• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Trump 'hopes' Russia will hack US government for Hillary emails.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fox_Mulder said:
Screen-Shot-2015-12-17-at-10.43.22-AM.png
Click to expand...

And there you have it.
 
Bam Bam Baklava said:
It's this kind of talk that makes discourse slip further and further into the cesspool. Every time he pushes the barrier for acceptable behavior in politics we just say "there's bigger things to focus on" and keep going further.
Click to expand...

Is Trump going to be defeated by holding him a standard of decorum? I feel like that battle was lost long ago. It creates chatter that riles up his base and doesn't do much else. Demagogues never apologize. I don't feel like anything he does or says is befitting of a presidential candidate, but he has to be beaten on issues where he's truly weak, corrupt, or criminal.
 
studyguy said:
It's difficult to say this is small potatoes when basically any Republican worth his salt is running for the hills from this kind of rhetoric. Pence and Ryan both put out comments IMMEDIATELY rebuffing the idea that Russian involvement should somehow be okay, rather one called Putin a thug and the other called for serious consequences for Russian hacks if found true.

Come on fam.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the numerous tweets by his campaign trying to clarify.
 
Watching the clip of Trump look into the camera and address Russia felt like a fantasy, alt universe TV show to me. How long can republican leaders fake their support of Trump? Because fake it 'till you make it isn't working out well for them.
 
Putin must be estatic. Trump is the perfect tool to take America apart, and he doesn't need to get anywhere near a conventional weapon to do it.
 
CrisKre said:
No. This may be the future president of the United States. This is not "one person". He could have excecutive decision power within the next 6 months.
Click to expand...

I don't see how that means what Trump said today constitutes speech that is likely to incite or produce imminent lawless action from Russia. What does executive decision power have to do with anything?
 
Deku Tree said:
So WikiLeaks is now an ally of the Russian Government and Pro-Trump and working to stop Hillary from being elected?
Click to expand...

Assange has made it explicit that the DNC leaks are specifically about hurting Hillary in the political race. There's no attempt to ensure the leaks are about exposing corruption or about being transparent; this is a purely political move.
 
TS-08 said:
I don't see how that means what Drumpf said today constitutes speech that is likely to incite or produce imminent lawless action from Russia. What does executive decision power have to do with anything?
Click to expand...

If they think than mere months from now this man may be in charge, they may be less affraid of repercussions.
 
TS-08 said:
I don't see how that means what Trump said today constitutes speech that is likely to incite or produce imminent lawless action from Russia. What does executive decision power have to do with anything?
Click to expand...

He just used a public platform to speak of how he is rooting for Russia to get and release Hillary's emails.

Notice how his campaign team is claiming he meant "give to the FBI". They are doing that because simply releasing those emails would be blatantly endangering the Clintons and possibly others whereas handing stuff over to the FBI would be in compliance with US Laws.
 
The Clinton campaign is smart to try to tie Trump in with Russia. While her ties to Russia run deep. When more of her corruption (Russian, or more) leak in the coming months, some will be skeptical because they're tired of hearing "Russia" in any context.
 
EatinOlives said:
Assange has made it explicit that the DNC leaks are specifically about hurting Hillary in the political race. There's no attempt to ensure the leaks are about exposing corruption or about being transparent; this is a purely political move.
Click to expand...
Fun fact: Julian Assange had a TV show on Russia Today.
 
Lorcain said:
Watching the clip of Trump look into the camera and address Russia felt like a fantasy, alt universe TV show to me. How long can republican leaders fake their support of Trump? Because fake it 'till you make it isn't working out well for them.
Click to expand...

At some point, love of country has to trump love of the Republican party. I thought we would have crossed that point several times by now, but here we are. The amoral, non-religious, foul-mouthed adulterer who's openly conspiring with Russia to sway the election is still going strong.
 
DudeWithNoName said:
The Clinton campaign is smart to try to tie Trump in with Russia. While her ties to Russia run deep. When more of her corruption (Russian, or more) leak in the coming months, some will be skeptical because they're tired of hearing "Russia" in any context.
Click to expand...

Tell me about this supposed corruption regarding Russia and how Clinton's campaign is somehow mind controlling Trump to endorse Putin as much as he possibly can?
 
DudeWithNoName said:
The Clinton campaign is smart to try to tie Drumpf in with Russia. While her ties to Russia run deep. When more of her corruption (Russian, or more) leak in the coming months, some will be skeptical because they're tired of hearing "Russia" in any context.
Click to expand...

