• 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!

Mattis: 'Very little doubt' Russia has interfered in elections

Moderate Right said:
What exactly would they coordinate? Did they make sure Hillary's campaign was dishonest? Did they make sure the DNC's email was hackable? Did they tell the Kremlin how to hack the DNC? When Trump made the comments about maybe Russia could find the 33,000 emails that Hillary illegally deleted after getting a court order, the comment was made AFTER the DNC's email had already been hacked. We're trying to make an entire picture here by connecting just a few dots.
Click to expand...

i would like to know :

a. did the Trump campaign have knowledge of and a discussion about the hacks with Russian operatives during the campaign?

b. was any quid pro quo established?

c. what else was discussed?

i would argue that these are questions which demand clear and objective answers.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
Hmm, he said "elections" (plural). Well, I wonder what other WHs have been infiltrated by the Kremlin. Just how many Presidents have been controlled - directly or indirectly - by Russia/China?
Click to expand...

My bet is on none.
 
Somerville said:
So you haven't seen the multiple posts by people denying that any such attempts were made by Russia here in the US. Denial is rather interesting when one is not deeply mired in the "swamp"
Click to expand...

Said posts are irrelevant. The claim made by Mattis is that Russia attempted to interfere with elections in democracies.

Denying they made attempts here in 2016 is not the same as denying they've made attempts in other locations or in the US previously. Additionally, Deny that they made attempts IN CONCERT with Donald Trump (which is more frequently what the denial is) is not the same as denyhing they've made attempts in other locations or in the US.

I'm not one that believes that the Russians made no attempts to influence things in 2016, but that's not what Mattis is saying. That's what you're DISHONESTLY attempting to present, which is clear based on your response to me. And it was the reason for my response. You dishonestly wanted to take Mattis's comments and act like it was somehow an admission of attempts in the US in 2016, or that it somehow automatically conflicts with those who deny the Russians did such a thing...it simply does not.
 
Glowpun said:
Stay on track, the subject is Russia's hacking of the US election.
Click to expand...

That's actually NOT the subject. From the actual OP:

"There is very little doubt that they have either interfered or attempted to interfere in a number of elections in democracies,"
Click to expand...

Notice the plurals. The "subject" is not simply the Russian interference in the 2016 US election; not as it relates to the story actually posted. The only way that is the "subject" is if one is dishonestly and fraudulently attempting to portray Mattis's comment as being directly about the 2016 Presidential Election.
 
upsideguy said:
drip, drip, drip fashion.
Click to expand...

Just a note. Not disagreeing that it's interference, but if memory serves the DNC hacks were not really let out drip, drip, drip fashion. They were let out in one or two big waves I believe, right around the time of the DNC convention. The information that came out in drip, drip, drip fashion were the podesta emails, which by most accounts were likely NOT compromised by Russian state actors.
 
Somerville said:
Now isn't this interesting. Trump's own pick to lead the State Department has said the same thing libruls have been saying for the past couple months. Do you think there are some 'discussions' taking place in the White House?
Click to expand...

No. The minions on the left, along with their MSM partners, have been saying President Trump worked with Russia to influence the election.

It doesn't improve anyone's credibility when they inject their own biased statements.
 
Helix said:
i would like to know :

a. did the Trump campaign have knowledge of and a discussion about the hacks with Russian operatives during the campaign?

b. was any quid pro quo established?

c. what else was discussed?

i would argue that these are questions which demand clear and objective answers.
Click to expand...

Absolutely agree. The answer may very likely be no, no, and nothing. But that's what we're supposed to find out. I'm not sure when the rules of the game changed, and because the President declares it to be so, it's so, no investigation needed.
 
Zyphlin said:
Said posts are irrelevant. The claim made by Mattis is that Russia attempted to interfere with elections in democracies.

Denying they made attempts here in 2016 is not the same as denying they've made attempts in other locations or in the US previously. Additionally, Deny that they made attempts IN CONCERT with Donald Trump (which is more frequently what the denial is) is not the same as denyhing they've made attempts in other locations or in the US.

I'm not one that believes that the Russians made no attempts to influence things in 2016, but that's not what Mattis is saying. That's what you're DISHONESTLY attempting to present, which is clear based on your response to me. And it was the reason for my response. You dishonestly wanted to take Mattis's comments and act like it was somehow an admission of attempts in the US in 2016, or that it somehow automatically conflicts with those who deny the Russians did such a thing...it simply does not.
Click to expand...

However, what he said also does not mean that there was no interference here.
 
I actually like Mattis. He's one of the few people close to the President who I think is honest and knows what the hell he's doing. I'll continue to like him until he proves me wrong.
 
tres borrachos said:
I actually like Mattis. He's one of the few people close to the President who I think is honest and knows what the hell he's doing. I'll continue to like him until he proves me wrong.
Click to expand...

I am taking a liking to him as well, although I didn't think I would. He's not afraid to disagree with Trump when he thinks he's in the wrong, and I give him props for that.
 
rocket88 said:
However, what he said also does not mean that there was no interference here.
Click to expand...

Correct. But this was the OP's claim:

"said the same thing libruls have been saying for the past couple months"

Not that he stated that Mattis said the "same thing" liberals have been saying, NOT that what he says doesn't conflict with what liberals have been saying.

If we're talking about people saying the "same thing" as Mattis, people on both sides have seemingly acknowledged Russia has attempted to interfere in various elections around the world. The only reason to call out what liberals has been saying is to tie it specifically to the 2016 election, and potentially to the notion that Trump was in on it. And that? That is definitely not the "same thing" as what was said here.

So thus, when the OP makes a post suggesting that Mattias's comments are "interesting", I ask...why is something that most everyone, regardless of the side of the aisle, would agree on "interesting"? I'd ask again, WHO exactly is suggesting that Russia has never attempted to interfere in elections in various places of the world?
 
Zyphlin said:
Correct. But this was the OP's claim:

"said the same thing libruls have been saying for the past couple months"

Not that he stated that Mattis said the "same thing" liberals have been saying, NOT that what he says doesn't conflict with what liberals have been saying.

If we're talking about people saying the "same thing" as Mattis, people on both sides have seemingly acknowledged Russia has attempted to interfere in various elections around the world. The only reason to call out what liberals has been saying is to tie it specifically to the 2016 election, and potentially to the notion that Trump was in on it. And that? That is definitely not the "same thing" as what was said here.

So thus, when the OP makes a post suggesting that Mattias's comments are "interesting", I ask...why is something that most everyone, regardless of the side of the aisle, would agree on "interesting"? I'd ask again, WHO exactly is suggesting that Russia has never attempted to interfere in elections in various places of the world?
Click to expand...

Not to mention the US has also constantly been into influencing elections around the world.
 
Fake headline for fake news is fake.
 
Moderate Right said:
Apologies to you. Good time to bring up the fact that media can't be trusted to portray the news honestly.
Click to expand...

Thank god we have an administration that is "100% correct, all the time." I would hate to have a president who contradicts himself in the same sentence or one who changes positions hourly depending on the topic. That's the kind of quality you can depend on from a guy who graduated at the very top of his class with an B.A. from Wharton; guy who started from nothing with a small loan from his father; a tough guy who had 5 deferments that kept him from serving in the military that he loves; a family man who loves being married so much he's been married three times; a man who respects women so much he sneaks into dressing rooms to see them naked; a feminist who grabs women by the *****. Face it, it's difficult for the press to equal such honesty, integrity and morality.
 
Last edited:
Risky Thicket said:
Thank god we have an administration that is "100% correct, all the time." I would hate to have a president who contradicts himself in the same sentence or one who changes positions hourly depending on the topic. That's the kind of quality you can depend on from a guy who graduated at the very top of his class with an B.A. from Wharton; guy who started from nothing with a small loan from his father; a tough guy who had 5 deferments that kept him from serving in the military that he loves; a family man who loves being married so much he's been married three times; a man who respects women so much he sneaks into dressing rooms to see them naked; a feminist who grabs women by the *****. Face it, it's difficult for the press to equal such honesty, integrity and morality.
Click to expand...

You seem obsessed. Your response has nothing at all to do with the thread or my post you quoted.
 
tres borrachos said:
I actually like Mattis. He's one of the few people close to the President who I think is honest and knows what the hell he's doing. I'll continue to like him until he proves me wrong.
Click to expand...

The only sane one in the WH or the cabinet. In fact Mattis is the only one who actually has a great deal of experience directly related to his job.


Risky Prediction No. 1278: Mattis will resign and tell all the lunatics in the WH to kiss sweet feck all. Unfortunately he is much too good to waste his talent with extremists, lunatics, terrible chancers, white nationalists and wayward ****wads.
 
Ah Maddog Mattis. Yes, very little doubt, but even less proof.
 
upsideguy said:
Hacked into DNC servers; stole e-mail; fed it to Wikileaks. Wikileaks slowly fed the info to American in a drip, drip, drip fashion. That is the interference.

The result: who knows. Trump won by 85,000 votes. Did the Wikileaks dripping convince 85,000 people that would have voted for Hillary that voting for her wasn't worth the gas and time to drive to town or did it flip 42,500 votes? Quite plausible, if not likely.
Click to expand...
So you admit they didn't falsify anything and just let Americans know the truth about Hillary Clinton. DAMN THEM!!
LOL- yeah that's a real strong argument.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
That's hilarious.
Click to expand...

Oh, really? Then why don't you list the Presidents that have been controlled, directly or indirectly, by Russia and China?
 
Somerville said:
Now isn't this interesting. Trump's own pick to lead the State Department has said the same thing libruls have been saying for the past couple months. Do you think there are some 'discussions' taking place in the White House?
Click to expand...

Except for the fact that Mattis isn't, as you say, Trump's own pick to lead the State Department, there is nothing surprising about what Mattis said. I'd say it's pretty much common knowledge and has been for decades. In fact, the US has had their share of doing the same thing.

So, no...this isn't all that interesting.

BTW, whether liberals have been saying this the past couple of months or not, this has no bearing on the other thing liberals have been saying for the past couple of months...that is, that the Russians attempted to interfere in OUR last election.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom