Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    25 Oct '17 23:04 / 1 edit
    Which ever way it's sliced, the MSM with Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman have led a charge against the Trump administration claiming deep Russian collusion, yet Fox News stalwarts like Hannity have long denounced the claims and have gone on the offensive in the last couple of days, detailing HRC's links to the Russians over the Uranium One deal, money in Bill's pocket and just breaking, Hillary paid for research to find links between Russia and Trump which led to the Trump dossier and the now infamous pee pee gate.

    While partisan world just kicked into overdrive with the poo fest that will surely unravel, shouldn't the real concern be the reality that Russia has pulled and is continuing to pull the strings over the principal characters that wield enormous influence and power on both sides of the American political ailse?

    It would seem that rather than left and right wings the US has become a series of Russian dolls, with each succeeding administration neatly encasing the contours of the previous one.
  2. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    27 Oct '17 04:37
    Was this Spy vs Spy confefe inevitable?

    During the GOP primary some unnamed republican identity paid for research to investigate links between Trump and Russia. At some point the GOP let go of the research only to have it picked up by the DNC/HRC.

    Was this a bait and switch move? Was this a pure muddy the waters move, where Fusion GPS were specifically there to provide salacious but false intel for the express purpose of insulating the real Russian Trump relationship behind a wall of FUD?

    And now that its blown up, all the FOX hosts are gleefully picking the carcass of yet another Clinton SNAFU.

    Only gets better doesn't it?
  3. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    27 Oct '17 04:49
    Which side did the Russians choose to undermine?
  4. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    27 Oct '17 04:58
    Originally posted by @athousandyoung
    Which side did the Russians choose to undermine?
    Both. Its about a Russian snake curling itself around the halls of power in Washington, in any form or manner that ultimately benefits Mother Russia.

    Who falls for it is immaterial, but what is certain, is that we are witnessing a chess match of incredible depth and scale where the forces of capital and unbridled personal reward are being pitted against notions of loyalty and sacrifice in service to a greater good.
  5. Subscriber mchill
    cryptogram
    27 Oct '17 12:16
    Originally posted by @kmax87
    Which ever way it's sliced, the MSM with Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman have led a charge against the Trump administration claiming deep Russian collusion, yet Fox News stalwarts like Hannity have long denounced the claims and have gone on the offensive in the last couple of days, detailing HRC's links to the Russians over the Uranium One deal, money in Bi ...[text shortened]... ian dolls, with each succeeding administration neatly encasing the contours of the previous one.
    It would seem that rather than left and right wings the US has become a series of Russian dolls, with each succeeding administration neatly encasing the contours of the previous one.

    Does this mean that Donald Trump's statement that Russia's hacking and interference in the 2016 election is not all "fake news" ???
  6. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    27 Oct '17 13:12
    Originally posted by @kmax87
    Which ever way it's sliced, the MSM with Rachel Maddow and Keith Olberman have led a charge against the Trump administration claiming deep Russian collusion, yet Fox News stalwarts like Hannity have long denounced the claims and have gone on the offensive in the last couple of days, detailing HRC's links to the Russians over the Uranium One deal, money in Bi ...[text shortened]... ian dolls, with each succeeding administration neatly encasing the contours of the previous one.
    Pulling the strings is a bit of an overstatement.

    Yes, the Russians try do what's best for their political interests. I imagine we do the same in other countries.

    If anybody broke laws, they should be prosecuted. If the Russian government merely lobbied or even dug up information about a candidate, all's fair in love and politics.

    The left wants to paint Trump's win as illegitimate. The right wants to paint HRC as corrupt. Russian connections help both narratives. As far as I'm concerned, the Russians are players in the marketplace of ideas.
  7. 27 Oct '17 18:15
    Originally posted by @sh76 to Kmax87
    Pulling the strings is a bit of an overstatement.

    Yes, the Russians try do what's best for their political interests. I imagine we do the same in other countries.

    If anybody broke laws, they should be prosecuted. If the Russian government merely lobbied or even dug up information about a candidate, all's fair in love and politics.

    The left w ...[text shortened]... both narratives. As far as I'm concerned, the Russians are players in the marketplace of ideas.
    A significant difference is that Putin evidently had a particular grievance about Hillary Clinton
    (as US Secretary of State) whereas he had no particular grievance about Donald Trump.
  8. Standard member finnegan
    GENS UNA SUMUS
    27 Oct '17 18:27
    Americans have been playing the Russian card for so long it is now an all purpose scapegoat, even when invoked for, against, around and behind all and every side of any nonsense. Talk about reds under the bed!

    As always, the real story is probably closer to home.

