• 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!

Does this feel like Watergate all over again ?

ocean515 said:
Never happen.

Some people struggle with creating an original thought.

For example, this Watergate thing is presented as if it were some idea that popped into the OP's mind.

Except, it's just a command and response to dog whistle from the alt-lefts MSM. Google Watergate Trump, and note how many hits come up. Also note who is pushing the meme, and when they started pushing it.

When handicapped by emotion, it must be difficult to have objective ideas grounded in an intellectually relevant thought process. It seems to me operating on little more than emotion means a constant supply of stimulation must be provided.

The left's MSM partners have become quite accomplished at supplying this stimulation to their diminishing followers.
Click to expand...

OP has tried repeatedly to cast a pall of illegitimacy on Trump's election and now his Presidency. I imagine he is reading numerous blogs looking for ammo. Especially since he has fired blanks on the election thing.
 
haymarket said:
For those of us old enough to remember the bad old days of Watergate and Richard Nixon, I wonder how many are reminded of that scandal right now with the Russian/Trump scandal? Not that it is exactly the same thing as there are obvious differences. But there are plenty of similarities.

I was born in 49 and followed Watergate closely for two years until its conclusion. As I taught Government for the next 33 years, so I also followed the Iran Contra scandal, the Whitewater Scandal, the Benghazi scandal and other dust ups over the in between fifty years. None of those felt like Watergate. They all failed to rise to that level.

But this one feels much much different. Far more serious than any of those and with details eerily reminiscent of the Nixon administration and how they badly mishandled the entire Watergate situation at almost every step.

This is NOT a poll. I would like to hear from older posters who lived through and remember Watergate and get their feelings and impressions about any similarity or differences between Watergate and the current Russian/Trump scandal.
Click to expand...


“…differences between Watergate and the current Russian/Trump scandal…”

There’s no comparison. As I’ve said before, Watergate was “local”. Russian/Trump is global. Nixon tried to control from the inside, using what was available in the existing infrastructure. Trump ignores the infrastructure and uses anything, including dis-inclusion of his vice-president, with whatever comes to his whim. I listen to those old enough that mention what is happening now does have similarities to what has happened in the past, like Watergate. Which is like saying the Russian/Trump, et al the Tyrannosaurus Rex, was aggressive as was the past aggressor, the big, bad wolf Watergate.
 
TheHammer said:
Oh! But I'm talking about "INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS" while you seem beguiled with toothless, powerless congressional hearings. I note that you refuse to answer the actual and most relevant questions, likely because you don't know the answrs because major leftist media never tried to find out, or you know the answers and wish not to reveal that Obama may most likely been incompetent or a bald face liar, or both.

I'll ask again, where was Obama during the Benghazi attacks and what were his actions therewith? Why didn't Obama know his Secretary Of State had a private insecure email server in her basement and was transmitting and receiving classified information? Where were the leftist investigative reporters?
Click to expand...

What? I couldn't turn on the TV for like 3 or 4 months without hearing about Benghazi. There was a thorough investigation and a Congressional hearing before a REPUBLICAN majority, and they came up short. The media didn't preside over the impeachment hearings for Nixon, they just got them started by breaking the story. Congress had their day in court over the Benghazi thing. What evidence were the "investigative reporters" supposed to dig up that our own government could not?
 
Fledermaus said:
OP has tried repeatedly to cast a pall of illegitimacy on Trump's election and now his Presidency. I imagine he is reading numerous blogs looking for ammo. Especially since he has fired blanks on the election thing.
Click to expand...

On sites like these, where anonymity is the name of the game, credibility becomes an important part of a "personality" that can only be developed through words. There are no other social tools that can be used to establish it.

When a poster establishes a lack of credibility, and is disingenuous in their words and actions, what is left?

I got into this whole blogging thing before Obama was elected when I noticed all these different groups using the same talking points. It was like a memo circulated among groups I never thought were connected. I did the research and discovered there is a massive, well funded ideological machine at work. I call it the Progressive Machine.

When I see mention of "Watergate" coming from all these different alt-left outlets, I know for a fact it's an orchestrated effort. The way the OP was written, it would suggest "Watergate" was just some individual thought that came to the persons mind. BS. It's the latest talking point from the Progressive Machine. This type of disingenuous behavior is what destroys a posters credibility.
 
ocean515 said:
On sites like these, where anonymity is the name of the game, credibility becomes an important part of a "personality" that can only be developed through words. There are no other social tools that can be used to establish it.

When a poster establishes a lack of credibility, and is disingenuous in their words and actions, what is left?

I got into this whole blogging thing before Obama was elected when I noticed all these different groups using the same talking points. It was like a memo circulated among groups I never thought were connected. I did the research and discovered there is a massive, well funded ideological machine at work. I call it the Progressive Machine.

When I see mention of "Watergate" coming from all these different alt-left outlets, I know for a fact it's an orchestrated effort. The way the OP was written, it would suggest "Watergate" was just some individual thought that came to the persons mind. BS. It's the latest talking point from the Progressive Machine. This type of disingenuous behavior is what destroys a posters credibility.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's so much disingenuous as it is credulous. It's fair to note that more conservative sites also tend to piggyback articles, ensuring that at one site or another, the talking point will be made known.

Sometime today or tomorrow I'll be talking to my little sister, who is not well-informed at all and has little time to keep up with current events but who nevertheless slavishly repeats the Salon point of view. ;)
 
Watergate, no matter the actors involved, or the motivations, was IMO limited to the DC scene.

What is going on with tRump & the Russian connection is much bigger than that IMO = potential for negative international implications, or worse

any & all potential connects between tRump & any Russian interest needs to be 100% fully investigated & to the maximum degree.


as a side note concerning Watergate: Frank Sturgis, now there's a really nice guy :roll:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom