But they keep finding witches...
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 21373
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm
Re: But they keep finding witches...
Another thing that baffles me is a Trumpy telling us it was OK for Russia to meddle in our elections because we meddle in the elections of others. What are we doing here, an ethics course? Who exactly are these Trump people rooting for here, Russia? Like Russia is a victim and we should coddle Putin the way Trump is?
Remember that it was Trump who responded to concerns about Russian meddling in this way. “Well, we do it!”
Well, duh, you moron! But you are the damned president of this country, not Russia.
How can anyone like this be taken seriously? Why would anyone want to defend this garbage?
But then I remember the pretzel logic of many LDS conservatives, paleo-conservatives, tax protesters, Sage Brush rebels, and the like. They love their country until it is inconvenient or expensive. These people flirt with conspiracies all the time. It is, in fact, baked into Mormon culture. The worst elements of American populism go well with fringe LDS political culture. We should not be surprised by the fervent Trump support of a large percentage of the LDS community. Once you accept that Joseph Smith breaking the law was OK because Joseph claimed God told him something about marrying dozens of women, or whatnot, patriotism can basically mean whatever works for you in the moment. That a movement with a scofflaw prophet would support a scofflaw president? What’s your hang up, man?
Remember that it was Trump who responded to concerns about Russian meddling in this way. “Well, we do it!”
Well, duh, you moron! But you are the damned president of this country, not Russia.
How can anyone like this be taken seriously? Why would anyone want to defend this garbage?
But then I remember the pretzel logic of many LDS conservatives, paleo-conservatives, tax protesters, Sage Brush rebels, and the like. They love their country until it is inconvenient or expensive. These people flirt with conspiracies all the time. It is, in fact, baked into Mormon culture. The worst elements of American populism go well with fringe LDS political culture. We should not be surprised by the fervent Trump support of a large percentage of the LDS community. Once you accept that Joseph Smith breaking the law was OK because Joseph claimed God told him something about marrying dozens of women, or whatnot, patriotism can basically mean whatever works for you in the moment. That a movement with a scofflaw prophet would support a scofflaw president? What’s your hang up, man?
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 21373
- Joined: Sat Dec 13, 2008 10:00 pm
Re: But they keep finding witches...
EAllusion wrote:The indictment among other things? Russians tried and failed in their hacking operation against this, but not the DNC, RNC, various state voter databases, and major and minor campaign figures.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJh6EQ5gv7g
Well, whom are we going to believe? American intelligence services and the FBI, or what Mr. Trump University claimed that Putin said?
The latter! Them’s the facts!
"Petition wasn’t meant to start a witch hunt as I’ve said 6000 times." ~ Hanna Seariac, LDS apologist
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 11104
- Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:17 am
Re: But they keep finding witches...
Water Dog, the indictments name the GRU, which you know about, as the ones behind the Guccifer 2.0 hacker persona. There is no doubt that Guccifer 2.0 was the party who both hacked the DNC and provided the emails to Wikileaks. The indictements spell out events involved with the scheduled timing of leaks as a stategic drip of information meant to maintain the narrative in the media that Clinton was untrustworthy.Water Dog wrote:We don't know Russians are responsible for email leaks any more than we know they didn't hack her bathroom server full of classified docs.
Know is a strong word. But it is incredibly probable. It would be difficult to imagine a person functioning who did not use information at that level of probability to make decisions.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa
~ Eiji Yoshikawa
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 7:10 am
Re: But they keep finding witches...
EAllusion wrote:The indictment among other things?
An indictment isn't proof. If that really needs to be explained, here ya go...
Alan Dershowitz wrote:...we’ll never find out the extent of the guilt of these people because of course they’re never gonna go on trial. They’re indicted but they’ll never go on trial. You think the Russians are going to extradite them? You think they’re going to travel to the United States, go to Disneyland to get arrested? Of course that’s not gonna happen, so it will be the end of the process, and indictments are just one-sided allegations, they’re not proof.
https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/07/1 ... nnecessary
EAllusion wrote:Russians tried and failed in their hacking operation against this, but not the DNC, RNC, various state voter databases, and major and minor campaign figures.
Allegedly. But no proof of that, either.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 11104
- Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2010 5:17 am
Re: But they keep finding witches...
Water Dog wrote:EAllusion wrote:The indictment among other things?
An indictment isn't proof. If that really needs to be explained, here ya go...Alan Dershowitz wrote:...we’ll never find out the extent of the guilt of these people because of course they’re never gonna go on trial. They’re indicted but they’ll never go on trial. You think the Russians are going to extradite them? You think they’re going to travel to the United States, go to Disneyland to get arrested? Of course that’s not gonna happen, so it will be the end of the process, and indictments are just one-sided allegations, they’re not proof.
https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/07/1 ... nnecessary
You do realize you used one piece of questionable evidence (an interview with Alan Deschowitz who has no reasonable claim to inside access to the investigations) to tell EA his evidence isn't "proof".
