[NEWS] CIA concludes with "high confidence" that Russia aided Annoying Orange in election

[Bloody Mary]

no one was concerned about us destroying the middle east

no one was concerned about us installing military outposts in almost every single country in the world

no one was concerned about the superpower of America going to war with multiple countries over the past 100 years for resources and financial gain.

to all of a sudden say "we should be concerned about foreign governments meddling with elections" is really funny because that's all our country has been doing these past 100 years.

I think people are plenty concerned about those things. There's been a growing anti-war sentiment in this country for almost 100 years. And even for those who aren't concerned, I don't think they'd remain unconcerned when such things are happening to them or their country. Using your logic, we shouldn't be concerned if Russia starts installing military bases here either.

[Ad Bot]

[Perry]

if your basis of morality is the law, you're going to have a bad time. Slavery was legal at one point, but it didn't make it any less despicable. Conversely, marijuana is illegal but doesn't really hurt anybody. The laws aren't really great from the perspective of ethics.

For forgets sake, assassinating the president wasn't even a crime until after Lincoln's killing.

Morality and the law are two different things and should be treated as such.

the laws we have in place for the election are not unjust. It is not unjust to have a fair election that has no influence from outside countries. Inside, both parties have some level of responsibility for influencing the election, i.e. Gerrymandering or the dnc screwing over Bernie. Either way, the election is for the president of the United States, and should be supported by Americans who use their citizenship to vote, not a clique of international data thiefs.

Laws regarding the election cannot be compared to laws about slavery or drugs. A safe and fair election system is not comparable to human rights violations. The purpose of my quote was to show that it is purely hypocritical to justify illegal methods to take care of illegal methods. Using crime to fight crime is not justice but hypocrisy.

[Cappytaino]

It's also unjust to take $44 million dollars from Saudi donors in exchange for political favors

It's unjust to not once, not twice, but three times, lose track of evidence subpoenaed by the FBI, from smartphones to laptops, tablets and emails.

It's unjust to sell 30% of American uranium to foreign mining agencies.

It's unjust to rig the primary.

It's unjust to call a quarter of the American electorate "Deplorable" and "Irredeemable" not once, but twice, on national television.

So what's more unjust? To do all of these things, or to simply reveal that someone else is doing them?

Hillary's behavior is absolutely unethical and disgusting. She leaves a trail of slime behind her like a snail.

[Decepticon]

let's say russia actually did do this

so we'll start off with this, russia had documents which proved that one candidate was corrupt. that same candidate happens to be very hostile with russia, while another candidate wants to restore relations with them. russia releases these documents.

sorry, i'm not seeing the problem?

if russia tampered with voting machines or released forged documents (hey wasn't that something the CIA did at one point?) in order to hurt hillary, it would be an actual loving problem, but these documents were real

you're really funny lol

yeah i admit i was sucking FBI richard there but it's still something to take notice of when they don't even want to bother with this, nor does it really invalidate my point about the CIA's past

[Bloody Mary]

It's unjust to call a quarter of the American electorate "Deplorable" and "Irredeemable" not once, but twice, on national television.

Unjust? I think this one is a bit of a stretch. It's certainly rude and probably not the demeanor a presidential hopeful should have, but I'd hardly call it unjust. I'll have to look up the other things you mentioned later.

[New Year]

no one was concerned about us destroying the middle east

no one was concerned about us installing military outposts in almost every single country in the world

no one was concerned about the superpower of America going to war with multiple countries over the past 100 years for resources and financial gain.

to all of a sudden say "we should be concerned about foreign governments meddling with elections" is really funny because that's all our country has been doing these past 100 years.

oh funny that comes up, it's not like the United States is doing the exact same thing to Russia to combat the truth WikiLeaks have been putting out so it seems like it's a political agenda being pushed by a foreign nation rather than our insanely forgeted up and corrupt government being exposed.

What part of "it's okay when we do it" do you not understand? Of course we want our own country to grab power and to resist having its own power grabbed in return.

[Cappytaino]

Unjust? I think this one is a bit of a stretch. It's certainly rude and probably not the demeanor a presidential hopeful should have, but I'd hardly call it unjust. I'll have to look up the other things you mentioned later.

also look up Travelgate, Uranium One, the Cattle Futures scandal, the Wall Street speeches, etc.

At the very least, insulting such a large portion of the electorate for no reason other than not supporting her is a ham fisted attempt to rally support for herself that backfired miserably.

[Perry]

It's also unjust to take $44 million dollars from Saudi donors in exchange for political favors

It's unjust to not once, not twice, but three times, lose track of evidence subpoenaed by the FBI, from smartphones to laptops, tablets and emails.

It's unjust to sell 30% of American uranium to foreign mining agencies.

It's unjust to rig the primary.

It's unjust to call a quarter of the American electorate "Deplorable" and "Irredeemable" not once, but twice, on national television.

So what's more unjust? To do all of these things, or to simply reveal that someone else is doing them?

Hillary's behavior is absolutely unethical and disgusting. She leaves a trail of slime behind her like a snail.

