'Wish I Had The Power' To Hack Enemies' Emails, Says Man Very Close To Having Such Power
from the maybe-time-to-pull-back-nsa-powers dept
This weird presidential election continues to get weirder. Donald Trump, perhaps upset about being overshadowed this week by the Democratic Convention, held a press conference on Wednesday morning where he said a whole bunch of completely nutty stuff. A lot of the attention is being placed on his weird possibly half-joking request that Russia hack into Hillary Clinton's emails and reveal the 33,000 that were deleted (or maybe just give them to the FBI, as he later said in a tweet). That was bizarre on a number of levels, including coming right after denying he had any connection to Russia and the possibility that they had hacked the Democratic National Committee's computer system.But it was his follow up comment that should be a hell of a lot more terrifying. He claimed that he "wished" he had the power to hack her emails:
"Honestly, I wish I had that power," Trump responded. "I’d love to have that power."Now, again, there's an argument that this comment was sarcastic in the same manner as the "please, Russia" comment that everyone's been focusing on.
But here's the thing: in just a few months he very well might have that power. The NSA certainly has the ability to hack into just about anyone's emails should they want to. And no matter what we feel about whether or not the NSA has or is currently abusing that power, at the very least the level of abuses aren't nearly as bad as they could be in the hands of someone who just doesn't seem to give a fuck about the Constitution or the law.
As we noted a few months ago, surveillance powers should be designed as if the person you least trust in the world had control over the systems. Whether -- to you -- that's Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton or someone else entirely doesn't really matter. It's a pretty clear reason that we should be massively curtailing the surveillance powers granted by the US government to both the intelligence community and the law enforcement community.
Here we have the nominated presidential candidate joking that he'd make use of the power -- which he'd have -- to hack into the communications of political enemies. And while some will argue this is yet another on the long checklist of reasons why Trump is not fit for the job, it's even more a condemnation of our surveillance powers today. Whatever people think of the candidates, it seems like the one thing we should agree on is vastly limiting the surveillance powers.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: donald trump, emails, hacking, hillary clinton, nsa, power, russia, surveillance
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
If a candidate either while campaigning for office or while in office advocates any activity that is in violation of the constitution, that person is immediately disqualified for any elected government office for the rest of their life.
That would put some teeth in their oath of office.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: immediately disqualified
I find the whole thing ironic - for decades I've been told not to worry about excessive government power, because in our democracy the leaders will always be reasonable, civilized people who won't abuse them.
Not some kind of crazies like the people who led [nightmarish dictatorship of your choice].
Then comes Mr. Trump...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: immediately disqualified
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: immediately disqualified
Don the Con is an immature, vindictive child who would misuse any power he couls get his stubby little orange fingers on.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: immediately disqualified
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: immediately disqualified
Hillary and Trump are cut from the same cloth, trashing one without the other reveals intellectual dissonance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: immediately disqualified
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: immediately disqualified
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: immediately disqualified
The way another person trashes another candidate reveals much about their politics.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: immediately disqualified
FWIW, in my view Trump and Clinton are both horrible, but in very different ways.
Clinton is horrible in the normal way that Richard Nixon, Jimmy Carter, and Barack Obama were horrible.
Which is, in my book, pretty bad.
But Trump is a whole different class of horrible.
I can't in good conscience vote for either of them.
My vote will go to Gary Johnson and Bill Weld. They're far from perfect too, but they are not corrupt, obviously incompetent, or insane, and will respect the Constitution.
That's something - more than I can say for Clinton and Trump.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: immediately disqualified
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
And, no, a CEO is not the same as a governor since a CEO tells people what to do, but a governor has to compromise with the legislature.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
It's the only rational explanation I can think of at this point.
Did he not say at one point that he might one day just decide he didn't want to be President? Maybe he's bored.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe this is what we need...
At least then the legislative and judicial branches have zero excuse to allow it to continue - lest they be outed as blatantly irresponsible as well.
As crazy as it would be to have Trump as president - I suspect it would demonstrate very quickly just how fucked up our government has become.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe this is what we need...
The USG is already a huge steaming pile of bad(among other things), I really don't need some narcissistic nutjob elected to what is supposed to be the highest office in the country to demonstrate this to me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
But damn, we've got some seriously stupid people in congress who need a serious wakeup call.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
Result: D. Trump for president; the ultimate protest vote.
You're already radical, that's the problem. America needs to stop being afraid, stop seeing violence as a shortcut to security and justice and start respecting common sense. When that happens you'll stop getting candidates like Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton in the front row of presidential candidates and start getting the safe pairs of hands you actually want on the helm of the good ship USA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
Might makes right, violence unfortunately is the ONLY tool to ensure security and justice.
