• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Press Got OBAMAED BABY!

Lord of Planar said:
That could be true.

I'm sure there are plenty of liberal DC insiders who fear Hillary as president.
Click to expand...

My guess would be Bernie supporters inside the DNC. After all he was the one that was screwed by them first.
 
calamity said:
We're sticking around for the impeachment, indictment and incarceration of Mr Unpresidented.
Click to expand...

What will he be incarcerated for?
 
Josie said:
What will he be incarcerated for?
Click to expand...

Working hand in glove with Putin to throw the election.

Oh yes. You read that rite.

But Hillary will pardon him. She will have to. We can't handle it.

He will be expelled from the continental united states.
 
Bobbaker said:
Working hand in glove with Putin to throw the election.

Oh yes. You read that rite.

But Hillary will pardon him. She will have to. We can't handle it.

He will be expelled from the continental united states.
Click to expand...

Nice conspiracy theory there.

You do realize that if Trump is impeached and is forced to resign and/or is kicked out of office, Hillary won't be President, right?
 
Bobbaker said:
Are a people rising up against their oppressive gment that rules according to whim and not according to law, terrorists ?
Click to expand...

Tell me.

Are you going by well researched information, or what the media pundits say?

Most of the people of Libya were very happy under Qaddafi. It is the religious element wanting to return Sharia law that Obama sided with.
 
Bobbaker said:
And exactly what was so damaging in the information that they contained, that would not have been at least as bad if not (more likely) much worse in the GOPs emails ? You'll have to be a real hypocritical buffoon to believe otherwise.

The only thing remotely objectionable in the wikileaded emails was news that she received one ORDINARY debate question in advance. Have you seen debate prep? Do you know how well prepared they are ? And these are seasoned politicians. They'll be able to draw on their prep and respond to practically every situation they are asked. That was no big deal though it was, of course, wrong.
Click to expand...

If there nothi8ng damaging, according to you, why are you worrying about it?
 
Mason66 said:
If there nothi8ng damaging, according to you, why are you worrying about it?
Click to expand...

I was responding to someone else. Look at the conversation, to understand the CONTEXT, before you interject yourself.
 
ajn678 said:
That's like you committing a crime and then getting caught because you kept your password "p@$$w0rd" and someone got into your information and it all came to light. Blaming someone else's criminal behavior from exposing your own criminal behavior has got to be one of the worst, most pathetic excuses I've ever heard. Own up to your **** and admit what you did. Don't blame some mythical hacker because you were caught breaking the rules.
Click to expand...


reminds me of one of my cases. a couple were selling multi pound quantities of Mexican weed. They used a cordless land line phone to do the deals. Their next door neighbor was a retired cop and the father of a DEA Special Agent. The retired cop was a massive HAM radio guy and one day he was on his radio when he picked up a telephone call that he (due to his former job) realized was a drug deal. When his neighbors gave their address, he called his son and his son got a warrant and the couple was busted. The couple whined about the HAM radio operator "violating their privacy" (guess what-the guy did nothing wrong its just a fact that a cordless phone can be picked up by others in the vicinity with certain gear and since the Operator didn't target these people to eavesdrop, the dealers had no argument)

but this whole mess sounds like the same thing I was dealing with-people who engaged improper activities upset that someone found out about it and let others know.
 
Josie said:
Nice conspiracy theory there.

You do realize that if Trump is impeached and is forced to resign and/or is kicked out of office, Hillary won't be President, right?
Click to expand...

and they will get a guy is really pro life-really anti gay, and really hard core NRA
 
Bobbaker said:
I was responding to someone else. Look at the conversation, to understand the CONTEXT, before you interject yourself.
Click to expand...
I know exactly what was being said.Now your answer?
 
Mason66 said:
I know exactly what was being said.Now your answer?
Click to expand...

I think you don't.

What was being said, and what was the context of what was being said ? What was the questioner trying to imply ?
 
ajn678 said:
That's like you committing a crime and then getting caught because you kept your password "p@$$w0rd" and someone got into your information and it all came to light. Blaming someone else's criminal behavior from exposing your own criminal behavior has got to be one of the worst, most pathetic excuses I've ever heard. Own up to your **** and admit what you did. Don't blame some mythical hacker because you were caught breaking the rules.
Click to expand...



