'Russians were responsible for hacking the DNC,' says Obama in final 2016 press conference

So…

OBAMA: Cut it out.
PUTIN: lol no

Allll righty then.

5 Likes

Still beats

TRUMP: Thanks that was great
PUTIN: No problem buddy

4 Likes

Yes, but it was the 1980s. Soviets may have taken Communism seriously as late as the 1960s with Khrushchev, but nobody took it seriously by the 1980s. Joining the Party or working for the KGB wasn’t an ideological position – you did it purely as a cynical move to advance yourself.

4 Likes

So, what is responsible for the fraudulent 2016 election of the unbelievable demagogue Trump over crooked Hillary?

Most obvious, is, voter suppression, voter role manipulation (think Interstate Crosscheck), gerrymandering and those discredited privately managed/owned provably hackable electronic voting machine and ballot scanners, that tend (not always) to favor Republicans. See links at the end and know.

Further, the data from individual precents machines are sent over the internet to central databases. Easy hacking has been shown in those realms, too.

Much the same happened during Election 2000 when Gore beat Bush.
http://www.michaelparenti.org/stolenelections.html

This election fraud reality, which one must not speak of, is why the US ranks at the bottom for election integrity amongst fully developed democracies countries, i.e.45th!!

So untrustworthy are these electronic machines, and the few interlinked right wing led companies that provide and manage them, that Canada, Germany, the Netherlands and Ireland no longer use them. They hand count traceable ballots. Will this trend arrive here? Why not yet?

Recognized forensic election experts and investigative journalists make the case. You will be persuaded beyond a reasonable doubt.

Beware of dialectic emotionally charged dead end debates socially engineered to divide and rule US (while distracting you where real power is and how ruling circles act when you aren’t looking)

The tense climate in all leading democracies is designed to further erode government legitimacy, the social contract for the greater good and make global corporate and billionaire sovereignty even more likely–total control of all habitable spaces and useful resources alive or dead and the greatest good for the least numbers.

So, speak your heart some, listen to strangers more. Connect with real people! Common people have a lot more in common than they do with the 0.01%.

1)How to Rig an Election
https://www.electiondefense.org/how-to-rig-an-election/

  1. 19 Big Myths About Our Elections That the Government and Media Want You to Believe
    http://codered2014.com/19-big-myths-elections-government-media-dont-want-know/

The GOP’s Stealth War Against Voters

4)The BRAD BLOG : Exit Polls Were ‘Wrong’ Again (Or Were They?)

Possible election rigging indicated by exit polls from November 8 election
http://codered2014.com/possible-election-rigging-seen-exit-polls/
6)
We can PROVE if there’s election fraud…
http://markcrispinmiller.com/2016/11/we-can-prove-if-theres-election-fraud-this-tuesday-but-officials-nationwide-wont-let-us-must-read/

7)GOP REDMAP Memo Admits Gerrymandering To Thank For Congressional Election Success

8)BREAKING: Election Experts Explain How The Election Was Stolen!

The exception to consistent election reds shift (likely Democratic prints flipping Republican) results is shown in the Sanders Vs Clinton Primaries.

Odds Hillary Won Without Widespread Fraud: 1 in 77 Billion Says Berkeley, Stanford Studies
http://tapnewswire.com/2016/06/odds-hillary-won-without-widespread-fraud-1-in-77-billion-says-berkeley-stanford-studies/

And much more, including proposed plans to reform our election s, here:

3 Likes

So you have telepathy and have read Putin’s mind as to his motivations as a young man?

As impossible as I find it to believe that some of this horror may not be new, I find myself returning to the introduction of Harlan Ellison’s short story collection aptly named “Approaching Oblivion”:

And among the letters I received on that book, was this one, reproduced exactly as I received it:

June 10, 1971
Dear Mr. Ellison,
For your dedication of Alone Against Tomorrow, you mention the “four Kent State University students senselessly murdered . . .” Please be informed that these hooligans were Communist-led radical revolutionaries and anarchists, and deserved to be shot, whether by a firing squad or by the National Guard.
Your remarks ruined an otherwise good book. Nevertheless, I am happy for the opportunity to correct your thinking.
Sincerely yours,
— ----------

I receive a lot of mail these days. Time prevents my answering very much of it—if I did, I’d have no time for writing the stories that prompt the mail in the first place. Some of the mail is pure, hardcore nutso. I roundfile it and forget it. More of it is reasoned, entertaining, supportive or chiding in a rational tone, and I read it and consider what’s been said and usually reply with a form letter I’ve had to devise simply as a matter of survival.

