Donald Trump and US politics

"

cipher_nemo wrote:

Calling for investigations of Trump is what the bulk of the Democratic party wants, and then didn't want. Obama wiretapping Trump is just a random, stupid tweet by Trump, not the whole party.

No, I'm pretty sure the bulk of the democratic party still wants Trump investigated.

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

"

But either way, without hard evidence, we're just talking about stories here. Without those photos, your wife would be ill-advised to fully believe any anonymous claim received; the motives to lie are numerous. The reason why Wikileaks is so effective is that they deal exclusively in evidence, not narrative.

And yet, the evidence that those hacked Clinton emails were legitimate was...? Oh right, the reputation of Wikileaks. And you'll have to excuse me if I consider the freakin' New York Times more trustworthy than Wikileaks.

Hahahaha! As if.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DomainKeys_Identified_Mail

Almost every leaked email was from a sent from an address on a server with DKIM enabled (ex: gmail.com, basically any server not run by a doofus). This encrypted information is not known crackable and confirms those emails authentic, that is, actually sent by the sender address to the recipient addresses at the time indicated with the exact text displayed. Edit: An individual can run, and I have ran, DKIM independently given the raw email and accountless access to the sender's email server (ex: Gmail). Because the Podesta emails are to Podesta's Gmail account, not from it, the server for DKIM verification varies widely.

"Reputation!" Hahahahaha! Ha.

"

Budget_player_cadet wrote:

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Dem sympathizers before Jan 20 be like "It sure is a good thing our intelligence agencies are investigating Trump's ties to Russia."

Dem sympathizers after Mar 4 be like "Our intelligence agencies investigated Trump? What a baseless conspiracy theory. No evidence."

40 days. That's how long it takes you guys to forget. That's how fast the MSM can make you 180.

Hands up, anyone who can spot the difference between "intelligence agencies are investigating Trump" and "Obama wiretapped Trump". Anyone? Anyone?

Meanwhile, according to The Intercept, if Trump had literally anything documenting this, he could release it at any time. He has full security clearance, and can declassify anything he wants at any time. Why hasn't he? See, if I heard that my political opponents were doing some skullduggery, and I knew for a fact that I could get literally any document related to this skullduggery and release it to the public with any degree of classification I desire, my first response would not be to throw out an unhinged tweet and wait a day or two. It would be to find those documents. Trump is talking out of his ass. As usual.

First: yes, I see the difference between "Trump was wiretapped" and "Obama ordered Trump wiretapped." The first isn't debatable, the second is the sort of thing we pretty much know is true but will (most likely) never be proved due to plausible deniability.

Second, no one is really questioning that Trump Tower was under surveillance nor that Trump can view any information intercepted. That's not really the issue here. The issue is: who ordered this? And why?

.

Edit: since I double-posted anyway, I'll add here... We never proved Nixon ordered Watergate.

Things I trust in descending order:
1) Encryption algorithms written by prominent computer scientists
2) WikiLeaks
3) Most parts of the US Government
4) A hobo wielding a knife and gibbering loudly while approaching me
5) The CIA and the FBI

"

pneuma wrote:

Things I trust in descending order:
1) Encryption algorithms written by prominent computer scientists
2) WikiLeaks
3) Most parts of the US Government
4) A hobo wielding a knife and gibbering loudly while approaching me
5) The CIA and the FBI

I'd switch 3 and 4, personally. I've heard precisely 3 sentences from hobos wielding knives gibbering loudly while approaching me, and although that's admittedly a small sample size, so far I rate them at 66% truthful.

exactly. all federal government employees swim in same pool and share same predispositions and that is growing wealth and power perpetuating .gov - at least a homeless guys just wants a $10 pint. I can afford that. Not so much 50% of my income.

That propaganda organ of the Alt-Right, the NYT, ran a front-page article on Jan. 20 stating that Trump Tower was wiretapped:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LX9AK2Zcus

"

In a story, written on Inauguration Day, Jan. 20th, by lead writer Michael S. Schmidt, the front page New York Times headline read:
“Wiretapped Data Used in Inquiry of Trump Aides”
In other words, Trump’s Aides – who, during the transition period worked in Trump Tower – were wiretapped by the government as part of an investigation of the business dealings of campaign advisors.
But, it gets better – and hat tip to Rush Limbaugh for pointing this out. On Saturday – just two days ago – the very same Michael S Schmidt wrote:
“Trump Offering No Evidence, Says Obama Tapped His Phones.”
So here was the Jan. 20th story an the front page of the NYT:

A writer contradicting his own headline. The news doesn't get much faker than that. =^[.]^=

"

Aim_Deep wrote:

exactly. all federal government employees swim in same pool and share same predispositions and that is growing wealth and power perpetuating .gov

Yeah. Like Grover Norquist. Who had every republican in congress sign a pledge to never raise taxes.

???

Cynicism does not equal intelligent commentary. It's just cynicism.

"

ScrotieMcB wrote:

Hahahaha! As if.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DomainKeys_Identified_Mail

Mea culpa.

"

First: yes, I see the difference between "Trump was wiretapped" and "Obama ordered Trump wiretapped." The first isn't debatable, the second is the sort of thing we pretty much know is true but will (most likely) never be proved due to plausible deniability.

Anyone else spot the obvious contradiction here?

"

Second, no one is really questioning that Trump Tower was under surveillance nor that Trump can view any information intercepted. That's not really the issue here.

I'd say it is. If he's claiming he was wiretapped, he hasn't provided shit for evidence.

Also, with regards to that NYTimes article:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/19/us/politics/trump-russia-associates-investigation.html?_r=0

One interesting thing is that there is no actual contradiction here. Paul Manafort is not Donald Trump. Carter Page is not Donald Trump. Roger Stone is not Donald Trump. Limbaugh is, as is his MO, lying. Big shocker.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dy9Qtf3P6Nw 23 min video (but you can skip the first 3).

Well... that seems a good reason for people to see that tax returns now, isn't it?

The sad thing is that no matter how much smoke is around, Trump Supporters will always refuse to see if there is fire. It's like that saying: "what eyes can't see, the heart can't feel".

You can't find out about sh*t you don't like if don't look for it.


Trump supporters won't want him to be investigated unless there is undeniable proof that he is guilty of something, which is kinda stupid...