goemaw.com
General Discussion => The New Joe Montgomery Birther Pit => Topic started by: renocat on February 15, 2017, 01:12:49 AM
-
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/millman/the-deep-state-gets-a-scalp/
The Flynn affect may poison our government from within and kill democracy. Read this. Bureaucrats alone doing what they say and think should be done, and screw the person the people, the people, elected to run the executive branch. They think they have the right to defecate on your liberty. Your vote is marginalized horse piss to them. They are not elected. This is scary. They are not working for America.
-
http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/can-trump-win-his-coming-battle-with-the-unionized-bureaucratic-deep-state/
The bureaucrats who are unionized and protected by civil service laws are battling the president internally by legal or illegal means to protect the policies and/or programs that they believe in or that provide.them a good job. An example is Flynn. The deep state is against Trumps.Russian policy. So government workers illegally tapped into a private telephone conversation to find damnable evidence to roast his gonies.
-
In all fairness, the majority of people voted for a different president.
-
In all fairness, the majority of people voted for a different president.
And the deep state would have been that much stronger . . . likely rendering an outsiders chances of ever winning the WH impossible by the time her reign of terror was over.
-
Of course this guy may mump it up for outsiders as well.
But for different reasons.
-
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/stunning-amount-of-classified-information-being-leaked/
There are people in our government leaking top secret information because THEY think THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES is wrong. Any president relies on secrecy to conduct business and to have frank conversations with others. I say find the leakers and give them the death penalty for treason. Water board them to get information. When the bureaucrats undermine and openly rebel and defy executing the wishes of elected officials, then democracy dies.
-
:jerk:
like the deep state/intelligence community just inherited or expressed some new power.
this is just as stupid as those that contest Bannon is leading a coup
-
By oath, intelligence officials' first duty is to "defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.."
the deep state has a legal obligation to oppose a president not acting in the best interest of the country.
-
By oath, intelligence officials' first duty is to "defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.."
the deep state has a legal obligation to oppose a president not acting in the best interest of the country.
Welcome to East Germany circa 1979!
So the "Deep State" gets to decide what is and isn't in the best interest of the country? Star Chamber starring Sys!
It's all starting to become very clear . . . Hey uh, NSA here, look if you're compiling an enemies list we're just gonna hand over the unfiltered stuff and then you other guys can pick and choose who you want to attack. Just can't see any politics or political motivations coming out of this policy.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/12/us/politics/nsa-gets-more-latitude-to-share-intercepted-communications.html
-
I'm fairly confident there are smart people behind the scenes that would lock trump and his entire cabinet in a restroom or something and get crap handled.
GO DEEP STATE GO! :Woohoo:
-
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four
I had to read this in College lit class. This description on wikidoofus sums it up. Seems like fiction is becoming reality.
-
Can you both dislike the "Deep State" but also not mind that they're rough ridin' with Trump?
-
Can you both dislike the "Deep State" but also not mind that they're rough ridin' with Trump?
oh for sure
-
I need a Cliffs Notes on deep state
-
By oath, intelligence officials' first duty is to "defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.."
the deep state has a legal obligation to oppose a president not acting in the best interest of the country.
I am no fan of Trump, but trusting the CIA to follow the law or the best interest of the country?
Just keep in mind these guys greatest hits include Manuel Noriega, trying to blow up Fidel Castro with a novelty cigar, assassinating democratically elected leaders in several countries, Iran-Contra, etc.
I mean they are based on most available evidence largely incompetent and evil.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Pompeo will flush the rats from their hole
-
you snowflakes can believe whatever you need to believe in order to sleep at night.
-
I need a Cliffs Notes on deep state
State within a state is a political situation in a country when an internal organ ("deep state"), such as the armed forces and civilian authorities (intelligence agencies, police, administrative agencies and branches of governmental bureaucracy), does not respond to the civilian political leadership.
-
It's okay fellas your hero handed the keys to the kingdom to the deep state.
Hope and Change!
-
It's okay fellas your hero handed the keys to the kingdom to the deep state.
Hope and Change!
do explain
-
A little stater Lick, from the dumpster
http://www.alternet.org/media/owner-washington-post-doing-business-cia-while-keeping-his-readers-dark
-
I would argue the Telecommunications Act by Clinton and Patriot Act by Bush were far greater influences on concentrated influences of power.
-
Why is all the deep state Democrats? That's weird.
-
It's because Democrats are pussies Phil.
-
Why is all the deep state Democrats? That's weird.
Because Republicans are the party of small government, duh.
-
Obama and Loretta Lynch signed off on allowing the NSA to distribute unfiltered signet intelligence to every other intelligence entity. In essence this allows any other intelligence entity in the $100 billion plus (annually) intelligence complex with an ax to grind to pick and choose whatever they want, whenever they want it on pretty much anybody they want.
-
I would argue the Telecommunications Act by Clinton and Patriot Act by Bush were far greater influences on concentrated influences of power.
Sure, the problem is they were all embraced, defended and expanded by the previous administration.
The spooks are mad their guy is gone and their woman didn't get elected. They didn't like Flynn because he vowed change and the Obamaites leftover are fighting exposure of the dumb Iranian deal, why?
-
Someone has been reading infowars again :D
-
if democrats control the "deep state" then that is a pretty boss move politically
playing chess to republican checkers.
:alleyoop:
-
Well, to be fair, "intelligence" (of any sort) is not really synonymous with "Republicans"
-
It's because Democrats are pussies Phil.
Dax said these deep state people only want war.??
Where were they when Obama was ruining this country for 8 years?
-
It's not like these people will be the ones fighting Phil. Easy to send someone else's kids to die.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
Of course what the proglibs are missing (as always) is that the origins of your movement derided the deep state.
Now, you've just been assimilated. You have no movement now, besides outrage at one side of a fake political paradigm.
-
Who are the prog libs on this board in your mind, dax? For me it seems like ~4 pubs, ~4 libs, and a bunch of people here to lol
-
Who are the prog libs on this board in your mind, dax? For me it seems like ~4 pubs, ~4 libs, and a bunch of people here to lol
Those that say they're here lol, ultimately are exposed.
-
So I'm a prog lib?
-
I should clarify that the real champions of exposing the deep state and understanding it's existence tend to lean libertarian, and that true fake political paradigmers are only for or against the deep state if it's for or against their side.
-
I contend I'm here to marvel at both sides and sometimes play Devils advocate. I lack the fervor to really contribute to either side.
-
who do deep state believe-in-ers think the boss of the deep state is? maybe those Bilderberg guys? like bill gates and junk?
-
I'm assuming this is coming in heavy from the same infowars anti-NWO people so I'm just putting their bad guys in the bad guy spot of this deal.
-
or maybe like the clintons?
-
I've gathered that they are led by unelected officials.
-
probably the clintons work with those bilderberg guys "irl"
-
and that rich guy that hires all of the protesters to be violent and do abortions at BLM rallies
-
it is fascinating to watch the birth of a talking point
conservatives can rest well knowing they can ride this pony for years to excuse Donald's shortcomings and transgressions
:shakesfist: deepstate
-
secondarily it is amazing to think that we are talking about vigorously investigating and fearful of the role of the american deep state in undermining our president
but not at all interested in the role of the Russian deep state undermining our elections/president
quite the pickle
-
powerful shadowy figures operating behind the scenes to control crap and junk is my favorite conspiracy theory type. really all of the great ones lead back to them. chemtrails, NWO, etc.
-
NWO? Are we talking the original or the Hollywood version with Hogan? I prefer that the originals be running this country.
-
powerful shadowy figures operating behind the scenes to control crap and junk is my favorite conspiracy theory type. really all of the great ones lead back to them. chemtrails, NWO, etc.
http://thevane.gawker.com/insane-lady-yells-at-clouds-and-sprays-vinegar-at-the-s-1550883163
-
it's pizzagates as far as the eye can see with these shadowy powerful rich shadow people.
-
I'm pretty sure it's the DN, not the DS.
-
Pretty cool to see all the "iraq war is lie" and "W is a war criminal" and "dick cheney made it up to enrich haliburton" whackadoodles no longer give a crap about the "military industrial complex". Also nice to see the party of human rights, privacy and goverment transparency now deny the patriot act is anything but sound policy. NOTHING TO SEE HERE FOLKS
-
Pretty cool to see all the "iraq war is lie" and "W is a war criminal" and "dick cheney made it up to enrich haliburton" whackadoodles no longer give a crap about the "military industrial complex". Also nice to see the party of human rights, privacy and goverment transparency now deny the patriot act is anything but sound policy. NOTHING TO SEE HERE FOLKS
Well, there is tons of evidence W. is a war criminal. Obama too.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Obama :curse:
You can literally see the deep state puppett strings hanging from his feminine frame.
-
If they are hanging from his frame, wouldn't that indicate that he isn't being manipulated?
-
Yeah, Bilderberg, info wars #rollingeyes
-
Pretty cool to see all the "iraq war is lie" and "W is a war criminal" and "dick cheney made it up to enrich haliburton" whackadoodles no longer give a crap about the "military industrial complex". Also nice to see the party of human rights, privacy and goverment transparency now deny the patriot act is anything but sound policy. NOTHING TO SEE HERE FOLKS
Well, there is tons of evidence W. is a war criminal. Obama too.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
and Clinton(s)
-
What a weird take. Rich, powerful people, companies and nearly trillion dollar military-intelligence-security complexes are all wholly benign, benevolent entities, devoid of any agenda besides that to serve the greater good. Not at all engaged in self preservation, power, or empire building.
-
Pretty cool to see all the "iraq war is lie" and "W is a war criminal" and "dick cheney made it up to enrich haliburton" whackadoodles no longer give a crap about the "military industrial complex". Also nice to see the party of human rights, privacy and goverment transparency now deny the patriot act is anything but sound policy. NOTHING TO SEE HERE FOLKS
Yep the Iraq war and America being thrust into perpetual war was done by a junta of kleptocrats in cahoots with neocons and a secret cabal of PNAC'ers joined at the hip of Big Energy and the Military Industrial Intelligence Complex and the whole thing must be torn down.
Then 8 years of silence as perpetual war raged and expanded, governments toppled, the security state expanded and millions of refugees created . . . Now: The Deep State is a myth.
Never stop whackadoo left, never stop
-
What a weird take. Rich, powerful people, companies and nearly trillion dollar military-intelligence-security complexes are all wholly benign, benevolent entities, devoid of any agenda besides that to serve the greater good. Not at all engaged in self preservation, power, or empire building.
Take it to the Trump thread....The one putting rich powerful people and companies in control of the government
-
What a weird take. Rich, powerful people, companies and nearly trillion dollar military-intelligence-security complexes are all wholly benign, benevolent entities, devoid of any agenda besides that to serve the greater good. Not at all engaged in self preservation, power, or empire building.
Take it to the Trump thread....The one putting rich powerful people and companies in control of the government
Yeah, I'll think about it as a Nazi Billionaire controls the left.
-
Butthurt and irrational hypocrisy are "so-in" right with libtard crowd. :lol:
-
Butthurt are irrational hypocrisy are "so-in" right with libtard crowd. :lol:
Pot. Kettle.
-
Butthurt are irrational hypocrisy are "so-in" right with libtard crowd. :lol:
Pot. Kettle.
So angry.
You've been assimilated and are complicit.
-
Butthurt are irrational hypocrisy are "so-in" right with libtard crowd. :lol:
Pot. Kettle.
Yeah, you realize you're proving my point with these type of retorts....right?
-
a junta of kleptocrats in cahoots with neocons and a secret cabal of PNAC'ers joined at the hip of Big Energy and the Military Industrial Intelligence Complex
Daxian mad libs are the best. Dax libs, if you will
-
Butthurt are irrational hypocrisy are "so-in" right with libtard crowd. :lol:
Pot. Kettle.
Yeah, you realize you're proving my point with these type of retorts....right?
I have no doubt democrats have been hypocritical. To think both sides haven't been is dumb dumb.
-
Nobody has answered why the entire deep state is democrats and only out to hurt lil ole trump and his well oiled machine that is his policies and administration.
-
Who said they're "all Democrats"?
-
Who said they're "all Democrats"?
then where we all these leaks to wreck Obama the past 8 years?
-
Who said they're "all Democrats"?
then where we all these leaks to wreck Obama the past 8 years?
Lacking need.
-
Who said they're "all Democrats"?
then where we all these leaks to wreck Obama the past 8 years?
On wikileaks
-
obama was amazingly scandal free for all 8 years. like the biggest thing dipshits tried to pin on him was the ridiculous birther crap. clean as a whistle.
-
obama was amazingly scandal free for all 8 years. like the biggest thing dipshits tried to pin on him was the ridiculous birther crap. clean as a whistle.
It's easy to be "scandal free" when the party that controlled Congress for most of his administration was his own, and the spooks had their guy.
-
obama was amazingly scandal free for all 8 years. like the biggest thing dipshits tried to pin on him was the ridiculous birther crap. clean as a whistle.
It's easy to be "scandal free" when the party that controlled Congress for most of his administration was his own, and the spooks had their guy.
:sdeek: :opcat:
-
obama was amazingly scandal free for all 8 years. like the biggest thing dipshits tried to pin on him was the ridiculous birther crap. clean as a whistle.
It's easy to be "scandal free" when the party that controlled Congress for most of his administration was his own, and the spooks had their guy.
:sdeek: :opcat:
No.
-
obama was amazingly scandal free for all 8 years. like the biggest thing dipshits tried to pin on him was the ridiculous birther crap. clean as a whistle.
It's easy to be "scandal free" when the party that controlled Congress for most of his administration was his own, and the spooks had their guy.
Why are you trying so hard to defend the Trump administration? I know you don't like or support him. You are just wanting to rail on the previous administration. But what is stopping you from also hating on Trump? Why not just call the hypocrites hypocrites and speak your mind about the current administration? What enjoyment do you get from fighting with people that dislike the current president as much as you but didn't rail against Obama? It's quite confounding and I'd like to understand.
We get your stance on Obama, prog libs, etc. When or what will it take for you to start speaking about how you feel about the current state of America and who America elected?
-
obama was amazingly scandal free for all 8 years. like the biggest thing dipshits tried to pin on him was the ridiculous birther crap. clean as a whistle.
It's easy to be "scandal free" when the party that controlled Congress for most of his administration was his own, and the spooks had their guy.
Donald's party has controlled congress for 100% of his administration.
-
Dax. Where art thou? I want an answer
-
obama was amazingly scandal free for all 8 years. like the biggest thing dipshits tried to pin on him was the ridiculous birther crap. clean as a whistle.
It's easy to be "scandal free" when the party that controlled Congress for most of his administration was his own, and the spooks had their guy.
Why are you trying so hard to defend the Trump administration? I know you don't like or support him. You are just wanting to rail on the previous administration. But what is stopping you from also hating on Trump? Why not just call the hypocrites hypocrites and speak your mind about the current administration? What enjoyment do you get from fighting with people that dislike the current president as much as you but didn't rail against Obama? It's quite confounding and I'd like to understand.
We get your stance on Obama, prog libs, etc. When or what will it take for you to start speaking about how you feel about the current state of America and who America elected?
Nice rant.
-
obama was amazingly scandal free for all 8 years. like the biggest thing dipshits tried to pin on him was the ridiculous birther crap. clean as a whistle.
It's easy to be "scandal free" when the party that controlled Congress for most of his administration was his own, and the spooks had their guy.
Why are you trying so hard to defend the Trump administration? I know you don't like or support him. You are just wanting to rail on the previous administration. But what is stopping you from also hating on Trump? Why not just call the hypocrites hypocrites and speak your mind about the current administration? What enjoyment do you get from fighting with people that dislike the current president as much as you but didn't rail against Obama? It's quite confounding and I'd like to understand.
We get your stance on Obama, prog libs, etc. When or what will it take for you to start speaking about how you feel about the current state of America and who America elected?
Nice rant.
Oh come on. It wasn't a rant. It is a genuine question.
-
Now back to real news.
17 days before leaving office Obama signs off on an order that Loretta Lynch signed off on as well that put the deep state on steroids (a familiar theme with the previous administration when it came to expanding the police state and waging non congressionally approved shadow wars of regime change).
They had 8 years, why wait until the end?
Now the left lemmings hang on every word out of nebulous, non elected, unaccountable spooks working for organizations that the founders of the modern day liberal movement used to rail against and want disbanded.
Congrats Libs (and resident fake centrists), you are them.
-
obama was amazingly scandal free for all 8 years. like the biggest thing dipshits tried to pin on him was the ridiculous birther crap. clean as a whistle.
It's easy to be "scandal free" when the party that controlled Congress for most of his administration was his own, and the spooks had their guy.
Why are you trying so hard to defend the Trump administration? I know you don't like or support him. You are just wanting to rail on the previous administration. But what is stopping you from also hating on Trump? Why not just call the hypocrites hypocrites and speak your mind about the current administration? What enjoyment do you get from fighting with people that dislike the current president as much as you but didn't rail against Obama? It's quite confounding and I'd like to understand.
