• 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!

Selective outrage?

Nap

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 12, 2016
Messages
8,362
Reaction score
3,187
Location
Jackson, MS
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
the former British intelligence operative and his vast network throughout Europe
Those sources also said that once Mr. Trump became the nominee, further investigation was funded by groups and donors supporting Hillary Clinton.
Some of the allegations were first reported publicly in Mother Jones one week before the election.

Intel chiefs presented Trump with claims of Russian efforts to compromise him - CNNPolitics.com

So according to CNN the Hillary campaign not only possibly benefitted from foreign influence there is evidence that it was funded by groups and donors that supported Hillary........

Where is the outrage? My bad, I forgot that it was perfectly acceptable as long as it was for Hillary.......
 
I don't get your point. Nothing in the article says that the Hillary campaign benefited from Russian propaganda efforts. Are you saying that perhaps the Hillary campaign benefited from the story that Trump might have benefited from Russian efforts? That's like complaining that the other players benefit when one of them is caught cheating at poker. But if there's any outrage, it would be misplaced if directed at the players who don't cheat.

That said, I have no doubt that both campaigns cheated however they felt they could without consequence--so, to be clear, I am not remotely claiming that Hillary or her campaign are clean as the driven snow. Merely that I don't get your point.
 
Last edited:
Intel chiefs presented Trump with claims of Russian efforts to compromise him - CNNPolitics.com

So according to CNN the Hillary campaign not only possibly benefitted from foreign influence there is evidence that it was funded by groups and donors that supported Hillary........

Where is the outrage? My bad, I forgot that it was perfectly acceptable as long as it was for Hillary.......

The full quote, for context...

"The raw memos on which the synopsis is based were prepared by the former MI6 agent, who was posted in Russia in the 1990s and now runs a private intelligence gathering firm. His investigations related to Mr. Trump were initially funded by groups and donors supporting Republican opponents of Mr. Trump during the GOP primaries, multiple sources confirmed to CNN. Those sources also said that once Mr. Trump became the nominee, further investigation was funded by groups and donors supporting Hillary Clinton."

Here's another from your source...

"These senior intelligence officials also included the synopsis to demonstrate that Russia had compiled information potentially harmful to both political parties, but only released information damaging to Hillary Clinton and Democrats. This synopsis was not an official part of the report from the intelligence community case about Russian hacks, but some officials said it augmented the evidence that Moscow intended to harm Clinton's candidacy and help Trump's, several officials with knowledge of the briefings tell CNN."

Selective outrage?
 
Intel chiefs presented Trump with claims of Russian efforts to compromise him - CNNPolitics.com

So according to CNN the Hillary campaign not only possibly benefitted from foreign influence there is evidence that it was funded by groups and donors that supported Hillary........

Where is the outrage? My bad, I forgot that it was perfectly acceptable as long as it was for Hillary.......

I am not picking up on where you think the outrage should be. That the foreign operatives collected compromising information on both candidates but only leaked that involving Hillary? Or that the Hillary campaign and/or supporters paid for people to dig up dirt on Trump?

So here we have all the U.S. intelligence agencies and the operatives who paid to have it collected having this information since at least August but they didn't release it before the November election? It is just coming out now after the election results are certified and Trump is writing his inauguration speech?

Somehow that just doesn't pass the smell test.
 
I am not picking up on where you think the outrage should be. That the foreign operatives collected compromising information on both candidates but only leaked that involving Hillary? Or that the Hillary campaign and/or supporters paid for people to dig up dirt on Trump?

So here we have all the U.S. intelligence agencies and the operatives who paid to have it collected having this information since at least August but they didn't release it before the November election? It is just coming out now after the election results are certified and Trump is writing his inauguration speech?

Somehow that just doesn't pass the smell test.

Only Mother Jones actually reported the leaks about Trump before the election. So it wasn't that only one side was leaked.
 
The full quote, for context...

"The raw memos on which the synopsis is based were prepared by the former MI6 agent, who was posted in Russia in the 1990s and now runs a private intelligence gathering firm. His investigations related to Mr. Trump were initially funded by groups and donors supporting Republican opponents of Mr. Trump during the GOP primaries, multiple sources confirmed to CNN. Those sources also said that once Mr. Trump became the nominee, further investigation was funded by groups and donors supporting Hillary Clinton."

Here's another from your source...

"These senior intelligence officials also included the synopsis to demonstrate that Russia had compiled information potentially harmful to both political parties, but only released information damaging to Hillary Clinton and Democrats. This synopsis was not an official part of the report from the intelligence community case about Russian hacks, but some officials said it augmented the evidence that Moscow intended to harm Clinton's candidacy and help Trump's, several officials with knowledge of the briefings tell CNN."

Selective outrage?

I was merely pointing out statements that seem to be overlooked. The source even contradicts itself when it states that the information was leaked by Mother Jones. They have an article from October that does report on some of the allegations.

So foreign agents provided anti Trump documents that was published before the election. It is the same exact thing people are upset about Trump/wikileaks. The only difference is the amount of publicity each got.
 
I was merely pointing out statements that seem to be overlooked. The source even contradicts itself when it states that the information was leaked by Mother Jones. They have an article from October that does report on some of the allegations.

So foreign agents provided anti Trump documents that was published before the election. It is the same exact thing people are upset about Trump/wikileaks. The only difference is the amount of publicity each got.

This guy, who used to be a British agent and now runs a private agency, was hired during the primaries by Republicans who were anti-Trump to dig up dirt on Donald. That's another thing that deserves publicity. In fact, I'd guess that Trump might well devote some government resources to finding names, he being that way inclined. But there's no mention of 'Anti-Trump' documents being published before the election. In fact, the report says that only information damaging to Clinton was released.
 
I am not picking up on where you think the outrage should be. That the foreign operatives collected compromising information on both candidates but only leaked that involving Hillary? Or that the Hillary campaign and/or supporters paid for people to dig up dirt on Trump?

So here we have all the U.S. intelligence agencies and the operatives who paid to have it collected having this information since at least August but they didn't release it before the November election? It is just coming out now after the election results are certified and Trump is writing his inauguration speech?

Somehow that just doesn't pass the smell test.


Say good bye to that smell test. From here on in nothing is likely to pass.
 
Only Mother Jones actually reported the leaks about Trump before the election. So it wasn't that only one side was leaked.

I didn't know that, but if that is the case it does make one wonder how Mother Jones got the information and from whom.
 
Intel chiefs presented Trump with claims of Russian efforts to compromise him - CNNPolitics.com

So according to CNN the Hillary campaign not only possibly benefitted from foreign influence there is evidence that it was funded by groups and donors that supported Hillary........

Where is the outrage? My bad, I forgot that it was perfectly acceptable as long as it was for Hillary.......


Ahem...


I read that entire article you cited and there is not ONE word about anyone "benefiting", in fact it raises alarms or should.


In your haste to deny even the slightest accusation about Trump you missed the part where it said:

"The allegations were presented in a two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. The allegations came, in part, from memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative, whose past work US intelligence officials consider credible. The FBI is investigating the credibility and accuracy of these allegations, which are based primarily on information from Russian sources, but has not confirmed many essential details in the memos about Mr. Trump."

I don't know, we aren't the most patriotic of countries, but I'm pretty sure anyone in Canada did what Trump is proven to have done, passed secrets to the Russians I suspect Canada would be heating up the tar and feathers..

I never thought I would see an American support a foreign power spying.
 
This is the norm. During primaries members of a party hire investigators to dig up dirt on their opponents. After the primaries the information that wasn't used gets purchased by the opposition party. It is sleezy as **** but it is the norm.

It isn't the same as a foreign government getting involved.
 

Interesting. I was unaware of the article. Mother Jones, among others, is infamous, however, for shoddy, inaccurate, and unethical journalism so I rarely ever consult that source for anything.

It will be interesting to see how it all shakes out. As I already posted, that all these people had the information as early as August and didn't leak it to hurt Trump before the election? Now that he is the certified President-elect, it is just now coming out? Just doesn't meet the smell test.
 
This is the norm. During primaries members of a party hire investigators to dig up dirt on their opponents. After the primaries the information that wasn't used gets purchased by the opposition party. It is sleezy as **** but it is the norm.

It isn't the same as a foreign government getting involved.

The problem is they have yet to prove a government was involved with wikileaks. If it were to be proven a former KGB agent was tied to WikiLeaks there would be people losing their minds. This information has actual ties to a foreign government where the wikileaks documents have not.
 
The problem is they have yet to prove a government was involved with wikileaks. If it were to be proven a former KGB agent was tied to WikiLeaks there would be people losing their minds. This information has actual ties to a foreign government where the wikileaks documents have not.

You mean it has ties to a foreign private firm working for American politicians? I understand completely if you don't like that. I don't like it. But it is common practice.
 
You mean it has ties to a foreign private firm working for American politicians? I understand completely if you don't like that. I don't like it. But it is common practice.

I understand that it is common practice, I'm just trying to illustrate how ridiculous this outrage over wikileaks is.

Answer me this, what would the reaction be if it is found that a former KGB agent provided Assange with the wikileaks documents?
 
I understand that it is common practice, I'm just trying to illustrate how ridiculous this outrage over wikileaks is.

Answer me this, what would the reaction be if it is found that a former KGB agent provided Assange with the wikileaks documents?

Fair point. People would be more upset.
 
Fair point. People would be more upset.

To be honest if they were able to prove that then even I would be upset.

I'm not defending Trump or Putin. The fact that Russians even attempted to hack American servers is reason for concern and should be addressed.

My issue is trying to throw wikileaks into this mess. Corrupt government officials stand to benefit the most out of discrediting Assange and WikiLeaks.
 
Ahem...


I read that entire article you cited and there is not ONE word about anyone "benefiting", in fact it raises alarms or should.


In your haste to deny even the slightest accusation about Trump you missed the part where it said:

"The allegations were presented in a two-page synopsis that was appended to a report on Russian interference in the 2016 election. The allegations came, in part, from memos compiled by a former British intelligence operative, whose past work US intelligence officials consider credible. The FBI is investigating the credibility and accuracy of these allegations, which are based primarily on information from Russian sources, but has not confirmed many essential details in the memos about Mr. Trump."

I don't know, we aren't the most patriotic of countries, but I'm pretty sure anyone in Canada did what Trump is proven to have done, passed secrets to the Russians I suspect Canada would be heating up the tar and feathers..

I never thought I would see an American support a foreign power spying.

I don't support a foreign government spying, I believe we should be addressing this country's security concerns and responding in kind.

If the allegations are proven true then I would be all for putting Trump on trial for treason. I didn't even vote for him.

As for the "benefits", if someone published some of the allegations provided in this document for the American people and it swayed their vote, then would Hillary not have benefitted from this?
 
Intel chiefs presented Trump with claims of Russian efforts to compromise him - CNNPolitics.com

So according to CNN the Hillary campaign not only possibly benefitted from foreign influence there is evidence that it was funded by groups and donors that supported Hillary........

Where is the outrage? My bad, I forgot that it was perfectly acceptable as long as it was for Hillary.......

Just curious, do you know that the Russian hacking efforts did not only have to do with emails and elections? Would you like Putin in charge of your electrical grid? No Outrage There?
 
Just curious, do you know that the Russian hacking efforts did not only have to do with emails and elections? Would you like Putin in charge of your electrical grid? No Outrage There?

See post #19 & #20, I am concerned about that. I am also just as outraged over China for doing the same. I'm against ALL foreign governments making even an attempt to access or interfere in American systems. This is another example of selective outrage, you are obsessed with Putin and Russians yet I do not see the same fervor in regards to China and other nations that have tried and in some cases succeeded in the same actions.
 
Back
Top Bottom