Sadly this same tool can also be used to ensure chaos and tyranny as well. Let's stop treating tools as default evil or good, they are just fucking tools! Their usage defines their nature and only in that moment. The inability of people who cannot understand this is a great peril and evil that facilitates the rotting away of wisdom and benevolence!
The real problem in America is multi-faceted. The existence of Political Parties in a voting system created to ensure their life blood. The apathy of an entire electorate that bitches and moans without actually doing anything. The corruption of 3 branches of government to the point where Government Believes IT is the USA and NOT ITS CITIZENS!!!
Congress is apathetic and unconstitutionally gives away regulatory powers to agencies. They do not have this power. The only duties regulatory agencies can constitutionally perform are the enforcement of laws created by Congress, not themselves.
SCOTUS no longer understands the English language and intentionally perverts the Bill of Rights for political and judicial activism. They have intentionally corrupted the Constitution.
The Executive Branch believes itself to be Royalty, and is unrestrained by a Congress that has more allegiance to Party than to Nation.
The electorate, a cacophonous group of ignorant and sycophantic dregs, clamoring to destroy themselves each time the opportunity arises. Boasting and Bragging about themselves while Disparaging and Insulting the others never once realizing or understanding their hypocrisy.
We currently are fulfilling the Prophecy handed down to us by George Washington, the First and Greatest President to have ever served the US.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
Dogs? No? Oh then you must like cats then.
Black? No? Then you must like white.
This may surprise you but it's entirely possible to believe that both are terrible choices, to believe that just because putting one is in charge is a terrible idea doesn't mean that you believe that putting the other in charge would be any better.
When I see people saying that they want to see Trump in office specifically because they think he'll make things worse in the hopes that that will be the tipping point... yeah, that's a stupid idea, and a stupid reason to vote for someone for the reason I noted above.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
Good analogy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
More like, we're stuck in a car that's got uncontrolled acceleration and the brakes aren't working. There's only one way that's going to end, so you might as well crash it deliberately in a manner of your choosing, instead of letting it happen in a way that you're unprepared for.
(Not saying I agree, but I can understand the sentiment without having to agree with it.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Maybe this is what we need...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe this is what we need...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
You created a system without limits, refuse to provide oversight, keep pushing for more powers because you think it applies to everyone else but not you. Now consider President Trump able to pick up a phone and have your entire life on his desk in 2 hours tops...
I guess the one redeeming thing is, they've cultivated a society that thinks to try to stop this sort of thing means you love terrorists & hate america... How many of you will end up in Trumps control? At least the lobbists pay you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Libertarian the Election
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Libertarian the Election
Same for Stein, by the way. Remaining a third-party candidate at this point is an act of selfish ego and risks the future of the country.
Do recall that the votes for Nader in 2000 gave us 8 years of The Shrub -- the man principally responsible for the increase in terrorist attacks around the world, the man responsible for the financial meltdown, the man responsible for much of the surveillance state, and most certainly the worst president in the history of the US. And as bad as that was, Trump would be far worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Libertarian the Election
For a second there I thought you were joking. If he cared about the country he would do anything but endorse Clinton.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Libertarian the Election
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Libertarian the Election
I'm not saying that's a good thing: it's not. But it's reality, and if you can't grasp that, then you have zero concept of the two-party system is operating. You need to do some remedial reading. In fact, you need to do a LOT of remedial reading.
Voting libertarian or green in THIS election is voting for Trump. Period. If you want to piss away your vote like that as some selfish act of protest, I suppose you can. Enjoy your self-righteousness as President Trump wrecks the country.
I backed Bernie (not entirely, but he was the candidate close enough to my views to merit my support). And now I'm going to work for the Clinton campaign, not because I'm enthralled with her, but because someone who voted with Sanders 89% of the time is the closest I'm going to get, and because the absolute highest priority, at all costs, is to stop Trump -- who would be a disaster for latinx, blacks, Muslims, women and just about everyone else who isn't a rich white straight racist male.
You want to grow a third party? Sure. So do I. Maybe one of the nascent efforts will do that. But AFTER this election. Because if Trump becomes president, there may not BE a next election.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Libertarian the Election
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing you have always been doing but expecting different results.
If you backed Bernie as self proclaimed Socialist then you deserve every last ounce of Shit Trump brings to the table, because whether you know it or not, your actions have birthed the likes of Trump. Don't feel bad, many others like you have done the same so you are certainly not alone.
