Hillary Clinton was the victim of cyber bullying.

So I’m in Malaysia for Chinese New Year, and CNN is on the tv in the hotel. Anderson cooper is going on and on about these 16 new indictments.

After reading the report it appears that we are really just talking about mean Facebook and Twitter posts.

I just hope you guys know that the rest of the world sees this garbage on TV, real sad day for an American.

The entire thing can be reduced to some people made a fake Facebook account and said mean things about Hillary, that’s it - it is getting ridiculous, we can’t let this go on until the 2020 election.

It is like staying in Iraq after we didn’t find WMDs, the entire thing starts to stink worse and worse the more people realize what is really going on.

Got it cyber bullying shouldn’t happen, but we don’t need to waste all this time, money and resources investigating the White House over a twitter feed that might not of been 100% honest, 90% of the stuff posted on Twitter is embellished, Facebook is full of photoshop.

a reply to: fatkid

If CNN think that poor Hillary is the victim of cyber bullying, then they might want to take a long hard look at themselves and their own behaviour towards the President over the last 18 months. I guess it's less of an issue, as Trump has dealt with their bullying attempts by punching them in the face and knocking them out.

originally posted by: UKTruth
a reply to: fatkid

If CNN think that poor Hillary is the victim of cyber bullying, then they might want to take a long hard look at themselves and their own behaviour towards the President over the last 18 months. I guess it's less of an issue, as Trump has dealt with their bullying attempts by punching them in the face and knocking them out.

I'm not going to defend $hillary, but when it comes to bullying, Trump takes the Cake. Which is why the first lady, unlike other past first lady, dare not speak on bullying or integrity or lectures on 'family' or anything... She just stays out of sight. Because she would be a massive hypocrite if she touched n family values or bullying.

So please, don't defend Trump in that regard... Just praise the good he has done , or attempted to do.

Hitlary and the DNC bullied Sanders. And there was no "cyber" to it...

a reply to: odzeandennz

Who said anything about trump? I’m talking about the Russian indictments, maybe I should of been more clear

a reply to: UKTruth

Talking about this Russian thing

a reply to: fatkid

It's one thing if I choose to target you in aim of defamation and/or harassment.

A completely other thing if I am being paid to do so.

Do you understand the difference?

a reply to: odzeandennz

Trump has taken more flak on social media AND mainstream media than anyone I can remember, so quite why CNN need to broadcast around the world about poor Hillary being bullied, I don't really know... well I do actually... they want to add more legs to the story about the 13 Russians, as on it's face it was a win for Trump.

a reply to: fatkid

To some, a social media post is a social media post. To others it is a threat to democracy. A simple look at reality will prove which one is foolish.

a reply to: fatkid

Forgive me but cyber bullying? Seriously?

Wow, what will they think of next. Cyber bullying, what she's 10?

People said mean things? Oh, noes...welcome to American politics. It's all about the politics of personal destruction. Issues? We don't need no stinking issues.

We've got deplorables on one side. Socialist commie dictatorial riff-raff on the other. With some few in the middle totally and complete browned off about the whole thing.

Cyber bullying...

a reply to: UKTruth

im not talking about Russians either. if cnn is guilty of bullying, so is Trump.

originally posted by: fatkid
a reply to: odzeandennz

Who said anything about trump? I’m talking about the Russian indictments, maybe I should of been more clear

pay attention, i was replying to someone else.

a reply to: fatkid

What Russian thing? The fact that some Russians attempted to influence our election? Oh, dear God in Heaven, what's new about that?

The Russian, who used to be the Soviets, have been doing that for almost a blessed century. Maybe longer, if the Tsars were trying...which they probably were.

Great Britain does. Israel does. Malaysia does (not sure about that one...it sounds good though.). Many countries do. Not to mention the folks in those countries.

Why? Because this country, whether ya like it or no, influences the world like no other at the moment. It's pure common sense to have some skin in the game.

