Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
If Trump's team was complicit in this, then how is that not the same as 'acting in their best interests'?
If you mean "Russian agent" in the sense that he's literally a plant sent over here from the Motherland to infiltrate our election, then that is indeed patently ridiculous. But it's also pretty painfully obvious at this point that he's bending over backwards to please them, so anyone with any sense is going to be looking at the possibility that he's been compromised. He doesn't need to be a literal agent to be a traitor.
As for whether or not Russia's influence in the election was decisive or not, that's both completely academic, impossible to discern for certain, and irrelevant. For the record, I do think it's very possible that their efforts tipped the balance (a calculated months-long campaign bent on boosting one candidate over the other could easily flip the 70K votes that got him into office), but I also think it shouldn't matter on bit. The election was compromised either way, and should be considered invalid.
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."![]()
It's not the same because they are in no way compelled to hold up their side of whatever bargain was struck, or to do so without getting anything meaningful in return for the United States.
Ask yourself what you would be saying if the CIA was caught doing this to some country in Latin America, and people were calling for a new election, even though there was no constitutional provisions for that.
edited 14th Jan '17 7:49:03 AM by CaptainCapsase
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
At which point did I say that? I have said previously that he appeared to be a useful idiot for Russia, that the Russian government saw him as someone susceptible to their manipulation, that he was leveraged by the Russian government, and echoed Kremlin positions on various geopolitical issues. At no point did I say that Trump was an actual Russian agent or operative. At no point did I say that Russia was the sole reason he won. I know that it wasn't the Russians suppressing voters or permitting nonfunctional voting machines to be sent to precincts and you know that.
![]()
![]()
![]()
Read your news sources. The American alphabet agencies don't operate the way their Third World autocratic counterparts do on their own soil because that's not how they operate and because it's simply not in their culture to do so on their own soil.
Capsase the intelligence community is not going to act unless they can present evidence. They're not stupid. They can't just go in and arrest Trump without people questioning why. Doing anything else would make the entire thing look like a liberal coup.
edit: Even if Trump won on his own merit he's still potentially being blackmailed by the Russians. The US government is compromised.
edit 2: I should also note that the CIA doesn't want Israel to provide us with information because it could leak to Russia. Why do that unless they thought this was true?
edited 14th Jan '17 7:52:30 AM by Kostya
If they genuinely believed Trump was a Russian agent, they would launch a coup against him or more likely attempt to assassinate him, and the military would most certainly be in on it. America's intelligence agencies and military very much function as a sort of deep state, and the fact that they appear to be tolerating Trump suggests that they are either uncertain about the degree to which Trump is influenced by Russia or confident that these influences can be mitigated. Or plotting something.
Edit: I should add that I'm not ruling out the more grounded theories being put forwards here, just saying that it's within a broad spectrum of possibilities, and without more information we shouldn't jump to the more shall we say surreal parts of that spectrum.
edited 14th Jan '17 7:54:33 AM by CaptainCapsase
Okay.
"Hey Bluefish. If the CIA was caught meddling in democratic elections in a Latin American country, and the citizens wanted to invalidate the results and hold a new election for the sake of national security, what would you say?"
"Well, Bluefish, I'd say more power to them, and next time we ought to keep our damn noses out of other democracies' business."
"I agree, Bluefish. I'm glad we had this conversation."
"Always a pleasure, Bluefish."
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."
With the current amount of evidence, I personally suspect many people would (rightfully) insist that we wait for more information before jumping to rash conclusions.
![]()
Exactly; the fact that the IC and military hasn't forcibly removed Trump suggests there's some uncertainty there about what exactly is going on. Also, while the rank and file of the military supported Trump, he had and has an overwhelming lack support from the officers, and they're who matters in terms of coup scenarios.
edited 14th Jan '17 7:58:14 AM by CaptainCapsase
So, I've been doing some reading up on Sanders' advisers trying to figure out what went wrong, and why they've been so goddamn silence since November. Came across this Gem
Apparently, Tad Devine worked on TWO election campaigns for Putin’s man in Ukraine, Yankovich.
Like...what the fuck?
New Survey coming this weekend!To me, whether Trump of a stooge or accomplice is irrelevant. The important detail to me is that multiple agencies are saying Russia made efforts to monkey with our election and our President-Elect is brushing them off and taking Russia's word they aren't.
To put this in schoolyard terms, as any political issue probably can be, if the school bully is accused of punching another kid in the face and everyone around is swearing up and down he did, you don't simply side with the bully. Even if you had reason to believe the other kids were lying to get the bully in trouble, you still look into what actually happened.
edited 14th Jan '17 8:07:32 AM by sgamer82
I didn't realize that this Latin American country we're talking about had the exact same amount of evidence as to foreign election interference as we do now. You didn't mention that bit.
