Dear Leader-elect's Propaganda Minister — Should Clinton Be Punished For Influencing Election?

You love stiring the Ats pot Ant.

a reply to: RickinVa

1. Noted cybersecurity expert Donald J Trump,........Total fabrication and lie

Please stop pretending that you gaf about lies. Just stop. I can show you a thousand times that Donald Trump lied directly to the faces of his loving flock and you won't bat an eyelash. I can point out dozens of completely fabricated fake news stories that were used as sources in OPs on ATS this election and you won't gaf about that either. You are completely fine with lies as long as the lies don't upset you. Period.

I on the other hand was clearly being sarcastic but THAT offends your delicate sensibilities? What Donald Trump said was this:

"And I know a lot about hacking. And hacking is a very hard thing to prove."

Donald Trump does not in fact know "a lot about hacking" though does he? So he lied to you, me and the rest of us in front of the national media.

You don't give a rat's ass about it though do you?

3. from hacking ordered by the "new king's" Russian benefactors. We do not have a king. Another total fabrication and lie

Again, not a lie. That was a reference with a link to a statement put out by Reince Priebus. Don't take my word for it, it's right here on GOP.com. Here's the bit I was referring to:

Merry Christmas to all! Over two millennia ago, a new hope was born into the world, a Savior who would offer the promise of salvation to all mankind. Just as the three wise men did on that night, this Christmas heralds a time to celebrate the good news of a new King. We hope Americans celebrating Christmas today will enjoy a day of festivities and a renewed closeness with family and friends.

Your bias is very clear and unmistakable... I usually ignore your trash threads, but the BS is getting really really old.

I've never claimed to be impartial? How is my bias any more egregious than the bias of nearly ever other person posting threads in the ATS political forums or for that matter, any more biased than anyone else commenting on politics anywhere?

If you want to ignore more trash threads, by all means do so. I'm not breaking into your computer and pulling them up in your browser, comrade.

originally posted by: muSSang
You love stiring the Ats pot Ant.

Guilty.

originally posted by: ColaTesla
Dear lord, The election was last year, You embarrassed yourself to the whole of ATS and OP's like this wont help you save face.


You were wrong,Give it up....

"We are the Borg. Your biological and technological distinctiveness will be added to our own. Resistance is futile."

a reply to: theantediluvian

At this Point, What does it matter? The election has been and gone, We should just put all this behind us and deal with it, Wipe the slate clean, you know, like with a cloth or something...

originally posted by: ColaTesla
Dear lord, The election was last year, You embarrassed yourself to the whole of ATS and OP's like this wont help you save face.


You were wrong,Give it up....

sweetie, you're the embarrassment.

op, it's hysterical how much you trigger trumps chumps. it's because deep deep down they know everything you say is true. the mans a fool and it's laughable.

he knows A LOT about hacking LOLOLOL.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: 200Plus

Clinton wasn't my first choice. I actually voted for Sanders in the primary. Despite my high opinion of Sanders in some regards, he wasn't exactly my idea of an ideal candidate either. To be honest, I would have taken a number of the GOP candidates over Donald Trump.

How did Clinton lose to Trump? There's no single reason but of the many important factors, most of them were her own doing. To name a few that were squarely on her shoulders:

- The email server and her lies about it.

- Failed foreign policy during her tenure as SoS.

- The Clinton Foundation and her own failure to live up to her promise of severing ties between herself/her staff and the foundation.

- Taking for granted traditional Democrat strongholds and mistakes in campaigning like not holding press conferences for months.

There are other factors for which the blame lies with her and others less so but it's all rather irrelevant. The election is over. Clinton is done. Finished. She'll never run for office again. Donald Trump on the other hand will be the President in a few short weeks and Russian hacking isn't going to stop being a threat just because Putin's preferred candidate is in the White House.

How is it that the Trump faithful forget that the current administration went full bore in ts efforts to improve relations with Russia for years?

You forgot the George Soro's and the Saudi factor, I suspect that the fact they were pumping 10 of millions of dollars into her campaign left a sour taste in many people's mouths, even yours...

a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

She lost the election when she sent the Paid Riot Squads to the Trump rallies.