"Try and tie Trump to Russia"? he is explicitly doing that hemself with the remarks he has been spouting over the last few weeks.
 
MikeDown said:
I think the reason he said this is because wants to keep the media attention on him and hillarys emails instead of DNC
Click to expand...

Undoubtedly, it is part of the reason. But it's in vain. Obama is speaking today, and nothing is going to overshadow. Some people seem to think this will, but he's one of the most beloved Presidents of our time for one side, while being one of the most controversial and polarizing to the other side. He will have everyone's attention one way or another.
 
DudeWithNoName said:
The Clinton campaign is smart to try to tie Trump in with Russia. While her ties to Russia run deep. When more of her corruption (Russian, or more) leak in the coming months, some will be skeptical because they're tired of hearing "Russia" in any context.
Click to expand...
All those tales from your ass. Clinton is notoriously hated by the Russian state.
 
BFIB said:
Nah, it seems Trump supporters are now lovers of Russia.
Click to expand...

You're not lying there. A Trump supporter at my job loves Putin and says he would be better than Obama.

Same guy called me a communist when he learned I voted for Bernie in the NY primary.

I wish I was making this up...
 
Another point, wouldn't these emails would be subject to FOIA, and so technically we have the right to see them?
 
Guileless said:
I think we should all listen to The Nation and lay off the Trump-Russia neo-McCarthyism.
Click to expand...

I strongly disagree with throwing out the term "neo-McCarthyism" to silence debate on this extremely important issue. We are not talking about simply looking for skeletons in the closet to try and link something in Trump's past to some ties to Russia.

We are talking about a dangerously inexperienced and irrational, racist, neo-fascist, sexist, right wing Presidential candidate who has now publicly asked for his political opponents private communications to be stolen and released. He is essentially inviting the security services of another state to engage in criminal activity and intervene in a Presidential election to help him win. And he is doing it in front of the TV cameras. Can you even imagine the shit he would try to pull behind closed doors?

This absolutely needs to be called out. Trump is giving us a glimpse of how dangerous he would be in office and every voter needs to be aware of this.

This is not an ordinary election. Trump is a threat to America and the security of the world.
 
CrisKre said:
If they think than mere months from now this man may be in charge, they may be less affraid of repercussions.
Click to expand...

But he may not win, and the election, and the potential swearing in, is months away. It's very hard to argue imminence at this point. If he said it as president, you may have a stronger case. The intent of his comments would also be a defense. I can see your point about not fearing repercussions if he said it while in office.
 
DudeWithNoName said:
The Clinton campaign is smart to try to tie Trump in with Russia. While her ties to Russia run deep. When more of her corruption (Russian, or more) leak in the coming months, some will be skeptical because they're tired of hearing "Russia" in any context.
Click to expand...
Gonna need to see some receipts for this. Anything to back that up?

For all this Clinton corruption that some have been screaming about time and time again, there has been little actually there.
 
TS-08 said:
But he may not win, and the election, and the potential swearing in, is months away. It's very hard to argue imminence at this point. If he said it as president, you may have a stronger case. The intent of his comments would also be a defense. I can see your point about not fearing repercussions if he said it while in office.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously trying to say that one of the US candidates saying this shit is no bid deal? You think every major news media is just writing about this, you think the entire Republican party is trying to A-spin or B- denounce this why?

If your whole point is that it won´t elicit inminent release of the emails, who the fuck knows? But he LITERALLY encouraged Russia to do so, so I fail to see your point.
 
maquiladora said:
I strongly disagree with throwing out the term "neo-McCarthyism" to silence debate on this extremely important issue. We are not talking about simply looking for skeletons in the closet to try and link something in Trump's past to some ties to Russia.

We are talking about a dangerously inexperienced and irrational, racist, neo-fascist, sexist, right wing Presidential candidate who has now publicly asked for his political opponents private communications to be stolen and released. He is essentially inviting the security services of another state to engage in criminal activity and intervene in a Presidential election to help him win. And he is doing it in front of the TV cameras. Can you even imagine the shit he would try to pull behind closed doors?

This absolutely needs to be called out. Trump is giving us a glimpse of how dangerous he would be in office and every voter needs to be aware of this.

This is not an ordinary election. Trump is a threat to America and the security of the world.
Click to expand...
I really don't disagree with any of this?

Am I a partisan?

Or is Trump really this scary?

Or am I just high?
 