"Bluefish, hang on a sec, I got another question. What if they didn't actually have conclusive proof that the CIA had been meddling in their election, only mountains of evidence that no one in their right mind would turn away from?"
"I guess I'd say they should immediately mount a thorough independent investigation in order to get to the truth, and postpone the transition of power to ensure that they weren't handing over their highest office to a treasonous entity."
"If the public evidence uncovered by independent journalists was sufficiently damning, and the campaign of one candidate had countless ties to the CIA, would you say it's rash for a private citizen to draw the conclusion that said candidate was elected with the CIA's help and was aware that it was happening at the time?"
"Not at all, Bluefish, that seems like a perfectly reasonable course of action to me."
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent.""Shouldn't we care as much about the CIA's hypothetical (or historically known) interference in the elections of some other nation?"
No, not really. Because, like it or not, the United States matters more to humanity on this planet than, say, Uruguay. What our government does affects the entire world in dramatic ways. Whatever shady shit we may have done, which I am not inherently disputing, is irrelevant to this discussion, unless you are the sort who thinks that illusory fairness trumps realism.
edited 14th Jan '17 8:46:25 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
My point was that people here would likely be less willing to believe the CIA had done this to another country with the same amount of evidence as is publicly available right now regarding Trump literally being a Russian agent. We have plenty of evidence Russia involved themselves in the election, but people are jumping to the most extreme possibility.
edited 14th Jan '17 8:45:11 AM by CaptainCapsase
The election of Trump is a threat to global security and our survival as a species. The US has done shady shit in a lot of countries but none of those countries have the potential to destroy the world.
![]()
Would we? I don't think any of us are disputing that the CIA does that.
edited 14th Jan '17 8:44:57 AM by Kostya
![]()
![]()
Has anybody here actually confirmed that? Because otherwise you're just making assumptions about other people's opinions to suit your own argument. I already said that I'd believe it in a second.
edited 14th Jan '17 8:45:31 AM by RBluefish
"We'll take the next chance, and the next, until we win, or the chances are spent."![]()
Under a democratic administration, I imagine you would, or at least you'd be far less willing to believe it than under a Republican administration, unless you happen to be very self conscious about the shortcuts in human information processing.
It's a suspicion based on the simple fact that democrats are subject to the same cognitive shortcomings as Republicans; both sides of the aisle constantly accuse the other of cognitive dissonance, and both sides are, in this regards, probably right.
edited 14th Jan '17 8:48:28 AM by CaptainCapsase
Its extremely unlikely that Trump or anyone in his campaign team are bona fide Russian agents, if for no other reason than they dont need to be. People in the 1% of the world dont work that way, they never have to break any laws because other billionaires basically wrote them. The single illegal action I've seen alleged is the claim that they paid hackers to steal the Clinton team's emails. If someone could prove that happened, and Trump knew about it, there's your impeachable offense.
And as for the CIA, yes, we need to stop interfering in other peoples elections, if we expect other countries from interfering in ours.
edited 14th Jan '17 8:49:43 AM by DeMarquis
I'm done trying to sound smart. "Clear" is the new smart.![]()
![]()
Goddammit, Capsace. I'm considering banning you for that. Your bald-faced assertions that we are bending facts to prop up our pro-Democrat biases is obnoxious in the extreme, especially as you have presented no actual evidence of the same. "All people have cognitive biases" is a condescending, juvenile cop-out designed to gaslight the conversation and we will not put up with it.
Whatever America's faults may be, and there are many, we have been trying, haltingly and reluctantly, but at least trying, to drag ourselves out of the tit-for-tat, Machiavellian world of Cold War style imperialism politics. Russia has not; indeed, Russia is fully immersed in their own visions of domination and the elimination of all political rivals. Russia is a serious threat to the sovereignty of nations, and it has indisputably exercised its power to manipulate U.S. elections.
It has achieved its goal of having a man elected as U.S. President who is at best a gullible narcissist upon whom they have massive quantities of blackmail material and who is backed by a national party that eats their propaganda with a spoon. That this is an incredibly dangerous situation should be patent to anyone with a brain.
As for the urgency of the situation, legally I think Trump cannot be arrested once he is sworn in as President. So if there were ever a chance to call "backsies" on this degenerate election, it's rapidly running out.
edited 14th Jan '17 8:48:45 AM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"
I'm not trying to assert that people here are exceptional in that sense; EVERYONE has this shortcoming, myself included, it's known as confirmation bias; at this point in time, we do not know enough to make assertive claims beyond "Russia was responsible for the various leaks throughout the election, and they probably wanted Trump if possible."
I would very much like to believe that all these horrible, impeachable things about Trump are true, but I know at an intellectual level that what I want to be true has no relation with what actually is true. Perhaps I'm over-correcting in that regards, or perhaps not.
edited 14th Jan '17 8:52:22 AM by CaptainCapsase
