With the Russian/Trump Connections in the Media (again)...

[Quetzal]

(Like my alliteration?)

What did you call me?!

I say Russian influence over Trump is pure partisan paranoia.

I guess we will see.

 

[Revoltingest]

What did you call me?!

Bubala

I guess we will see.

Those who want to see conspiracy will continue to see 'evidence'.
Show me a smoking gun, & I'll admit the conspiracy.....& send Putin a thank you note.

 

[Underhill]

I sure do!

It's fine for them to believe in the likelihood of the Evil Ivan conspiracy.
But we've been mislead by agencies before, so I'm skeptical.
Still....where's the harm?
Sure, sure...in general we don't want ferriners influencing our elections.
But when such influence is to expose corruption, I don't get offended.

If it were to expose corruption, sure. But who is to say it isn't to create corruption?

How hard would it be for them to do the same thing to any candidate they don't like, using real or staged documents?

And I still say the stuff they released is no worse than the skeletons in any campaigns closets. This kind of one sided release of damaging, "making the sausage" kind of crap is the last thing we need.

 

[Revoltingest]

If it were to expose corruption, sure. But who is to say it isn't to create corruption?

Exposing secretive unethical activity by the DNC would be the opposite of corruption.

k
How hard would it be for them to do the same thing to any candidate they don't like, using real or staged documents?

To hypothesize phony documents doesn't address what happened.
So far, the documents released have not had their authenticity challenged.

And I still say the stuff they released is no worse than the skeletons in any campaigns closets. This kind of one sided release of damaging, "making the sausage" kind of crap is the last thing we need.

If the released docs weren't so bad, then tis a puzzlement why the Dems complain so bitterly about them.
I think they do realize that the leaks likely caused Hillary's loss.
And now they're making political hay from their outrage.

 

[Underhill]

Exposing secretive unethical activity by the DNC would be the opposite of corruption.

To hypothesize phony documents doesn't address what happened.
So far, the documents released have not had their authenticity challenged.

If the released docs weren't so bad, then tis a puzzlement why the Dems complain so bitterly about them.
I think they do realize that the leaks likely caused Hillary's loss.
And now they're making political hay from their outrage.

Kinda like how Trump is pissed about the leaks about his cabinet nominees?

The difference being the leaks about his cabinet people are from Americans concerned for the well being of America...

We can be fairly sure the Russians aren't looking out for our interest. Motives matter.

And obviously the leaks were bad, but again, there was nothing there that was all that ground breaking. It was bad mainly due to the timing, which was obviously the point.

 

[Revoltingest]

Kinda like how Trump is pissed about the leaks about his cabinet nominees?

Ironic, eh?

The difference being the leaks about his cabinet people are from Americans concerned for the well being of America...

As with all whistleblowing, the blower must judge whether the greater good is served by the risk & illegality.
Some, like Snowden, serve open government rather than partisan politics.
I don't know the motives of Trump's tormenters.

We can be fairly sure the Russians aren't looking out for our interest. Motives matter.

Sometimes we have a common interest.
If they pursue that, then I'm OK with it.

And obviously the leaks were bad, but again, there was nothing there that was all that ground breaking. It was bad mainly due to the timing, which was obviously the point.

Who ever caused the leaks, I thank them.
Politicians should all fear the airing of their dirty laundry.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

A theory.....
For Democrats, the Russians are a useful boogeyman.
If they can be both demonized & connected to Trump, then it's worth increasing the risk of violent conflict.
Politics is often not about what's best for the country, but rather what's best for the party.

Interesting theory but in the case of Trump and his administration there's enough information coming out suggesting they were in constant contact with Russia before and during the election. The other thing I've noticed is it's not the democrats that have been stoking the fire of conflict around the world. Many of the surrogates of Trump have been talking to various leaders as well as at the UN seemingly talking tough and giving ultimatums.

So they're currently saying that something nefarious is there, because something nefarious might be there.
But have they thought this thru?
Let's say their dream comes true, ie, Trump is impeached, convicted, & driven from office.
Pence would become Prez.
Would he be weakened by such events?
No....his more conventional Republican status could mean even greater cooperation with his party's control of Congress.
Is that better for progressives & everyone else than Trump?

More people should play go.
One learns that an attack requires great care & planning, lest a battle won cause an overall loss.

Darned if you do or don't really. Pence might be a little more level headed than Trump but you're right...He would certainly push much of the agenda along. Trump will push it along as well. As Grover Norquist said...

"All we have to do is replace Obama. ... We are not auditioning for fearless leader. We don't need a president to tell us in what direction to go. We know what direction to go. We want the Ryan budget. ... We just need a president to sign this stuff. We don't need someone to think it up or design it. The leadership now for the modern conservative movement for the next 20 years will be coming out of the House and the Senate.

Pick a Republican with enough working digits to handle a pen to become president of the United States. This is a change for Republicans: the House and Senate doing the work with the president signing bills. His job is to be captain of the team, to sign the legislation that has already been prepared." - Grover Norquist

 

[Dirty Penguin]

The real question is what kind of evidence would it take to be enough for supporters of Trump to begin to consider the possibility that it is true? My fear is that any evidence would not be enough regardless of its strength or source.

But what do you do when they get their info from skimpy sources....in part do to Trump blasting other news outlets as "fake news"...?

How do you even reach these people? It makes me think of those those seemingly frothing at the mouth for the repeal of "Obamacare" but surprised to find out the it's the same thing as the ACA....