Well its very simple.

a. This is not a mythical hackers. This is Vladimir Putin, America's dear friend in Moscow. They are not so skilled that they were able to hide their cybertracks from us. Human intel has also indicated this.

b. Putin chose to release her emails, and nothing about the RNC and Trump. He had regular contact with the Trump campaign during the election, which Trump denied at that time on several ocassions but now keeps mum about after the Russian deputy foreign minister released it. Hillary had zero regular contact with Putin. Trump's vast octopussian business empire has partners in shell companies in the Kremlin, all of which makes it easy for him to pay Putin or for Putin to pay him, etc.

Trump has been lying about getting help from Putin to commit crimes against America and interfere with the election. And this is only what has been currently publicised.

All of which should concern you. Unless you're not an american.

b. Whatever they discovered about her emails were not significantly objectionable. A debate question - yeah its wrong but its not significant considering what debate prep entails. Put on the same yardstick, Trump's actual crimes were much much worse. He cheated thousands of ordinary people of their rent money, remember? You think getting one relatively ordinary debate question ahead of time is equivalent to that?

Try to comport that. I know its a challenge for you to think critically...but try.
 
Bobbaker said:
Well its very simple.

a. This is not a mythical hackers. This is Vladimir Putin, America's dear friend in Moscow. They are not so skilled that they were able to hide their cybertracks from us. Human intel has also indicated this.

b. Putin chose to release her emails, and nothing about the RNC and Trump. He had regular contact with the Trump campaign during the election, which Trump denied at that time on several ocassions but now keeps mum about after the Russian deputy foreign minister released it. Hillary had zero regular contact with Putin. Trump's vast octopussian business empire has partners in shell companies in the Kremlin, all of which makes it easy for him to pay Putin or for Putin to pay him, etc.

Trump has been lying about getting help from Putin to commit crimes against America and interfere with the election. And this is only what has been currently publicised.

All of which should concern you. Unless you're not an american.

b. Whatever they discovered about her emails were not significantly objectionable. A debate question - yeah its wrong but its not significant considering what debate prep entails. Put on the same yardstick, Trump's actual crimes were much much worse. He cheated thousands of ordinary people of their rent money, remember? You think getting one relatively ordinary debate question ahead of time is equivalent to that?

Try to comport that. I know its a challenge for you to think critically...but try.
Click to expand...
Wow...

I haven't seen any proof it was Russia. Maybe you need to testify before congress with your proof, because they most certainly want the facts!
 
Lord of Planar said:
Wow...

I haven't seen any proof it was Russia. Maybe you need to testify before congress with your proof, because they most certainly want the facts!
Click to expand...

Our intelligence community, patriots all of them, risks their lives, DAILY, to obtain information like this for the benefit of the President and the American People , and you DARE question it after they've all gone public with their conclusions ?

Direct proof is shown to officials with clearance, not yeller ****s who shoot from the peanut gallery under the (mistaken) assumption they can't be traced, monitored, and cornered at will.
 
Last edited:
shrubnose said:
Obama's been getting attacked by some people in the GOP for the last 8 years,and it's still going on.

Maybe they'll find a new target next year,eh?
Click to expand...

Why? It took Obama years to stop blaming Bush.
 
shrubnose said:
Bush will always be guilty of invading Iraq without a good reason.
Click to expand...

Please look past the blinders. Bush was blamed from A to Z, not just invading Iraq.
 
Bobbaker said:
Our intelligence community, patriots all of them, risks their lives, DAILY, to obtain information like this for the benefit of the President and the American People , and you DARE question it after they've all gone public with their conclusions ?

Direct proof is shown to officials with clearance, not yeller ****s who shoot from the peanut gallery under the (mistaken) assumption they can't be traced, monitored, and cornered at will.
Click to expand...

Care to share their direct quote of what they carefully said, instead of some pundits paraphrasing or quotes out of context.

They "believe" it was Russia. That is acknowledgement that they really don't know.

Link please...

Meanwhile, definition: Believe:


intransitive verb

1
a : to have a firm religious faith b : to accept something as true, genuine, or real <ideals we believe in> <believes in ghosts>

2
: to have a firm conviction as to the goodness, efficacy, or ability of something <believe in exercise>

3
: to hold an opinion : think <I believe so>
transitive verb

1
a : to consider to be true or honest <believe the reports> <you wouldn't believe how long it took> b : to accept the word or evidence of <I believe you> <couldn't believe my ears>

2
: to hold as an opinion : suppose <I believe it will rain soon>
​

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/believe
 
Lord of Planar said:
Care to share their direct quote of what they carefully said, instead of some pundits paraphrasing or quotes out of context.
Click to expand...

