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.

 

US election hacking: Putin 'sought to help' Trump

page: 2
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 07:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

Russia allegedly did what to help Clinton exactly?



Read it, they did a whole host of things.

www.dni.gov...




posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 08:44 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Is anything about that supposed to be anything other than a blind rant because it's always got to be Clinton who's wrong with you hasn't it?

Clinton destroyed Syria? I'm not quite sure what you think Russia was dropping from its planes, but then again, you bought it, you swallowed it, I'm sure you won't let it choke you.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 09:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: Profusion

There's only two people that had a real influence on the US elections...Trump and Clinton.

The People simply put, were frightened out of their wits at the prospect of a HRC Whitehouse much more than they were about a DJT Whitehouse.

And it's the DNC's own fault for fielding a criminally negligent idiot in the first place.





Perhaps, but if that's really the case then why did Clinton win the popular vote? Could hardly be due to a whole heap of disinformation could it? Nah, who would fall for that. Pizza anyone?



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 10:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
The way you know its political propaganda is it NEVER says 'Putin tried to hurt Clinton', but instead "Putin tried to help Trump".


Would you feel the same way if all this information coming out , and Clinton had won?

I'm seeing all this on all these threads but I have a very strong suspicion that if Hillary had won the right would be exploding over Russian interference and all this down playing wouldn't be happening

Hell it would be hard for me not to do and I didn't vote for either one of them


it depends, if the hacks release produced factual truths that proved one side was full of criminals and thugs, It would be hard to be angry and defend them, I mean they really were proven to be just that.


Truth shouldn't depend on who it's being directed at regardless of their past

Since when did the "right leaning" decide to adopt "the ends justify the means"

That thought process is something we have fought against for ages

Truth is truth regardless

Again I'm still on the fence about the subject



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 10:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: Profusion

There's only two people that had a real influence on the US elections...Trump and Clinton.

The People simply put, were frightened out of their wits at the prospect of a HRC Whitehouse much more than they were about a DJT Whitehouse.

And it's the DNC's own fault for fielding a criminally negligent idiot in the first place.





Perhaps, but if that's really the case then why did Clinton win the popular vote? Could hardly be due to a whole heap of disinformation could it? Nah, who would fall for that. Pizza anyone?


Or it could be that that many people really just dislike trump

I know it's hard for trump supporters to understand. It there is a large swath of even conservatives like myself that really don't like the guy, and I've done all my own research into his background since they de I heard he was contemplating running

One persons "truth" doesn't make it another persons , and you don't need a foreign gov intervening for that to happen



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 11:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: Profusion

There's only two people that had a real influence on the US elections...Trump and Clinton.

The People simply put, were frightened out of their wits at the prospect of a HRC Whitehouse much more than they were about a DJT Whitehouse.

And it's the DNC's own fault for fielding a criminally negligent idiot in the first place.





Perhaps, but if that's really the case then why did Clinton win the popular vote? Could hardly be due to a whole heap of disinformation could it? Nah, who would fall for that. Pizza anyone?


Or it could be that that many people really just dislike trump

I know it's hard for trump supporters to understand. It there is a large swath of even conservatives like myself that really don't like the guy, and I've done all my own research into his background since they de I heard he was contemplating running

One persons "truth" doesn't make it another persons , and you don't need a foreign gov intervening for that to happen


As a non American I'd agree with you, but rumours, hearsay etc can do a lot to sway the more impressionable minds, perhaps those who always hear the word smoke and start yelling fire.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 12:44 PM
link   
So, if things go wrong under Trump, it is in fact Putins fault ?



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 12:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: Profusion

There's only two people that had a real influence on the US elections...Trump and Clinton.

The People simply put, were frightened out of their wits at the prospect of a HRC Whitehouse much more than they were about a DJT Whitehouse.

And it's the DNC's own fault for fielding a criminally negligent idiot in the first place.





Perhaps, but if that's really the case then why did Clinton win the popular vote? Could hardly be due to a whole heap of disinformation could it? Nah, who would fall for that. Pizza anyone?


Or it could be that that many people really just dislike trump

I know it's hard for trump supporters to understand. It there is a large swath of even conservatives like myself that really don't like the guy, and I've done all my own research into his background since they de I heard he was contemplating running

One persons "truth" doesn't make it another persons , and you don't need a foreign gov intervening for that to happen


As a non American I'd agree with you, but rumours, hearsay etc can do a lot to sway the more impressionable minds, perhaps those who always hear the word smoke and start yelling fire.


Absolutely agree there.....far far too many take what's spoon fed and swallow it down



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

That's because Putin didn't want any other republican to win, nor did he want Hillary to lose..he wanted trump specifically to win..


Says who?

Then again, why would anybody wants Neocon's like Jeb Bush & Hillary Clinton to win?



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: ManBehindTheMask

I got the feeling you were ging for a flip side routine, but your execution at that juncture left some to be desired.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

That's because Putin didn't want any other republican to win, nor did he want Hillary to lose..he wanted trump specifically to win..


