me.

I can say." -DT

 

[James Brown]

Maybe the following needs to be tested:

"I could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody and I wouldn't lose voters," Trump said at a campaign rally here.

Yes, that's what Donald Trump said. Did any Trump supporters drop their support because of that?

May be impossible to know.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Donald Trump has said so many ridiculous things at this point that everyone's built up a tolerance. Talking about Russian intelligence at this point is pretty much nothing.

 

[ksen]

We know for certain that Wikileaks hacked the DNC and deliberately timed the release in an attempt to undermine the US Presidential election.

Do you know how WikiLeaks works? WikiLeaks doesn't hack anyone.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

We know for certain that Wikileaks hacked the DNC and deliberately timed the release in an attempt to undermine the US Presidential election.

Do you know how WikiLeaks works? WikiLeaks doesn't hack anyone.

Ay alors!

 

[Shadowy Man]

We know for certain that Wikileaks hacked the DNC and deliberately timed the release in an attempt to undermine the US Presidential election.

Do you know how WikiLeaks works? WikiLeaks doesn't hack anyone.

It was probably China.

 

[Ford]

We know for certain that Wikileaks hacked the DNC and deliberately timed the release in an attempt to undermine the US Presidential election.

Do you know how WikiLeaks works? WikiLeaks doesn't hack anyone.

I stand corrected. Wikileaks released the material in order to attempt to disrupt the election. Fuck those guys.