We get your stance on Obama, prog libs, etc. When or what will it take for you to start speaking about how you feel about the current state of America and who America elected?
Nice rant.
Oh come on. It wasn't a rant. It is a genuine question.
I thought you were here for laughs.
-
obama was amazingly scandal free for all 8 years. like the biggest thing dipshits tried to pin on him was the ridiculous birther crap. clean as a whistle.
It's easy to be "scandal free" when the party that controlled Congress for most of his administration was his own, and the spooks had their guy.
Why are you trying so hard to defend the Trump administration? I know you don't like or support him. You are just wanting to rail on the previous administration. But what is stopping you from also hating on Trump? Why not just call the hypocrites hypocrites and speak your mind about the current administration? What enjoyment do you get from fighting with people that dislike the current president as much as you but didn't rail against Obama? It's quite confounding and I'd like to understand.
We get your stance on Obama, prog libs, etc. When or what will it take for you to start speaking about how you feel about the current state of America and who America elected?
Nice rant.
Oh come on. It wasn't a rant. It is a genuine question.
I thought you were here for laughs.
I never said that. I'm here to observe and sometimes play Devils advocate. I said I wasn't well versed or possessing enough fervor to really to contribute to either side. But I see people going back and forth and I know one side really doesn't like Trump at all and for the most part neither does the other side. I'm just curious why both sides can't unite. Why there is still a need to bicker.
I get it, you spent 8 years railing against Obama and his policies. I get it, you didn't think Hillary was fit to be president. But I haven't seen one post in support of Trump. Just posts about how he is just doing what past presidents have done. I don't understand why you can't call the "proglibs" out and still be against the current state of affairs. Your silence on the current situation and posts about the past are a quiet indication of your support for Trump. I know that's not true.
I don't get why we are so hard wired to hate one another and argue even when we may agree or have common ground. I am not innocent of this by any means. Politics are just not where I choose to argue. I vote. I have views. I express them in that manner. As it is the only way that matters. Being a guy who usually votes D, it sucks in KS. But had the Republicans put out a better candidate I would have went R this go round. Hillary would be status quo imo. I don't like her or feel she was fit to be president but she was at least able to project strength and speak well and keep up a front. Even if Washington was business as usual, it still is. eff I would I have voted for Romney so hard if he was on the R ticket.
America doesn't need insecure idiots as our figurehead. We are a beautiful nation. A strong nation. We can disagree on policy all day long but at the end of the day the president is the face of this nation and at the very least they need to not worry about their own image but the image of the country.
I think I rambled on and let my politics show.
Dax and those of his same views, I get it, Obama did a lot shady stuff that most of us are unaware of. How do you feel about Trump?
-
obama was amazingly scandal free for all 8 years. like the biggest thing dipshits tried to pin on him was the ridiculous birther crap. clean as a whistle.
:lol: Nice troll, libtard
-
:eek:
https://twitter.com/Koxinga8/status/831701390791577600
-
So, here's the deal:
Nothing that happened in Barack Obama's presidential administration was a scandal. Not the gun-walking, not the ambassador killed by terrorists, not the pay-to-play green-energy stuff, not the weaponization of the IRS, not the Bowe Bergdahl swap, not the inspector general's firing -- none of it. Obama wanted it that way, and that was enough to make it so.
Everything that happens in Donald Trump's administration will be a scandal. Every Tweet, every denial of the obvious, every course change, every refusal to change course, every leaked internal disagreement, every assertion that some word or action is not a scandal. Trump is breathing, and that is enough to make it so.
During Obama's administration, it was wrong -- racist, no less -- to "obstruct" the president's agenda by constitutional means.
Even before Trump took office, he faced a "resistance" movement, and rioting was widely excused as merely a spirited form of political commentary.
With those ground rules in mind, the political left has determined its strategy and the media left has settled upon the narrative that will define the entire Trump presidency -- which is all of 1 month old today.
-
I look forward to more posts of editorials from Kevin in Cleveland
-
You don't have to reply to everything I post. It rarely ends well for you, in any event.
-
http://dailycaller.com/2017/02/19/state-officials-want-trump-to-reverse-obamas-last-minute-election-power-grab/
Appears Obama set up things for the Deep State to have the ultimate power, ballot box control.