Foreign nations, and nationals, have been attempting, with varying degrees of success, to influence this country since its founding. Via it's elections, trade, war, etc... There is, quite literally, nothing new about this.

a reply to: fatkid

Several good points you make...including the waste of time and taxpayer resources with interviewing 68 people in the Trump administration, yet 13 Russians were indicted.

Mueller's last gasp attempt to save face is a pitiful gesture.

a reply to: fatkid

I think you're seeing a taped Anderson Cooper in Malaysia. He puts his diaper on, and hits the sack early.

BTW..CNN just gave Hillary excuse number 68, for why she lost. TRIVIA: 68 also happens to be the Clinton "body count", since 1988.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

If at any time it is possible for an extreme to be pushed today is the day to do it.

I'm sorry but we need to be able to recognise influence and discern the reasoning behind said influence.

To me if a person attempting to influence me is being paid to do so I can only assume that this person has an agenda, and since we would be speaking of a "conspiracy to influence" I must assume said influence would be negative in regards to whatever values I may have held dear or will so in the future. Last I checked, I have to pay people to help me.

A threat to democracy is an extreme conclusion don't you think?

...

You can teach sheep to climb a mountain all you want, the reality is they must "evolve" to ever stand a chance. They'll still be Ovis, but they'll be a little less docile.

originally posted by: RAY1990
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

If at any time it is possible for an extreme to be pushed today is the day to do it.

I'm sorry but we need to be able to recognise influence and discern the reasoning behind said influence.

To me if a person attempting to influence me is being paid to do so I can only assume that this person has an agenda, and since we would be speaking of a "conspiracy to influence" I must assume said influence would be negative in regards to whatever values I may have held dear or will so in the future. Last I checked, I have to pay people to help me.

A threat to democracy is an extreme conclusion don't you think?

...

You can teach sheep to climb a mountain all you want, the reality is they must "evolve" to ever stand a chance. They'll still be Ovis, but they'll be a little less docile.

Agenda or not, it is our choice whether to give them influence or not. Personally, I welcome more voices. I want to hear what people have to say, and that includes people with an agenda, who try to influence.

Yes, a threat to democracy is quite extreme. That’s why I personally dismiss such claims as specious at best, dangerous nonsense at worst. In fact it is the opposite. More voices is more democracy.

a reply to: RAY1990

So in your opinion, if I like vanilla ice cream more, and you pay me to say I like strawberry ice cream more......... the maker of vanilla ice cream should be able to file a suit?

She deserves all she gets.

She lost.

Too bad, so sad.

a reply to: seagull

I'm not seeing the point of bringing up unofficial business done in the name of officialdom... Anyone who can read a bit of history can work out that a good percentage of those Communist spies were willing to aid the motherland.

Is McCarthyism the definition of a dog and pony show?

No, there is literally nothing new to this, however the scale is new and the platform is new. I believe the question is new too, because I see recent events as more of a question put to the public.

I think the emphasis should be placed on the individual, it's us who become gullible. I mean only 5 years ago a conspiracy was making the rounds here, gang stalking. Now I'm not saying the Russian government are gang stalking Americans, what I am saying is that governments do hire people to target individuals and/or groups in order to influence them.

Non of this is new.

What is new is the personal nature of these activities, today many could have asked themselves if they were influenced and answer honestly.

I'm seeing how people are reacting to this provocation.

Personally I'm more curious than anything. I'm thinking eventually we'll have laws, some of them "human rights" related in order to establish protection in regards to an individual's influenceability.

Aka censorship.

Or

We'll have an awakening (forced?) in regards to how we are influenced and influence others, how often these influences are negative and/or done for personal gain whether directly or indirectly.

I'm guessing the former.

I don't see this ball being dropped... Which is why I said I'm not seeing the point in mentioning that nations do this all the time because it isn't the point.

The point is we are sheep. Collectively we are sheep.

Yet awareness is a wonderful thing.