It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: boncho
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
"Both" parties do the same thing, and they work together to stomp out the third parties.
Guccifer for President!
You mean Russia?
Guccifer 2.0 is the Russian government
It's no secret Russia wants Trump to win the election. They haven't made any ground with Hillary as SoS, and they don't want her cabinet in the oval office. Trump on the other hand has Putin's balls on his chin while making statements about Geopolitical climate. Stating he's a better leader than the US President and other political gaffs (even if that's true you don't compare an enemy state and say they're better in any way than your own leader)
He's also commented on weakening NATO positions, etc-so it really should be no surprise Russia would rather have Trump in office over Hillary.
However, considering a long trail of breadcrumbs pointing back to Russia left by the hacker, as well as other circumstantial evidence, it appears more likely that Guccifer 2.0 is nothing but a disinformation or deception campaign by Russian state-sponsored hackers to cover up their own hack—and a hasty and sloppy one at that.
As much as anyone might hate Hillary (and Im not condoning or endorsing Hillary or the DNC) but you are basically just letting Russia control your vote, and your nation by buying the Guccifer 2.0 ruse and jumping onto this bandwagon.
I've said for years now, anyone involved in Conspirology... (the name this hobby had before CIA coined "Conspiracy Theorist" as a pejorative term/activity-see:memo on JFK disinfo circa '60s, see:Google NGram on "conspiracy Theorist") ...should not play into nor care about politics at all. Unless it's concerning a political conspiracy.
The political conspiracy is not what the DNC or Hillary did, it's what Russia is trying to do to control the US nation. If you are going to condemn the DNC and Hillary, then you need equal facts (open books or leaks) on the RNC. And its largely why any conspiracy minded people should step outside of politics all together.
When this hobby or type of thought, or activism or whatever you want to call it, when it originated online, it was in usenets, BBS, IRC chats, newsletters, forums, etc-and no one cared nor acknowledged politics. The whole premise of this topic is that the government and groups with ill intentions or subversive intentions are lying to accomplish some end. The whole point is to uncover these lies or gain better understanding of them. Not involve yourself in them.
Government = bad, people = good. That's the general theories this subject is built off of. No individual government agent is to be followed, commended, supported, etc-unless they have done something to disclose, uncover-truth, change-status-quo, declassify, illuminate-truth, etc.
Trump has a history of lining his own pockets and abusing the system as he sees fit (bankruptcy) to line his own pockets and maintain himself as 1%. He is not anyone's hero. Neither is the DNC or Hillary. But to condemn any of these actors (in an ongoing election) without equal evidence and knowledge about all of them, is to be a tool for political end games, in this case, likely Russia. A country that not only abuses and silences its own people, would not hesitate to do much worse to people living outside of it.
originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: boncho
Sorry, but the spooky Russians aren't enough to stop this already rolling ball. The thing that you (and the Russians apparently) aren't taking into account is that Clinton is one of the only people Trump can beat. He wouldn't stand a chance against Sanders, wouldn't stand a chance against Jill Stein, there are many alternatives for if Clinton gets knocked out of the race.
Available Case Documents
The following documents for this case are available for you to view or download:
Date Filed # Document Text
June 28, 2016 1
1 Class Action Complaint
June 28, 2016 1
1-1 Exhibit 1 to Class Action Complaint
June 28, 2016 1
1-2 Civil Cover Sheet
June 28, 2016 1
1-3 Summonses (DNC Services Corporation)
June 28, 2016 1
1-4 Summonses (Deborah Wasserman Schultz)
The DNC Memo presents, “a suggested strategy for positioning and public messaging around the 2016 Republican presidential field.” It states that, “Our goals in the coming months will be to frame the Republican field and the eventual nominee early and to provide a contrast between the GOP field and HRC.
” (emphasis added). The DNC Memo also advises that the DNC, “(u)se specific hits to muddy the waters around ethics, transparency and campaign finance attacks on HRC.” In order to “muddy the waters” around Clinton’s perceived vulnerabilities, the DNC Memo suggests “several different methods” of attack including: (a) “(w)orking through the DNC” to “utilize reporters” and create stories in the media “with no fingerprints”; (b) “prep(ping)” reporters for interviews with GOP candidates and having off-the-record conversations with them; (c) making use of social media attacks; and (d) using the DNC to “insert our messaging” into Republican-favorable press.
“Shortly into the hearing, DNC attorneys claim Article V, Section 4 of the DNC Charter—stipulating that the DNC chair and their staff must ensure neutrality in the Democratic presidential primaries—is ‘a discretionary rule that it didn’t need to adopt to begin with.’
Based on this assumption, DNC attorneys assert that the court cannot interpret, claim, or rule on anything associated with whether the DNC remains neutral in their presidential primaries.
“The attorneys representing the DNC have previously argued that Sanders supporters knew the primaries were rigged, therefore annulling any potential accountability the DNC may have. In the latest hearing, they doubled down on this argument: ‘The Court would have to find that people who fervently supported Bernie Sanders and who purportedly didn’t know that this favoritism was going on would have not given to Mr. Sanders, to Senator Sanders, if they had known that there was this purported favoritism.’
“Jared Beck, the attorney representing Sanders supporters in the class action lawsuit, retorted that the DNC Charter is not akin to political rhetoric a politician would use during a campaign, but rather an inherent and important part of democracy in America. The entire argument of the DNC in this lawsuit is to conflate the promises of a political candidate with those of an election arbiter bound to neutrality by the DNC Charter, and to claim that fraudulent inducement cannot ever be proven as the DNC attorneys allege, ‘I think there’s an impossible showing of causation.’”
originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: UKTruth
New YOUTUBE on Shawn Lucas death