-
It appears that the deep state had a dear friend in Barrack Obama. While Dems absolutely lost their minds about the Pub neoncons, they voted the real neocons into office to wage war across the globe, to plant the seeds of the next world war and cede the power of the government over to the unelected intelligence complex.
-
It appears that the deep state had a dear friend in Barrack Obama. While Dems absolutely lost their minds about the Pub neoncons, they voted the real neocons into office to wage war across the globe, to plant the seeds of the next world war and cede the power of the government over to the unelected intelligence complex.
duh
-
Great work by dax here. When Trump goes waring with China and North Korea and middle East to distract people from his multiple issues, dax can then point to the Obama installed deep state as the reason.
This is a real master in his element guys....Can only sit back and enjoy the man work.
-
Great work by dax here. When Trump goes waring with China and North Korea and middle East to distract people from his multiple issues, dax can then point to the Obama installed deep state as the reason.
This is a real master in his element guys....Can only sit back and enjoy the man work.
When and if those things actually happen, we can discuss it then.
Since you clearly weren't paying attention the US ramped up South China Sea military operations and conducted massive joint military exercises in Korea under the Obama administration.
In terms of the Middle East, the real question under the previous administration was who weren't we bombing or selling arms to, it was few and far between.
Unfortunately they were also allowed to propagate a huge lie that they were rolling back AQ, when in fact the exact opposite was occurring. Thus we should be asking who exactly they were bombing, why, and to what end. But that's not going to happen.
-
A Picasso on the blogs
-
The op-ed in NY Times about some guy in the administration working to undermine Trump to protect his view of how the federal government should function and the policies that should be pursued should alarm every American.
Was the self.appointed guardian of American democracy elect?
He'll no! What gives him/her the right to wizz on my precious vote?
This is treason. Hanging treason. This could morph into mass rioting aND civil conflict
-
It’s not just “some guy” Reno
https://twitter.com/mccormackjohn/status/1037446303419166725?s=21
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Super disappointed. I thought Trump would eradicate the Deep State menace once and for all. Now, it just seems like the Deep State is stronger than ever!
-
Professor SteveDave is on to something. Could the swamp rat be Pence? He can't be fired. He believes that he is on a mission from God.
https://www.indystar.com/story/news/2018/09/06/mike-pence-denies-being-anonymous-lodestar-new-york-times-op-ed-writer/1209663002/
-
I am pretty sure it is someone who you wouldn't be able to pick out of a lineup and you have never heard their name before. It for sure is not Mike Pence. Come on.
-
There are likely other idioms buried in there.
-
I am pretty sure it is someone who you wouldn't be able to pick out of a lineup and you have never heard their name before. It for sure is not Mike Pence. Come on.
the times will look pretty bad if that's the case. anon rando doesn't like the president is not news.
-
Journalism at its finest
-
:lol:
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/1183037520503885824
-
https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/1536377641980264448
:lol:
-
Someone missed the recent report from our own cyber security agency.
Elections are always secure: When we win (#blueanon)
When we don’t win, it was the Russians - or racism (#blueanon)
Stand down! (Susan Rice and Barrack Obama to our then cyber security director)
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.
-
Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.
Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.
We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.
Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.
-
Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.
Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.
We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.
Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.
I’m aware of plenty of analysis that Russian propaganda convinced a bunch of chodes to (legally) vote Trump in 2016, but if you have any sources saying Democrats actually accused the results of being illegitimate I’d like to see them.
If I recall correctly the Trump appointed election commission was like almost entirely Republican led, so I think you’re getting mixed up on who argued the results were illegitimate.
-
Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.
Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.
We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.
Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.
I’m aware of plenty of analysis that Russian propaganda convinced a bunch of chodes to (legally) vote Trump in 2016, but if you have any sources saying Democrats actually accused the results of being illegitimate I’d like to see them.
If I recall correctly the Trump appointed election commission was like almost entirely Republican led, so I think you’re getting mixed up on who argued the results were illegitimate.
How to say you haven't been paying attention without actually saying it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html
-
We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.
Mike Lindell's cyber security people?
Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.
What is this in reference to? Rich coming from the party where Trump is trying to put people who wanted to overthrow the 2020 election in charge of the next election.
-
Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.
Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.
We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.
Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.
I’m aware of plenty of analysis that Russian propaganda convinced a bunch of chodes to (legally) vote Trump in 2016, but if you have any sources saying Democrats actually accused the results of being illegitimate I’d like to see them.
