Agree with posts #34 and #40.
The news outlets pushing the Russian conspiracy are left leaning and thus are to be taken with a grain of salt as far as I'm concerned. This silly notion (by WaPo) that no one is reporting it is seriously humorous. I see that as reverse psychology, since every left leaning news outlet is reporting it as if it is a sure thing right now. And pushing it as 'far bigger story than whatever corruption DOES exist in DNC.'
If some bad story (aka hit piece) gets released right now about Trump (i.e. he is a rapist) and people question the timing on the story, those making the allegation, it is ALL ABOUT don't shoot the messenger for the contents of the message. With Dem items that is rarely, if ever, the case. It is ALWAYS about shooting the messenger, discrediting them, and pointing to a (vast) conspiracy against Dems.
So, Dem supporters want to try and have it both ways. I fully expect them to continue, and I fully am in mode of not caring anymore about their pathetic strategizing over this.
I think most in the U.S. know that the U.S. has (covertly) influenced other nation's elections. Now, we know (at least some of us) that the U.S. has influenced its own elections, and is blatantly doing so in this one. As that finger points at U.S. personnel, they point to Russia as deflection. Even if it were Russia, so what???? Really, so what???? Whatever is worst case scenario around Russia 'influencing U.S. elections' would not match what U.S. has historically done, and is arguably doing right now.
As Bernie supporters don't take their rigged losing lightly, nor should they, I imagine those seeing Clinton stock falling are going to go away quietly. It really appears that if Hillary goes down, those die-hard supporters, who are on the inside are perfectly willing to take the whole political game down with them, even if that means WWIII.
Us Pub supporters are used to this, and is so last decade type shenanigans. As one who has previously been a proud non-voter, I recognize this is not really about the upcoming election. It's about maintaining support to a status quo that seeks to manipulate at every turn and literally doesn't genuinely concern itself with small time players (those who are donating less than $100K, or fully willing to volunteer their time, and soul, to the cause of maintaining THAT status quo).
It really doesn't matter who wins U.S. elections at this point, and if history is any guide, the supporters of whichever party does not have a person holding the executive branch, certainly does appear to hold more influence. Country was clearly in mode of being anti-Bush and anything he put forth while he was office; likewise with Obama in office, the country has pushed (very hard) on things Obama has been against since day 1. Rising gun sales, anyone? With these two particular candidates, sure there will be hallelujah moments in November that probably carries over until early 2017, after that, I imagine the 70% of the population that despises either of these two candidates will rise up and maintain a strong resistance to whatever 'status quo' the new party, and its propagandists want us to believe is how things will work going forward.
HRC's only saving grace right now is plausible deniability (as in she's not really connected with the DNC and their dealings). I really hope DNC leaks round 2 take that away from her. But when that happens, I'm sure Hillary supporters will blame someone for daring to conspire against her.
I think I've seen, in other areas of this forum, more evidence for a physically existing deity, than I have for what Hillary supporters are asking us to take as 'fact.'