DudeWithNoName said:
The Clinton campaign is smart to try to tie Trump in with Russia. While her ties to Russia run deep. When more of her corruption (Russian, or more) leak in the coming months, some will be skeptical because they're tired of hearing "Russia" in any context.
Click to expand...

Time for some evidence.

Ah, I remember, it's Uranium One I believe? There's no proof. It's a multi-billion dollar foundation with public finances.
 
ClosingADoor said:
Gonna need to see some receipts for this. Anything to back that up?

For all this Clinton corruption that some have been screaming about time and time again, there has been little actually there.
Click to expand...

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.
Click to expand...
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/u...s-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html
 
There will be a point in this campaign that a journalist or a competitor will lose his or her cool and scream at him: "You're a moron! That's the stupidest thing you have ever said and that's saying a lot considering all that you said in the last months of this campaign! Stop it."
 
The Russia thing is probably this. Posted from another thread

The Lamp said:
I don't intend to thwart the direction of conversation here, but I shared this amongst my friends because it is pretty damning. For me, it cemented even further that I have to vote for Hillary versus Trump.

But then my friends who dislike Hillary shared this exceptional piece, and now I'm not convinced this Russia flirting is uncommon for these politicians in general.

http://nyti.ms/1DkztP8
Click to expand...

First, the State Department did approve of Russia’s gradual takeover of a company with significant U.S. uranium assets, but it didn’t act unilaterally. State was one of nine government agencies, not to mention independent federal and state nuclear regulators, that had to sign off on the deal.

Second, while nine people related to the company did donate to the Clinton Foundation, it’s unclear whether they were still involved in the company by the time of the Russian deal and stood to benefit from it.

Third, most of their Clinton Foundation donations occurred before and during Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential bid, before she could have known she would become secretary of state.

The bottom line: While the connections between the Clinton Foundation and the Russian deal may appear fishy, there’s simply no proof of any quid pro quo.
Click to expand...

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-trump-inaccurately-suggests-clinton-got-pai/

So yea, while it might seem a bit shady (and maybe it actually is), considering the fact that it was well before the sale, that she wasn't even Secretary of State at the time and had no idea that she would be, that multiple agencies, including independent ones have to approve it as well seems unlikely that this was bribe money. Getting her to agree certainly doesn't get all the other people to agree.

Moreover, we can see from Putin's propaganda television channels and his hack of the DNC that he is actively trying to hurt her campaign and favors Trump by a wide margin. If she could be influenced at a remotely similar level to trump then this really wouldnt be necessary. It is pretty obvious that Putin thinks that a Clinton presidency would be bad for Russian and Putin's interests.
Click to expand...
 
CrisKre said:
Are you seriously trying to say that one of the US candidates saying this shit is no bid deal? You think every major news media is just writing about this, you think the entire Republican party is trying to A-spin or B- denounce this why?

If your whole point is that it won´t elicit inminent release of the emails, who the fuck knows? But he LITERALLY encouraged Russia to do so, so I fail to see your point.
Click to expand...

The speech being likely to cause imminent lawless action is required for the incitement exception to the First Amendment to apply. I was responding to someone curious about charging Trump based on incitement. I never said that Trump's comments weren't a big deal. If you are going to reply to me, participate in the conversation I'm having, not the one you want to have.
 
BriGuy said:
At some point, love of country has to trump love of the Republican party. I thought we would have crossed that point several times by now, but here we are. The amoral, non-religious, foul-mouthed adulterer who's openly conspiring with Russia to sway the election is still going strong.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it will. Republicans, as their convention overwhelmingly confirmed, simply do not like America as it currently exists. Given the state of their party and electorate, it shouldn't be surprising that they are sympathetic to any white authoritarian, regardless of his nation-state.
 
TS-08 said:
The speech being likely to cause imminent lawless action is required for the incitement exception to the First Amendment to apply. I was responding to someone curious about charging Trump based on incitement. I never said that Trump's comments weren't a big deal. If you are going to reply to me, participate in the conversation I'm having, not the one you want to have.
Click to expand...

I misjudged your response. Sorry. That said his statement seems like the definition of incitement to me. It's quite frankly revolting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
Trump X 6ix9ne
5
238
Coconutt replied
Xzbit goes to Russia
26
1K
Dirk Benedict replied
Meta'a Director for AI Safety gave OpenClaw AI access to her computer and it deleted her emails
News 
40
378
Hugare replied
  • Locked
SCOTUS rules Trump tariffs illegal
15
208
Smiggs replied
Aya Hirano goes to Russia
14
936
Heimdall_Xtreme replied
Top Bottom