If I recall correctly the Trump appointed election commission was like almost entirely Republican led, so I think you’re getting mixed up on who argued the results were illegitimate.
How to say you haven't been paying attention without actually saying it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html
I think it’s pretty clear Hillary is talking about his qualification to be president, not that the votes were counted incorrectly.
You are saying Democrats impugned the security of the 2016 election. That’s the claim I’m asking you to back up. But I do (sincerely) appreciate the mostly topical response.
-
We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.
Mike Lindell's cyber security people?
Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.
Bucket, why are you always so far behind?
https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-technology-georgia-election-2020-a746b253f3404dbf794349df498c9542
But rest assured, they found no evidence of hacking . . . the thing is, good hackers don't leave behind any evidence.
Relative to 2022 and 2024, the continued propagation of al lie that people are being denied the right the vote because states have actual rules is one form of de-legitimization.
-
Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.
Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.
We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.
Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.
I’m aware of plenty of analysis that Russian propaganda convinced a bunch of chodes to (legally) vote Trump in 2016, but if you have any sources saying Democrats actually accused the results of being illegitimate I’d like to see them.
If I recall correctly the Trump appointed election commission was like almost entirely Republican led, so I think you’re getting mixed up on who argued the results were illegitimate.
How to say you haven't been paying attention without actually saying it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html
I think it’s pretty clear Hillary is talking about his qualification to be president, not that the votes were counted incorrectly.
You are saying Democrats impugned the security of the 2016 election. That’s the claim I’m asking you to back up. But I do (sincerely) appreciate the mostly topical response.
You're so full of crap dude. Hacking was referenced multiple times in that story.
-
Dax did you know that Trump appointed a commission to look into the security of the 2016 election (the one where you say Democrats were complaining about “Russians”). I’d venture to guess the last two cycles were among the most scrutinized ever on a national scale in US history.
Democrats are already working to de-legitimize 2022 and 2024.
We were told that Dominion was safe, our cyber security people now say otherwise.
Commission or not, from Hillary on down the claim was that the Russians stole the 2016 election.
I’m aware of plenty of analysis that Russian propaganda convinced a bunch of chodes to (legally) vote Trump in 2016, but if you have any sources saying Democrats actually accused the results of being illegitimate I’d like to see them.
If I recall correctly the Trump appointed election commission was like almost entirely Republican led, so I think you’re getting mixed up on who argued the results were illegitimate.
How to say you haven't been paying attention without actually saying it.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/hillary-clinton-trump-is-an-illegitimate-president/2019/09/26/29195d5a-e099-11e9-b199-f638bf2c340f_story.html
I think it’s pretty clear Hillary is talking about his qualification to be president, not that the votes were counted incorrectly.
You are saying Democrats impugned the security of the 2016 election. That’s the claim I’m asking you to back up. But I do (sincerely) appreciate the mostly topical response.
You're so full of crap dude. Hacking was referenced multiple times in that story.
DNC emails were hacked (everyone knows this). Not voting machines.
-
DNC emails were not hacked, they were removed from the premises by an insider. There's a reason the "investigation" by the FBI was a joke.
You didn't even read the article.
There's entire white papers instructing Dems to stop talking about Russian hacking of elections.
-
I don’t know what you’re on about here. The word “hack” appears once in the article. Trump literally appointed a commission to prove the 2016 election was not secure in multiple states, and then he claimed the 2020 election was marred by rampant voter fraud.
Link the white paper and I’ll read it.
-
I don’t know what you’re on about here. The word “hack” appears once in the article. Trump literally appointed a commission to prove the 2016 election was not secure in multiple states, and then he claimed the 2020 election was marred by rampant voter fraud.
Link the white paper and I’ll read it.
That changes nothing about the fact that from the top on down, your party continually tried to de-legitimize the 2016 election and one of the tactics was claiming it was hacked by the Russians. On top of the ridiculous claims of voter purging and voter suppression.
The Trump commission literally has nothing to do with the continuous claims by Democrats. Your leaders turned the nuanced into a widespread false narrative that as always was parroted by millions of #blueanon, the fact that you weren't aware of it is not the least bit surprising in any way.
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/735470
-
I don’t know what you’re on about here. The word “hack” appears once in the article. Trump literally appointed a commission to prove the 2016 election was not secure in multiple states, and then he claimed the 2020 election was marred by rampant voter fraud.