Occasionally I get a letter that gives me pause. Mr. Chambers’s letter was one of those. If I didn’t know purely on instinct that he was running off jingo phrases that he’d swallowed whole, if I didn’t know he was wrong purely on gut instinct or by my association with student movements for ten and more years, the reopening of the Kent State Massacre case by the Attorney General would convince me. So it’s too easy merely to disregard a letter like that, and say, “What an asshole.” But consider the letter. It isn’t illiterate, it isn’t rancorous, it isn’t redneck or written on toilet paper. It is a simple, polite, straightforward attempt to straighten out what the correspondent takes to be incorrect thinking on my part. One cannot dismiss this kind of letter. It is from an ordinary human being, speaking about extraordinary events, and genuinely believing what he writes. Chambers really does believe those poor, innocent kids were Communist tools who deserved to die.

Now that scares the piss out of me.

That was written in the year I was born. And now in the current day - forty five years later- as often as may feel ready to lay down and die, I read the next paragraph of that introduction and feel as if we may have some faint, twisted sense of hope to survive this current ordeal as well:

That is approaching oblivion. It is reaping the whirlwind of half a decade of Nixon/Agnew brainwashing and paranoia. It is a perfectly apocalyptical example of the reconditeness to which The Common Man in our time clings with suicidal ferocity. I won’t go into my little dance about the loathsomeness of The Common Man, or even flay again the body of stupidity to which “commonness” speaks. I’ll merely point out that the Ellison who believed in the revolutionary Movement of the young and the frustrated and the angry in the Sixties, is not the Ellison of the Seventies who has seen students sink back into a charming Fifties apathy (with a simultaneous totemization of the banalities and mannerisms of those McCarthy Witch-Hunt Fifties), who has listened long and hard to the Chambers letter and hears in it a tone wholly in tune with the voice of the turtle heard in the land, who—when the defenses are down in the tiny hours after The Late Late Show—laments for all the martyrs who packed it in, in the name of “change,” only to turn around a mere five years later and see the status returned to quo.

And I hope that perhaps these are larger cycles within cycles that we only catch a glimpse of in our small, mortal lives, and something like hope flickers within my chest.

Every time is new. Every time is different. Every time is the same. Maybe this time will be different. Maybe it won’t. Either way, we must try to live through it.

25 Likes

Please stop using these twitter streams. They are killing any kind of sensible political debate.

5 Likes

No, but I do know a number of Russians who experienced the Soviet Union in its dying years.

Being pedantic, Putin was not a KGB agent; he was a KGB officer who became head of the FSB. “Agent” is the hired muscle; “Officer” is the person who controls agents.

4 Likes

Indeed.

[edit - perhaps the greatest untapped source of renewable energy is the hypocrisy of politicians.]

5 Likes

So the US right is now welcoming russian interference in US elections. At least the rotational energy from Reagans grave should solve any energy problems. What kind of bizarro world is this? Bad bye!

4 Likes

(1) Thank you, President Obama, for saying “hacking the DNC” rather than “hacking the election”.

(2) To those on this thread:
(a) Did you change your vote as a result of the DNC emails reveal?
(b) Were you tempted to?
© Do you know of anyone else who changed their vote as a result?

2 Likes

That doesn’t quite cover it though, now does it? It appears they hacked the servers of BOTH major parties, but they only leaked out dirt on the Democrats. If you think that act had zero impact on the election then I don’t know what to tell you.

13 Likes

I think there is a critical difference between Russian propaganda efforts where manufactured disinformation is published, and the wikileaks information, which was a release of actual emails produced by DNC and Clinton campaign members. And it is entirely possible to hold unchanged cold war views on the Reds while judging the motivations of the DNC on their own words.
Are you still anti-fracking, even knowing that much of the anti-fracking movement is funded by the Russians to keep the US from energy independence? Probably, especially if you like clean water and dislike earthquakes.

“We were up against Russia pushing oligarchs and others to buy media. We were even up against phony environmental groups, and I’m a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, ‘Oh that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you,’ and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia,” HRC, June 18, 2014 courtesy of wikileaks and the red menace.

2 Likes

You can’t expect every commenter to be well-informed or sophisticated, and that’s making the generous assumption that they’re arguing in good faith in the first place. If you can no longer make that last assumption, there’s no point in engaging (cf. the author of the typically disingenuous comment immediately preceding this one).

[ETA: see also the author of the comment immediately following this one.]

2 Likes

(a) Did you change your vote as a result of the DNC emails reveal?
(b) Were you tempted to?
© Do you know of anyone else who changed their vote as a result?

What would be your point here, jones?

6 Likes

6 Likes

Is Zangief winning round 1 intentional?

1 Like

a - no
b - no
c - More than one. All cited Wikileaks obsessively when I discussed things with them, and all voted green.

12 Likes