    Next Wednesday, November 1, Twitter executives will testify before the US House panel investigating alleged election meddling by Russia, as will representatives from Google and Facebook. What are we going to be watching? The major players in social media are coming under increasing pressure from the American government and starting to buckle under the weight.

    Is freedom of information sacred? Is media diversity valued? Is fascism starting to fence off the common spaces required to make democracy effective?

    https://www.rt.com/op-edge/407858-rt-twitter-us-election/
  9. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    29 Oct '17 23:45
    Originally posted by @mchill
    Does this mean that Donald Trump's statement that Russia's hacking and interference in the 2016 election is not all "fake news" ???
    Absolutely. Look in the same way Obama knew what Merkel was saying because her phone was tapped, Putin has had a lot of time to put plans together. The continuity of his rule brings a focus to strategy that the US by contrast simply can't match. I think the question should rather read, why would Putin not seek to find sympathetic corners on both sides of the Washington ailse, and if you can accept that basic premise, hacking for fun and profit is a small step away from that, especially if the prospect of having a Russian friendly businessman, who would like to extend his hotel brand into your country presents themselves as a serious contender in that nations election process.
  10. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    30 Oct '17 00:56
    Originally posted by @sh76
    The left wants to paint Trump's win as illegitimate. The right wants to paint HRC as corrupt. Russian connections help both narratives. As far as I'm concerned, the Russians are players in the marketplace of ideas.
    If it was just Mercer and cronies using sophisticated algorithms to micro target voters using social media, I suppose I could agree that alls fair in love and politics, but when it appears that there was significant Russian influence in the generation of fake news for social media, the question is, were the Russians employed by Trump or did they exploit his desire for Russian finance and business opportunity to offer skill sets in cyber influence to "guarantee" his election.

    While nothing in life can be guaranteed 100%, those who worked for Trump would have swaggered with confidence that it was so. Or are you going to claim occam's razor and say that Trump just stumbled in on the back of Hillary's unfavourability and unfortunate hiccups with Comey and the Podesta emails and some voter deregistration?

    But as for Trump being his own creation and not having strings attached to his person pulling and contorting his movements at the whim of some puppet master?

    Consider this. It's been quite a transformation with a fair degree of insight in understanding the plight of the common man for a person who hardly seems to be able to see much past his own nose and who requires a serious degree of fawning obsequious butt licking (Lou Dobbs and co. have you no shame) to display a reasonable sense of composure.

    And yet this is the same candidate Trump, who just instinctively knew the right messaging to fire up a disgruntled mostly white middle/working class, rural base, and yet for most of his adult life he shmoozed with Democrats and Wall St?

    No I think you guys have been had, and I would be very surprised if an outright antagonist to core Russian objectives ever makes the Whitehouse in the future.
  11. Standard member sh76
    Civis Americanus Sum
    30 Oct '17 01:51
    Originally posted by @kmax87
    If it was just Mercer and cronies using sophisticated algorithms to micro target voters using social media, I suppose I could agree that alls fair in love and politics, but when it appears that there was significant Russian influence in the generation of fake news for social media, the question is, were the Russians employed by Trump or did they exploit his ...[text shortened]... ed if an outright antagonist to core Russian objectives ever makes the Whitehouse in the future.
    There is absolutely zero evidence that the Russians were employed by Trump.

    Trump's campaign may have swaggered with confidence, but yes, I would say it stumbled into a lucky win.

    In such a close election, any one of numerous factors could have made the difference, but I'd say Russian interference was way down on the list.

    Bad luck in the electoral college, white working class resentment at the "system," Hillary's general unpopularity and the bizarre way the email saga was handled by all parties, including the media and FBI, were all much bigger factors than the Russians.

    "Voter deregistration" is the sort of excuse that losers make.
  12. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    30 Oct '17 11:42
    Originally posted by @sh76
    There is absolutely zero evidence that the Russians were employed by Trump....
    When can we reasonably be assured that for their own self interested reasons the Russians did not do their utmost to avail themselves to Trump during the campaign and now that he is President they will like any other corporate donor, reap the benefits of their support.
  13. 30 Oct '17 14:17
    Originally posted by @kmax87
    When can we reasonably be assured that for their own self interested reasons the Russians did not do their utmost to avail themselves to Trump during the campaign and now that he is President they will like any other corporate donor, reap the benefits of their support.
    It's almost like we can't trust those in government.

    No worries, I'm sure we can trust them with our health care.
  14. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    01 Nov '17 16:02
    Originally posted by @whodey
    It's almost like we can't trust those in government.
    No worries, I'm sure we can trust them with our health care.
    You should check out the health plans that go with being in congress and you will become a believer!