Voting for a 3rd party makes your vote into a political statement about the Party system. In order for it to be destroyed, you have to start somewhere. People with attitudes like yours never go anywhere because you cannot take the first step, the ultimate act of a loser... FEAR of getting started. So instead out of chagrin you berate others for doing something you are too cowardly to do.
Besides, Bernie just left the Democratic Party... you gonna vote for your man now loser?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Libertarian the Election
https://medium.com/@wendycockcroft/authoritarianism-is-everybodys-problem-3d9c12d29694#.lq9v 31sq0
Trump's is less subtle than Hillary's but they're both authoritarian. Voting third party in BIG ENOUGH NUMBERS will get a third party candidate in. It's a numbers game. Get the numbers in, get the candidate in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Libertarian the Election
Both parties clearly want to mercilessly destroy the constitution, they just differ on which specific items in the Bill of Rights to start with. For the left its the 1st and 2nd, for the right its the 4th and 5th.
But in reality both wish to suppress all of them when it suits their political agendas, they just have particular ones they hate more than the others.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Libertarian the Election (think that ANY third-party candidate)
At this point it is mostly about who the American people hate the least. Gary Johnson is certainly less hate-able than either of the other two.
If I were to put odds on violent civil revolt in this country, the lowest probability is with Johnson. I don't think there is any question about that.
Trump = complete batshit chaos.
Hillary = SCOTUS whimpers in the corner while the corporate oligarchy wipes its dick on the Constitution.
Johnson = The establishment would have NO fucking idea what to do with this guy.
Johnson is west coast likable. I think he has a real shot in CA, FL, VA, most of the northwest and midwest. TX will probably go Trump because it's TX. The northeast and the deep south will go HRC.
If you regard the unholy trinity of cabal news as the propagandist douche squeeze that they are, then maybe Johnson may have a better chance right now than Trump.
NONE of the data that comes out of the trinity is reliable. If you aren't completely ignoring them at this point, you are conceding your mind to the system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Libertarian the Election
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Libertarian the Election
Don't vote 3rd party and let one of the 2 main parties win. Vote for one of the 2 main parties and ensure it!
Yeah, I see how that works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Libertarian the Election
Gary Johnson is closer to an Eisenhower Republican than Trump. His thoughts on switching over to a VAT style tax system is a little nuts, but it would never pass Congress, and I think he is aware of that.
Trump is dangerous because Congress is vindictive enough to give him running room. HRC is dangerous because she would ride the country down in a flaming ball of shit if that is what was required for her to be the most important person in the room. Her corporate benefactors are counting on that fact.
Gary Johnson isn't that dangerous at all. There is a lot of stuff in his platform that Congress won't let him do, and the stuff that they MIGHT let him do is fairly progressive.
At the very least he will be asking a lot of the right questions. And he certainly has the stamina for the job. The guys runs triathlon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sure he was sort of asking Russia to get Hillary's lost emails but I didn't find that nearly as damming as the part you highlighted
Bigly
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yeah, me too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does anyone else know about this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perspective
It kind of feels like he's just following the public perception that our current and past government think about citizens email privacy.
Seriously, how many stories in the past few years have we read? From Microsoft suing to at least tell folks that they are being spied on to overseas datacenters center our own government fights tooth and nail to access to trusted employees abusing collection database information to look up ex wives or potential girlfriends...
While the guy may be saying things off the cuff, the precedent is that our own government has been very focused on doing exactly what he's suggesting.
-- What frightens me more, as he's just one person, is that entire agencies with thousands of people and resources are perceived to be doing just what he's calling for on all of us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Irony.
When the media freaks out and calls you Hitler then asks you for a statement, you point out this is business as usual, and people go absolutely nuclear when they realize the existing commander in chief has already done this on a broad scale (IRS targeting of tea-party protesters with tax audits and getting in bed with foreign intelligence agencies to name two sins he's saying he'll commit here. Also, isn't it funny how we have two political parties that kinda push the same agenda's?).
Even if you lose the election, you've got the public in such a flurry about what the commander in chief can do, that they won't be able to do anything for the next 2 generations.
Russia and China are fully aware of how destructive psychological and economic warfare is and given the last 20 years of US dominance in this field, I think they very much so prefer to give the American People any kind of chance they can get given the alternative dominance from multinational corporations or the destabilization of the United States.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Irony.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Irony.
Have you ever had something sold at you this hard that ended up being worth the sticker price?
Have you ever been given the stick and carrot to encourage you to pick between two undesirable options, when all the while there was a third option you would have seen if you'd hadn't been under pressure?