Says who?

Then again, why would anybody wants Neocon's like Jeb Bush & Hillary Clinton to win?


Fair enough, but still doesn't change the fact swearing you hate Russia has been a keystone of the GOP since Reagan...


So in no way was put in down to help any other republican candidate.

The dems have been far softer on Russia for decades.

Trump is the one exception in either party..

That said I'm down with the fact most of the anti Russian stuff Americans hear is propaganda, but don't pretend like Putin was specifically against hillary, when it is obvious he was 100% for trump.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 01:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox

That said I'm down with the fact most of the anti Russian stuff Americans hear is propaganda, but don't pretend like Putin was specifically against hillary, when it is obvious he was 100% for trump.



I've already covered the real MOTIVES at length, but I guess you missed the memo's:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
The way you know its political propaganda is it NEVER says 'Putin tried to hurt Clinton', but instead "Putin tried to help Trump".


Would you feel the same way if all this information coming out , and Clinton had won?

I'm seeing all this on all these threads but I have a very strong suspicion that if Hillary had won the right would be exploding over Russian interference and all this down playing wouldn't be happening

Hell it would be hard for me not to do and I didn't vote for either one of them


it depends, if the hacks release produced factual truths that proved one side was full of criminals and thugs, It would be hard to be angry and defend them, I mean they really were proven to be just that.


Truth shouldn't depend on who it's being directed at regardless of their past

Since when did the "right leaning" decide to adopt "the ends justify the means"

That thought process is something we have fought against for ages

Truth is truth regardless

Again I'm still on the fence about the subject


so what are we left to be angry about? The fact that we left our fly open and Russia found a way to peak? The fact that the DNC did some underhanded #? In a cyber world, where hacking is a daily operation in every country with a light pole, who should be punished first? Just the ones who get caught?

My opinion is, any anger being openly displayed is faux outrage meant to produce a result. (like make Trump's win look less legit for reasons unknown) It's Obama being a douche.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 02:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: Profusion

There's only two people that had a real influence on the US elections...Trump and Clinton.

The People simply put, were frightened out of their wits at the prospect of a HRC Whitehouse much more than they were about a DJT Whitehouse.

And it's the DNC's own fault for fielding a criminally negligent idiot in the first place.





Perhaps, but if that's really the case then why did Clinton win the popular vote? Could hardly be due to a whole heap of disinformation could it? Nah, who would fall for that. Pizza anyone?


Or it could be that that many people really just dislike trump

I know it's hard for trump supporters to understand. It there is a large swath of even conservatives like myself that really don't like the guy, and I've done all my own research into his background since they de I heard he was contemplating running

One persons "truth" doesn't make it another persons , and you don't need a foreign gov intervening for that to happen


And just so you know, most "Trump supporters" would have loved a better choice, some not, but I'd wager most would. It's just that Hillary was a much worse choice and her win was something everyone was willing to gamble with Trump to prevent. Yea, she was that bad of a candidate. So in essence, our political leadership failed us in presenting a gaggle of idiots to choose from on the right, and only one ruthless bitch on the left.

Now we as the USA have Trump. And like him or hate him, he's our president. So actively looking for reasons to make him look bad now is a really stupid choice unless you are not a fan of the USA. I'm hoping like hell he won't do that himself with every tweet.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 03:50 PM
link   
Apparently hillary supporters are that much in tears with hilldog losing to the Trump they are undecided whether people anti her helped Trump, or to "harm" her chances.

Give them time folks. Maybe they'll turn to the positions of the planets in the solar system, the moon the tides, maybe even philosophize the notion that Beyonce didn't horseback ride Katy Perry at a concert in Idaho as the turning point.



posted on Jan, 7 2017 @ 04:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: ManBehindTheMask

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
The way you know its political propaganda is it NEVER says 'Putin tried to hurt Clinton', but instead "Putin tried to help Trump".


Would you feel the same way if all this information coming out , and Clinton had won?

I'm seeing all this on all these threads but I have a very strong suspicion that if Hillary had won the right would be exploding over Russian interference and all this down playing wouldn't be happening

Hell it would be hard for me not to do and I didn't vote for either one of them


This is a really interesting question to explore. I didn't vote for either of them either, btw.

So, if the scenario was reversed, I honestly think I would scoff at the idea that the Russians or any other nation was behind a hacking that was negative for Trump's campaign.

I would totally assume Hillary's campaign would be behind such a thing and trying to deflect by blaming it on someone else.

That begs the question...why was the first (and only) conclusion that the Russians were behind it and not the Trump campaign or some other Republican/Trump supporting suspect?

It reminds me of how it was reported so quickly that al Qaeda was behind the attacks on 9/11 and that just doesn't sit well with me. I'm thinking it was always meant to be blamed on Russia.




top topics



 
2
<< 1   >>

log in

join