You chose to rely on a claim as one piece of weaker evidence to dismiss a piece of stronger evidence originating out of a lengthy professional legal investigation.
That's daft, Water Dog.
The world is always full of the sound of waves..but who knows the heart of the sea, a hundred feet down? Who knows it's depth?
~ Eiji Yoshikawa
~ Eiji Yoshikawa
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 18519
- Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 12:39 pm
Re: But they keep finding witches...
The indictment contains a fair amount of evidence that you're able to read Waterdog. It's not a matter of saying they are indicted and therefore guilty, but rather that the evidence is crystal clear.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 13037
- Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 6:44 pm
Re: But they keep finding witches...
Water Dog wrote:An indictment isn't proof. If that really needs to be explained, here ya go...
Obviously you need a lesson on proof and evidence. They're no synonymous, or didn't ya know?
To sit there in July 2018 and insist there is no evidence of collusion makes you incredible daft. Now go back to getting your denial prescriptions from the Blaze, of all places... You know, that propaganda outfit run by the guy who was far too radical for even FOX News.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 7:10 am
Re: But they keep finding witches...
Kishkumen wrote:Well, whom are we going to believe? American intelligence services and the FBI, or what Mr. Trump University claimed that Putin said?
I don't know how you pack so much silly into such a small statement. What Trump claims Putin said? What is that a reference to? Credibility of American intelligence... where are the WMDs in Iraq? You say things like this so breathlessly as if they have this obviously impeccable record that is beyond reproach. You don't understand how these intelligence agencies work. Moreover, how is this representative of the situation? You frame this as though my only options are to believe Trump or FBI. How about, neither? I prefer to objectively look at the evidence and base my conclusions on that. Thus far, zero evidence. No evidence of Russians. No evidence of collusion. Actually, in the case of collusion, not even accusations of collusion.
I realize you're a history guy, so perhaps this is just outside your wheelhouse. I have advanced degrees in subject matters related to this. As a professional I do similar work for DOD and other agencies within our government. I have been tasked with breaking into computer and control systems, preventing the same, doing risk assessments, etc. As I have repeatedly said, I am not arguing that Russians were not responsible for the email leaks, any of them, or all of them. I am arguing that there is no way to know this for certain.
Arguably the most substantial leak was John Podesta. Who was using a gmail account. He was not "hacked." Google servers were not breached. Someone sent him an email, dressed up to look like an official email from Google, and he clicked on it and typed his password into it like a dumbass. This is called phishing... because it's like "fishing" for the idiot that will bite the hook. Podesta was such an idiot, even after his IT department told him it was an obvious scam that should be ignored. How can you blame this on Russians? It could have been me, you, or anyone. The sixty million people who voted for Trump, any one of them presumably had motive. What have they got, an IP address? They have some metadata from the original phishing email. It fits a certain pattern that some Russian scammers are known to use.
None of this would stand up in court. It's not possible to establish guilt from the evidence that's available. Maybe it was Russians. Maybe it was someone else. Maybe it was someone who wanted to appear Russian. Maybe it was a Russian citizen unaffiliated with the Russian govt in any way. Sky is the limit.
What really stands out is the lack of sophistication. The narrative you guys are running with today is the coincidental timing. Trump makes a public statement about gaining access to emails, poof, emails appear. As if behind the scenes there was this sophisticated Russian cyber apparatus that went into motion and nabbed the emails... just like that... upon request. That isn't how this works.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 7:10 am
Re: But they keep finding witches...
EAllusion wrote:The indictment contains a fair amount of evidence that you're able to read Waterdog. It's not a matter of saying they are indicted and therefore guilty, but rather that the evidence is crystal clear.
I read most of the indictment and didn't see any evidence. It presents a narrative, but not any evidence or source material from which it was derived.
-
- _Emeritus
- Posts: 1798
- Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2013 7:10 am
Re: But they keep finding witches...
honorentheos wrote:You do realize you used one piece of questionable evidence (an interview with Alan Deschowitz who has no reasonable claim to inside access to the investigations) to tell EA his evidence isn't "proof".
You chose to rely on a claim as one piece of weaker evidence to dismiss a piece of stronger evidence originating out of a lengthy professional legal investigation.
That's daft, Water Dog.
Huh? I didn't present any "evidence" related to the allegations at all. I cited a renowned legal scholar who explained what an indictment is.... and is not. You're arguing that this indictment magically alters the definition of an indictment? Innocent until proven guilty in all other cases but this one. This is a special indictment, different from all other indictments, which comes bundled with proof of guilt. ROFL.