You're such an insufferable drama queen lol. You've been blabbering about "paid riot squads" (strangely capitalized now? wtf?) for months despite the fact that these PRS (let's elevate it to acronym status, shall we?!) are more a figment of your imagination than reality.

You've got one guy on video saying he provided training to an elderly woman to "bird dog" Trump supporters in line. What does that mean exactly? It means that she was provided with some chants to trigger Trump supporters. What else do you have?

Oh that's right, the guy who was working for Brietbart, dressing up as a robot and "bird dogging" Marco Rubio on tape saying he coordinated with protest groups to shut down the Chicago rally? Let's assume that this guy wasn't lying for his buddies at Brietbart, where do the PRSes come in again?

Meanwhile, it's a well known fact that Alex Jones teamed up with Trump-lackey Roger Stone to pay people a bounty in the THOUSANDS of dollars to disrupt Clinton rallies and pro-Clinton speeches. Yet because it wasn't in some chopped up video from professional serial liar James O'Keefe — who won't release the raw footage lest he be caught ONCE AGAIN — you choose to dismiss it as a "contest."

Am I wrong?

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Activists participating in a contest are "shills" now?

I can prove that at the very least, dozens of protesters who disrupted Clinton events were doing so expecting to get paid as much as $5,000. You won't even go so far as to call somebody getting paid to protest a SHILL yet an unpaid elderly woman being taught some chants is a member of the "Paid Riot Squad." That's an appalling level of cognitive dissonance.

originally posted by: knoxie

originally posted by: ColaTesla
Dear lord, The election was last year, You embarrassed yourself to the whole of ATS and OP's like this wont help you save face.


You were wrong,Give it up....

sweetie, you're the embarrassment.

op, it's hysterical how much you trigger trumps chumps. it's because deep deep down they know everything you say is true. the mans a fool and it's laughable.

he knows A LOT about hacking LOLOLOL.

Oh look, another person with bad judgement that the American people had to save from themselves...

And to save any confusion, Which clearly you're prone to, I have not stated anywhere at anytime that "Trump Knows about hacking"

Or just in the off chance that i've taken leave of my senses and have stated that somewhere that only you know about, Could you copy and paste the quote where i have said that and put it in your reply.

Just trying to be accurate thats all......

Okay, this is a conspiracy site after all ... What if the reason Trump has been so cocky about his knowledge of specificities and seemed to have worn a shield of 'can't hurt me!' was because he was behind all of the hacking? Wouldn't it make more sense to look more at him, than at Russia? Crazy, I know...but we should explore all avenues...even if I voted him in...I will be hopeful and watchful. How smart is he? Or how clever were those he hired? Who are his insiders?
Edit add: So, the whole point fingers at Hillary and Co. now, is simply another political distraction piled on political distractions. Another question then is what is the central point of view that is being purposely being hidden by the establishment? What would be something they all agree that We the People should never contemplate nor understand?

originally posted by: CynConcepts
Okay, this is a conspiracy site after all ... What if the reason Trump has been so cocky about his knowledge of specificities and seemed to have worn a shield of 'can't hurt me!' was because he was behind all of the hacking? Wouldn't it make more sense to look more at him, than at Russia? Crazy, I know...but we should explore all avenues...even if I voted him in...I will be hopeful and watchful. How smart is he? Or how clever were those he hired? Who are his insiders?


If you took the work "hacking" and changed it to "leaked" Now theres a story i could buy....

a reply to: ColaTesla
You are right...hacked is the wrong word. Leaks have been happening...not hacks. Leaky pipes are the first sign that something needs to be fixed. Instead of ignoring the problem or just swabbing some patchy repair, it may be best to fix it permanently. Rusty pipes need to be replaced. It is a pain and no one wants to have to...but necessity calls. Question now is...is Trump going to be a simple patch or will he begin to really tackle the real problems?

a reply to: ColaTesla

I don't know what you're going on about. you said the op was an embarrassment I was simply stated that you were. the rest of my response was related to the original post, bless your heart.

Good thread dude
Just shows that TJW's are special special snowflakes.

originally posted by: ColaTesla
a reply to: theantediluvian

At this Point, What does it matter? The election has been and gone, We should just put all this behind us and deal with it, Wipe the slate clean, you know, like with a cloth or something...

So democrats and independents that didn't want should put this all behind us? Why cant we continue the long tradition of obstruction and denouncement of the president like the GOP?

originally posted by: knoxie
a reply to: ColaTesla

I don't know what you're going on about. you said the op was an embarrassment I was simply stated that you were. the rest of my response was related to the original post, bless your heart.

That confusion you suffer from must be a bitch....

a reply to: Pyle


That went WAY over your head dude

originally posted by: ColaTesla
a reply to: Pyle


That went WAY over your head dude

Not really I just ignored the overused joke about how Clinton made a comment about wiping clean a email server with a cloth when the interviewer actually meant with software designed to permanently delete information and not just wipe registry data. While also ignoring the "what does it matter at this point" joke, which is a GOP meme that doesnt mean what they think it means.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

The reason I called the poll data fake is because they simply did not reflect the noise of the internet I was seeing, reading & watching everyday since Trump announced he was running - reddit, FB, twitter, instagram, here, almost all outlets had lots of Trump support - lots. I read & watched it with my own eyes (just like you) inlieu of being spoon-fed what the propagandists want the citizens to know - the same propagandists that were hanging their hats on the polling data whilst ignoring the aforementioned internet noise saying otherwise.

The problem is that social media hype isn't necessarily a very good indicator. Even if the pollsters got it wrong in terms of their prediction for the election result, they actually weren't that far off in terms of the national polling.

Clinton ended up winning the popular vote by 2.1% (about 3 million). You can see from this page at RealClearPolitics what the polls were the last few days.

Monday, November 6th:

Bloomberg - Clinton +3
IBD/TIPP Tracking - Trump +2
CBS - Clinton +4
Fox - Clinton +4
Reuters - Clinton +3
ABC/WaPo - Clinton +4

These are discrepancies that are generally within the margins of error. If you want to get technical, the LEAST accurate poll above was the IBD/TIPP Tracking poll which indicated a popular vote win of 2% by Donald Trump?

The real trouble came in how forecasters took that polling data, plopped it into models and tried to predict an outcome. It's certainly an embarassment for these folks to have gotten it wrong but saying that they got it wrong on purpose is pure speculation on your part and given that the livelihoods of people like Nate Silver are largely based on their sucessful predictions, I find it hard to believe that they'd all be complicit in a grand conspiracy to get Hillary Clinton elected by what? Some sort of unproven voter suppression scheme that would be just as likely to swing the other way by scaring Trump voters into getting out the vote in greater numbers?

In fact, couldn't it be argued that the media was actually lulling the other team into a false confidence and therefore suppressing the vote by discounting a feeling of urgency?

It's strange to me that this dubious narrative is taken as matter-of-fact but way back in June, before the first email was released, it was established with forensic evidence made available to the public that the Russians were the likely culprits in the DNC hack by CrowdStrike at the time that the hack was first revealed to the public — and Trump supporters (and to a lesser degree, Trump himself) are dismissing the much more substantiated speculation about Russian hacking as a false narrative.

Anyway, I'm not trying to argue about why Trump won or Clinton lost. The election is over. Trump won. There's no evidence of tampering with the vote and it is impossible to prove what effect hacking, reporting on polls, Comey's letter, etc had on the outcome of the election.

What concerns me now is how Trump is going to lead. I'm concerned about his appointments, his policy, his statements, his tweeting, etc. I'm also concerned with what our new foreign policy will be, particularly in relation to Russia if the Trump administration is either a) loathe to deal objectively with them for fear of some perception of delegitimizing Trump or worse, b) a feeling of gratitude.

Suggesting that we should ignore Russia's actions is bad enough. Suggesting that we should ignore Russia's actions and instead consider some form of punishment for the loser for "influencing the election" based on subjective notions about how the media should behave and the fact that Donna Brazile sent a paraphrased question from a one of the debates to the DNC?

What the hell is that about?

Just an FYI while you're ranting about the media: Kushner: We struck deal with Sinclair for straighter coverage