Link the white paper and I’ll read it.
That changes nothing about the fact that from the top on down, your party continually tried to de-legitimize the 2016 election and one of the tactics was claiming it was hacked by the Russians. On top of the ridiculous claims of voter purging and voter suppression.
The Trump commission literally has nothing to do with the continuous claims by Democrats. Your leaders turned the nuanced into a widespread false narrative that as always was parroted by millions of #blueanon, the fact that you weren't aware of it is not the least bit surprising in any way.
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/735470
Dax, that article is literally about the fact that people misunderstood the term “hacking” to refer to hacking of voting machines, which no one seriously argued was the case.
Despite consensus that Russia’s interference in the 2016 election did not extend to actual hacking of voting technology, Russian efforts to intervene on behalf of the Trump campaign have been defined as “hacking” by elements of the liberal media. This definition is broadly accepted in liberal circles, and there is now a widespread misperception that Russia tampered with voting technology to alter the outcome of the election. In this essay, we trace the emergence of this definition of Russia’s role in the 2016 election and explain the factors that led to its acceptance, arguing that the debate over Russia’s “hacking” illustrates that definitional arguments may operate differently than scholars have previously conceived. Traditional studies of definition emphasize the role of political leaders in crafting salient definitions, adopting a top-down approach. We argue that definitions also emerge from the bottom up, moving from media sources toward institutional centers of power. Our findings both illustrate the dangers of efforts to define Russia’s influence campaign as “hacking” and extend previous scholarship on definitional argument.
Only one party has actually argued that US elections are not secure.
-
I'm going to be really nice, and politely remind you again what i just said:
Your leaders turned the nuanced into a widespread false narrative that as always was parroted by millions of #blueanon, the fact that you weren't aware of it is not the least bit surprising in any way.
That's exactly what the paper is trying to stop. Your movement parroted hacking into election hacking, because rank and file #blueanon is not capable of understanding nuanced things.
-
I don't think that I have ever heard anyone make the case that Russia hacked or interfered with the voting process.
The Russian interference in our elections that I have heard discussed always centered on influence campaigns.
-
I don't think that I have ever heard anyone make the case that Russia hacked or interfered with the voting process.
The Russian interference in our elections that I have heard discussed always centered on influence campaigns.
Anecdotally Lick has said he's never heard that . . . fantastic for you, Lick.
Meanwhile JHU feels the need to write an entire paper to tell #blueanon to stop doing it. :thumbsup:
-
Never thought I would see you all worked up over a paper written by a couple KU grad students
-
Never thought I would see you all worked up over a paper written by a couple KU grad students
The expected tapout
-
Someone thinks the russians hacked into the electronic voting hardware? no crap? who?
-
Read the thread #slowdug.
Our friends at KU and JHU had to write a whole paper reminding #blueanon that the voting machines allegedly weren't hacked, so quit implying that they were.
-
Read the thread #slowdug.
Our friends at KU and JHU had to write a whole paper reminding #blueanon that the voting machines allegedly weren't hacked, so quit implying that they were.
Dominion keeps whipping people's asses
-
Yep, they're whipping so much ass our cyber security people say they can be hacked, but allegedly they haven't been. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
Newsflash, good hackers are very difficult to track and can make themselves appear completely harmless.
-
Dax, in the last few posts you have gotten angry that (according to you) #blueanon thinks voting machines were hacked and also gotten angry that #blueanonGe does not believe voting machines are being hacked.
-
Dax, in the last few posts you have gotten angry that (according to you) #blueanon thinks voting machines were hacked and also gotten angry that #blueanonGe does not believe voting machines are being hacked.
https://youtu.be/hO1HI_3U5HI
-
Despite consensus that Russia’s interference in the 2016 election did not extend to actual hacking of voting technology, Russian efforts to intervene on behalf of the Trump campaign have been defined as “hacking” by elements of the liberal media. This definition is broadly accepted in liberal circles, and there is now a widespread misperception that Russia tampered with voting technology to alter the outcome of the election
https://muse.jhu.edu/article/735470
According to #blueanonGe, this paper sits on a throne of lies
-
Dax, in the last few posts you have gotten angry that (according to you) #blueanon thinks voting machines were hacked and also gotten angry that #blueanonGe does not believe voting machines are being hacked.
https://youtu.be/hO1HI_3U5HI
A valiant failed effort (as usual)