They "believe" it was Russia. That is acknowledgement that they really don't know.
They don't merely believe the way you believe that you're a valid person. They believe with high confidence, and that's as far as they will go in the public. If you've got any education, you know that means they know.

This was a statement from 10 weeks ago :

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07...omeland-security-and-office-director-national

Much more has emerged now and can be read about in the media, from comments given by officials on both sides of the aisle as well.


You're taking potshots at people who spend years of their lives, and literally billions of dollars in resources, coming to certainty about what they know. This is what you are for literally questioning patriots who work harder and risk more in a day to protect you, than you do in one year to protect your own family :


Loser : noun
1.
a person, team, nation, etc., that loses:
The visiting team was the loser in the series.
2.
Informal.

a person who has been convicted of a misdemeanor or, especially, a felony:
a two-time loser.
a person who has failed at a particular activity:
a loser at marriage.
someone or something that is marked by consistently or thoroughly bad quality, performance, etc.:
Don't bother to see that film, it's a real loser.

3.
Slang. a misfit, especially someone who has never or seldom been successful at a job, personal relationship, etc.


And also in particular:

Moron : noun
1.
Informal. a person who is notably stupid or lacking in good judgment:
I wonder why they elected that narrow-minded moron to Congress.
2.
Psychology. (no longer in technical use; now considered offensive) a person of borderline intelligence in a former and discarded classification of mental retardation, having an intelligence quotient of 50 to 69.
 
Bobbaker said:
They "believe" it was Russia. That is acknowledgement that they really don't know.
They don't merely believe the way you believe that you're a valid person. They believe with high confidence, and that's as far as they will go in the public. If you've got any education, you know that means they know.

This was a statement from 10 weeks ago :

https://www.dhs.gov/news/2016/10/07...omeland-security-and-office-director-national

Much more has emerged now and can be read about in the media, from comments given by officials on both sides of the aisle as well.


You're taking potshots at people who spend years of their lives, and literally billions of dollars in resources, coming to certainty about what they know. This is what you are for literally questioning patriots who work harder and risk more in a day to protect you, than you do in one year to protect your own family :


Loser : noun
1.
a person, team, nation, etc., that loses:
The visiting team was the loser in the series.
2.
Informal.

a person who has been convicted of a misdemeanor or, especially, a felony:
a two-time loser.
a person who has failed at a particular activity:
a loser at marriage.
someone or something that is marked by consistently or thoroughly bad quality, performance, etc.:
Don't bother to see that film, it's a real loser.

3.
Slang. a misfit, especially someone who has never or seldom been successful at a job, personal relationship, etc.


And also in particular:

Moron : noun
1.
Informal. a person who is notably stupid or lacking in good judgment:
I wonder why they elected that narrow-minded moron to Congress.
2.
Psychology. (no longer in technical use; now considered offensive) a person of borderline intelligence in a former and discarded classification of mental retardation, having an intelligence quotient of 50 to 69.
Click to expand...

You still don't get it.

High confidence is still not absolute. Then what appears to be their reasoning:


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.
​

Consistent methods... Are we expected to believe that only the Russians hack in a certain way?

What are their motivations, unless it is because Hillary et. al. has threatened Russia?

And what about this:


However, we are not now in a position to attribute this activity to the Russian Government.
​
 
Bobbaker said:
Well its very simple.

a. This is not a mythical hackers. This is Vladimir Putin, America's dear friend in Moscow. They are not so skilled that they were able to hide their cybertracks from us. Human intel has also indicated this.

b. Putin chose to release her emails, and nothing about the RNC and Trump. He had regular contact with the Trump campaign during the election, which Trump denied at that time on several ocassions but now keeps mum about after the Russian deputy foreign minister released it. Hillary had zero regular contact with Putin. Trump's vast octopussian business empire has partners in shell companies in the Kremlin, all of which makes it easy for him to pay Putin or for Putin to pay him, etc.

Trump has been lying about getting help from Putin to commit crimes against America and interfere with the election. And this is only what has been currently publicised.

All of which should concern you. Unless you're not an american.

b. Whatever they discovered about her emails were not significantly objectionable. A debate question - yeah its wrong but its not significant considering what debate prep entails. Put on the same yardstick, Trump's actual crimes were much much worse. He cheated thousands of ordinary people of their rent money, remember? You think getting one relatively ordinary debate question ahead of time is equivalent to that?

Try to comport that. I know its a challenge for you to think critically...but try.
Click to expand...

So you attempt to bring hearsay into the equation and label it as facts? Pretty sad, even for a progressive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom