It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If You Are An American And You Support Foreign Influence Over Our Elections

page: 4
19
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 10:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Konduit
Governor Pence called out the Clinton Foundation for what it is.

There are laws forbidding US officials and diplomats from accepting money and donations from foreign countries. The Clinton's found a loophole to circumvent these laws with the Clinton Foundation. It is a conflict of interest.

They even went as far as to conveniently "forget" to put on their tax records that the foundation accepted tens of millions of dollars from foreign governments over the course of 4 years, but when the 2014/2015 audit found this they were forced to come clean. This is something they attempted to hide from the public.


Got to love the insurmountable evidence that Hillary is influenced by foreign powers but all the other side has is blame Russia. They will provoke Russia to try to save face from embarrassing stuff hackers got from unsecured servers, endangering lives everywhere and increasing nuclear tensions.




posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 10:17 PM
link   
When it is Hillary's own emails that are being used to smack her in the face - how can that be " foreign influence"? It isn't. The results are the same no matter who airs Hillary's dirty laundry and our military's dirty laundry and our corporation's dirty laundry and the dirty laundry of our other gov't officials.

Sal

a reply to: theantediluvian



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 10:31 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker


You do understand we helped destabilize Ukraine so we could try and make another NATO country next to Russia and take their black sea fleet away right? If they did that to Cuba, as you've seen, we wouldn't allow it.


The only evidence of this that I've seen is the Nuland transcript which really isn't all that damning and has not context (for instance, when did that call occur?) The $5 billion claim that is casually tossed about is misleading as all hell. We didn't orchestrate the Orange Revolution or the Euromaidan protests. The instigator in both cases was Putin pal Yanukovych and the Party of Regions (or rather Russia operating through them).

There was an American who was at the center of the Ukrainian crisis though and his name is of course... Paul Manafort.

After the dissolution of the USSR, Russia didn't try to take back Crimea but they did sign the Budapest Memorandum which they violated in 2014. They already had a treaty with Ukraine to maintain their base which was signed around the same time as the Budapest Memorandum, maybe 2 years later?

Russia has been the chief instigator but if you want to get really into this, lets go back to 1944 when the USSR deported the Crimean Tatars from their ethnic homeland.

So I reject the notion that the US involvement in any way should be characterized as destablizing and quite the contrary.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 10:39 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

I'll be frank and say I could compile information on my arguement but no damning facts. The fact is both sides are good at hiding the truth, and the truth is somewhere in between.

I understand the idea of trying to stay convicted, and I admire your attempt. But I think the same thing you fight is the same thing you've succumb to. Best of luck to you, and I agree, from your posts your a smart guy (or gal). But you'll never convince me of your angle as it is picking a side (specifically partisan). I look at all.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 10:40 PM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14


Exactly, since the Cold War ended we have been slowly taking over remaining resistance. Currently it is the West and its allies that are on Russia's doorstep, NOT Russia on US' borders. That can't be ignored.


How have we been "slowing taking over remaining resistance?" Ukraine had been playing ball all along. They shipped the nukes off to Russia to be decomissioned, they pulled out of their involvement in building nuke plants in Iran — hell they even sent troops to Iraq.

Russia is actively trying to reconstitute its former influence on the global stage. I'm not saying that their aspirations are somehow uniquely sinister to Russia but lets not pretend that they're just minding their own business and the mean 'ol US just keeps poking at them with a stick.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 10:46 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

We went against the judgment of the UN and invaded Iraq, after which we don't really consult them on our decisions. Bashing Russia for Crimea is calling the kettle black. Don't appear weak, be creative and retaliate (drop their currency, we did) bit understand rather implies retaliation.

By the way, look at NATO from 1989-now and tell me it's not provocative considering we promised no expansion.

Kind of odd creating a huge alliance with no enemy up until now and being surprised someone bucked back.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 10:51 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody


Access was gained through her server. Do your own homework.


I promise you I've done far more homework on the DNC hack than you have or will. That statement is complete nonsense but if you want to prove me wrong, have it.


The "russia reset" was a fail. That will tarnish obamas legacy. He nor hillary could find the stones to muster ANY alled cooperation. He nor hillary had the diplomatic leadership skills to do anything but watch putin roll right on in. Now after they made a mess of the situation you want to make a boogey man out of russia to get hillary in office. BS


More unsubstantiated blathering? It must be nice to think that just saying "things" makes you somehow right. If you've got an actual argument, lets hear it.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 10:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14


Exactly, since the Cold War ended we have been slowly taking over remaining resistance. Currently it is the West and its allies that are on Russia's doorstep, NOT Russia on US' borders. That can't be ignored.


How have we been "slowing taking over remaining resistance?" Ukraine had been playing ball all along. They shipped the nukes off to Russia to be decomissioned, they pulled out of their involvement in building nuke plants in Iran — hell they even sent troops to Iraq.

Russia is actively trying to reconstitute its former influence on the global stage. I'm not saying that their aspirations are somehow uniquely sinister to Russia but lets not pretend that they're just minding their own business and the mean 'ol US just keeps poking at them with a stick.


Oh, I don't think they are innocent.

But I do think objectively that the US currently holds the majority of world power, after the fall of the USSR. We have something like 800 bases abroad. As I noted earlier. Russia only has that naval base in Syria, excepting naval bases inside former USSR satellites. Obviously it has some military bases too, but the US hegemony and power FAR exceeds Russia currently. After the fall of the USSR, no other superpower has existed which could manipulate other countries to the same degree as the US. Obviously that can and probably will change, but the fact remains the same.

Don't fool yourself that our leaders aren't hell bent on keeping it that way, at almost any cost. That is what these continuing wars are all about. I believe that it is historically demonstrable, not some conspiracy theory.
edit on 6-10-2016 by Quetzalcoatl14 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 10:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
Where is your outrage over the Mexican Billionaire Carlos Slim owned New York Times influenicng the elction?

Especially with illegaly obtained document?


Carlos Slim doesn't own the NY Times. He is the largest single shareholder but he has somewhere less than a 20% ownership of the company which doesn't put him in any actual control over the NY Times let alone the editorial decisions.

Nice try though.

Illegally obtained document? It's not illegal under the circumstances with which they claim it was received. Last rumor I heard was maybe Marla sent it.

But hey, if you have some evidence that it was obtained by hackers from a foreign government intent on influencing the outcome to election, let's hear it. Otherwise, you're just grasping.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Konduit

The 2015 audit the foundation commissioned?


There are laws forbidding US officials and diplomats from accepting money and donations from foreign countries. The Clinton's found a loophole to circumvent these laws with the Clinton Foundation. It is a conflict of interest.


That's a whole lot to unpack there. Why don't you start by demonstrating exactly how this loophole works? How does the money get from the foundation into the Clinton's bank account?

Then show where there was quid pro quo activity. Specifically. Please. I'm aparently debating a number of people here simultaneously and I don't have time to carry on debates with people who know things and then keep bouncing back trying to have other debates with a low information parrots who just say things.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:12 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

"In a summary of its investigation into Clinton’s use of private email released Friday, the FBI concluded that a username and password for an email account on the server — it’s not clear whose email beyond that it belonged to a woman working as an aide to former President Bill Clinton — was compromised by an unknown entity. That entity logged into the compromised email, read messages, and browsed attachments using a service called Tor."

Aside from that the fbi reported it could not determine her server had or had not been hacked. Had she any sense of your PATRIOTISM she would have safeguarded the classified material she was RESPONSIBLE for.

You resort to attacks when the facts do not bear out your BS position on russia. Though I noticed you did not dispute the failures of the current administration.

Take your bush era neocon evil empire retoric and go away.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:23 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker


Well said. Luckily we live in the midst of the biggest Renaissance ever to be bestowed on man. We all have access to the biggest stockpile of information and real time exchange with the planet.


Nobody believes this more than I do — particularly as an autodidact. I have been involved since I was a teenage hacker in the early-to-mid 90's. I co-sysoped BBS boards, curated large (relatively, large for then
) collections of text files, many of which I wrote, published (a short lived) zine, etc.

I saw the whole thing playing out from a front row seat.

More recently, I created from scratch a news aggregator so that people could get interesting Forteana (and I make not a cent from it) and of course, I spend a lot of time posting here. I'm all about sharing information.