All i know out of these things is that Hillary wasn't the one who rigged the primary, but actually the DNC who was involved and made all the calls to do it. Either way justifying an invasion of privacy in order to gain crucial information is just as slimey as what hillary's doing. This whole mentality of "it was okay because she's a criminal!" is pure bullstuff. Whoever was responsible for leaking the information is also a criminal now.

The election has been decided and whether its been influenced or not is out of the question. I personally don't think its worthwhile to mill over who did what and what happened. Whether russia was responsible for Annoying Orange's winning is not worth pursuing anymore.

At the very least, insulting such a large portion of the electorate for no reason other than not supporting her is a ham fisted attempt to rally support for herself that backfired miserably.

Though i'm a known shill, I wholeheartedly agree that her calling people a basket of deplorables was crossing a line and generalizing a group of people. There are plenty of Annoying Orange supporters like you and some of my friends who are perfectly educated and rational voters that don't even come close to being deplorable.

[Decepticon]

Globalism, the thing that is making the U.S. incredibly rich, is bad because...?

because globalism takes away the people's ability to represent themselves

let's go with, say, a fascist democracy. you can still represent your own interests. your civil liberties might very well be severely restricted, which is terrible, but you can work the proper channels and have yourself represented

under a globalist rule, foreign people have the ability to just sorta walk in and decide your laws and choose your policies as you are nearly or completely reliant on foreign nations to keep your country afloat and running

no matter what you do, you cannot and will not ever have any sort of real representation unless you align your interests with those of the foreign nationals that control your nation

the only real step after having your country taken over by foreign powers is a declaration of independence which is usually followed by a civil war, which leads us to the mess of unrest that we're seeing today

[Cappytaino]

All i know out of these things is that Hillary wasn't the one who rigged the primary, but actually the DNC who was involved and made all the calls to do it. Either way justifying an invasion of privacy in order to gain crucial information is just as slimey as what hillary's doing. This whole mentality of "it was okay because she's a criminal!" is pure bullstuff. Whoever was responsible for leaking the information is also a criminal now.

The election has been decided and whether its been influenced or not is out of the question. I personally don't think its worthwhile to mill over who did what and what happened. Whether russia was responsible for Annoying Orange's winning is not worth pursuing anymore.
Though i'm a known shill, I wholeheartedly agree that her calling people a basket of deplorables was crossing a line and generalizing a group of people. There are plenty of Annoying Orange supporters like you and some of my friends who are perfectly educated and rational voters that don't even come close to being deplorable.

I'm going to have to agree that Hillary didn't directly rig the primary, but she had knowledge of what the DNC and Debbie Wasserman-Schultz were doing, and after DWS was forced to resign over the rigging scandal, Hillary immediately gave her a job on the campaign.

I'd say she's partly at fault, but certainly there were more forces than just Hillary at play.

[Magus]

because globalism takes away the people's ability to represent themselves

let's go with, say, a fascist democracy. you can still represent your own interests. your civil liberties might very well be severely restricted, which is terrible, but you can work the proper channels and have yourself represented

under a globalist rule, foreign people have the ability to just sorta walk in and decide your laws and choose your policies as you are nearly or completely reliant on foreign nations to keep your country afloat and running

no matter what you do, you cannot and will not ever have any sort of real representation unless you align your interests with those of the foreign nationals that control your nation

the only real step after having your country taken over by foreign powers is a declaration of independence which is usually followed by a civil war, which leads us to the mess of unrest that we're seeing today

I don't think that's what that word means...
Not helping matters is that different sites give different definitions.

[Nixton 2.0]

Clinton Intelligence Agency

[Perry]

because globalism takes away the people's ability to represent themselves

We all share one earth. Globalism is literally nations coming together and making agreements that benefit each other. All sentient life can literally be summarized as a mass of different smaller organisms coming together and working together to form a better solution. We have cells in our body that work together to form us as humans, and us as humans work together to make a community, and communities work together to make a country. Why not have countries work together to make a planet? Is there a real issue with having people of different mindsets put their views together and come to a general solution that benefits mankind?

This is pretty much a theory, and I understand that there's a lot of adhering to foreign policy and other things, but said foreign policies are in place for a reason. Most of these 'international laws' that cause people to not be represented are laws that concern involvement in conflicts or starting of conflicts. It's good to have these in place so we don't have another holocaust or genocide.

[beachbum111111]

http://www.themideastbeast.com/syrians-outraged-russias-meddling-us-elections/

[LeisureSuit912]

Stop putting politics ahead of a fair election process. No one here is defending Hillary, her campaign or the DNC. Trying to establish some false equivalency between the DNC and the Russian government is ludicrous and distracts from the fact that foreign nationals are tampering with our election. Isn't that something we should be concerned about? Especially if you believe big-bad globalism is hanging over our heads?

Anyone who tries to deflect to Hillary is being willfully ignorant of the bigger problems. The majority of the Republicans in Congress are turning a blind eye to this CIA assessment because they won and Annoying Orange and his transition team are trying to distract the conversation away from their corruption. America is getting thoroughly cucked by Russia and no one wants to do anything about it because "our guy won". If you believe globalism cripples the voice of the people, you should not stand for this regardless of who your opponent was.