The thing is that many people have simply transferred the "TV mentality" to their consumption of information on the Internet. They get locked onto a "channel" or two and just let whatever information is presented to them flow right through their eyes into their brains.

An example of some of the worst of this is the "alternative media" that people wrongly put so much trust in. Just because it isn't "mainstream" doesn't make it better. That's a different rant though.

In other words, I agree that we're in the midst of a sort of informational big bang but it's up to the individual to be discriminating.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:23 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian



In other words, I agree that we're in the midst of a sort of informational big bang but it's up to the individual to be discriminating.

Good luck with that... Here.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: SallieSunshine


When it is Hillary's own emails that are being used to smack her in the face - how can that be " foreign influence"? It isn't.


Wrong again. The Russians haven't published any Clinton emails. The Clinton emails were released following FOIA requests made by Jason Leopold of Vice News.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

Kudos man, we'll agree to disagree. Me and you have interpreted information differently. I admire your conviction, but I'm afraid I see something else. Either way you're eloquent, I just disagree haha. I'm an agnostic though so I'm used to it (disagreeing) .
edit on 7-10-2016 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-10-2016 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: theantediluvian



In other words, I agree that we're in the midst of a sort of informational big bang but it's up to the individual to be discriminating.

Good luck with that... Here.



Because it doesn't lean your direction? I thought we were all supposed to be skeptical. I see your posts and if I can be frank they lean left. I hail to no side, they work for the same head in my opinion. Wait for this cycle to be over and I bet the comminuty will agree again, finding common ground on how we are just pawns.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:49 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

That is not how the Russians gained access to the DNC emails which is what you claimed. You're conflating two different things. One of the groups that hacked the DNC (Cozy Bear) also compromised non-secure systems of the Joint Chief of Staff and the White House. Their typical MO for initial access is mass targetted spearphising. Do you know how spearphishing works? If so you'll know that the computer that is infected is the one of the end user viewing the email who clicks the link.

There's absolutely no evidence that one had anything to do with the others.


You resort to attacks when the facts do not bear out your BS position on russia. Though I noticed you did not dispute the failures of the current administration. Take your bush era neocon evil empire retoric and go away.


I don't dispute the failures of the current administration though I don't engage in frivolous partisan exaggeration either. I'm not actually a supporter of Clinton either which is where your own thinking is fundamentally flawed. I don't care about Clinton. She could get arrested the day after being sworn in for all I care.

I am more than anything, anti-Trump. I'm not "resorting" to anything. You've yet to discredit anything I've said about Russia at all. Not one single thing but yet you say "when the facts do not bear out your BS position on russia."

Please, disabuse me of my mistaken beliefs concerning the very real and very obvious efforts by Russia to influence the outcome of the US Presidential election.

I didn't even get into the influence they're having over Donald Trump — a man so lacking in even a desire to understand foreign policy that he just repeats what is whispered in his ears.

If you're interested, here are some of the threads I've posted on the topic of Russia, Trump and WikiLeaks recently:

Who Is Carter Page And How Did He Come To Work For Trump's Campaign?
Dissecting The WikiLeaks Russian Connection - Part One
Did WikiLeaks Exclude Syria To Russia Bank Transfer Emails From Syria Files?



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 11:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: theantediluvian

Kudos man, well agree to disagree. Me and you have interpreted information differently. I admire your conviction, but I'm afraid I see something else. Either way your eloquent, I just disagree haha. I'm an agnostic though so I'm used to it.


Fair enough. I respect people who care enough to have informed opinions, whether or not I agree with them




posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 12:01 AM
link   
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

I actually don't disagree with anything you just said at all and as I said to Critical Stinker, I respect that you have informed opinions and your willing to discuss them. It's always nice to have discussions/debates with people who have something substantial to say. There's a whole herd of aggressively ignorant folks running around here just parroting talking points.

We've been at it for about 4 hours now which was far longer than I'd anticipated!

I'm off to check on the other thread I started just before this one that doesn't seem to have taken off at all:

CLC Files FEC Complaints Against BOTH Major Party Presidential Candidates and Their Super PACs




posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 12:04 AM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker




Because it doesn't lean your direction? I thought we were all supposed to be skeptical.

We are supposed to be skeptical. We are supposed to use critical thinking skills.
These things are often lacking on ATS.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join