Have you ever been patronized with the phrase "I hear you", or received another quaint platitude from someone who clearly disrespects everything about you?
Have you ever been asked to "join us" at a card table looking for a sucker?
It isn't that you win, it is what you win. If there is no integrity, there is no reasonable expectation of fulfillment. And even if the worst is the result, then at least the next time around we will all be more compelled in our duty to the electoral process.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Trump is so Nixon 2.0 in a lot of ways.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Trump's policy is Trump. That's it. In terms of megalomania, Nixon was an amateur compared to him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
And hacking is the least of my worries with him as president, though I wonder if he'll give our nuclear launch codes to the Russians, too. I can only imagine the level of incompetence and fuckwittery with him as a sitting president.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trade ya a paradigms for 4 nickles....
She asks me how some people can sleep at night.
I sleep well, just by trying to be the man she wants me to be.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just like Turdegon
Or look to Russia where a powerful & rich politician can make or break anyone on their whim of the day.
Soon the USA will be the "Home of the dictator & land of the enslaved".
Unfortunately not even God will save the USA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Just like Turdegon
'Soon'?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Just like Turdegon
Too late
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment was held for moderation for at least 24 hours
Enjoy the results!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trump Hacking E-mails
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
If Russia acquires those emails, it's ESPIONAGE. Period. And if you're so blindly by your misogynistic hate for Clinton that you think it's acceptable for a presidential candidate to request that another country conduct espionage against the United States, then you're a worthless, traitorous piece of filth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
Are you stupid, Russia is already into espionage and so is the good ole US of A! Just ask Angela Merckel if she enjoyed the US spying on her? You guys defending Hillary are amazing. Obama has been killing American citizens with drone strikes. He has gone after whistle blower like no other before him. Hillary will be more of the same and most likely worse. You can see the tyrant in her if you just open your eyes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
Lets just say... Hillary lovers burned their sight out a long time ago and only cling to Hillary because that is the last thing they ever saw! They cannot see anything else!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
The DNC is trying to make it a matter of National Security, which would mean those emails could possibly contain classified materials - which we were told wasn't the case.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
To be clear that's NOT what he said at the actual press conference. At the conference he asked Russia to get the emails (though, it's pretty clear he was being somewhat sarcastic).
AFTER the conference, he did a tweet where he changed what he said slightly, and THEN asked Russia, if they found those emails, to turn them over to the FBI. You're confusing what he said at the conference with what he tweeted after.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
If Russia or any other country or person has Hillary Clinton's 33,000 illegally deleted emails, perhaps they should share them with the FBI!
This is from the conference:
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Mr. Trump said during a news conference here in an apparent reference to Mrs. Clinton’s deleted emails. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Twisting this to him asking is nothing but FUD.
It's funny that Billary supporters care more about words than the illegal actions of their candidate of choice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Trump Hacking E-mails
If you're so sure that via hacking isn't what he meant, can you elaborate on how the Russians would have come across these emails?
You know, just so we can be FUD-free.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Australia has no bill of rights or human rights act. We already have far worse than snoopers charter and patriot act combined here - and there is no legal mechanism for challenging it.
Personal data is like crack to the motherfuckers. No amount is ever enough.
Maybe we need a big scandal like Trump using the surveillance machine against his political enemies for this decent into the abyss to finally be reconsidered.
I can't see it stopping any other way. For any of us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Again
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Again
The people that scream of equality the most are the ones visiting the most inequality of all! It is quite the situation to have discovered that they hide their own racism and bigotry under the guise of calling others racists and bigots.... no wait... I keep forgetting, this is history 101!
The politicians that spend most of their time attacking other politicians are very shallow and incompetent. Better to turn your followers against the other citizens to ensure your victory.
I tried to remind all of the Bush lovers that whatever power you give that ass clown the other party will gain as well then they make it into office! But no... refused to listen, just like every other worthless Party before country fucktard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's look at the facts.
Hillary's email server is long gone -- unless her lawyers are lying and they kept copies in defiance of the FBI.
So we aren't talking about hacking currently, but merely going through old stuff that Russia may have picked up a few years ago.
So all that Trump is asking is for the Russians to look through their old stuff & turn it over -- if they have it.
All of the hyperbole and spin comes from people in the tank for Hillary.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's look at the facts.
When words fall out of Trump's mouth, *you* might think that obviously he's being sarcastic or joking, but he is heard WORLD-WIDE. And what people hear is that if he is serious he is encouraging espionage against the US. And if he is joking, then other countries will think that joking about such matters is shocking and, at the very least, irresponsibly trivialising hacking and surveillance by the country that the US's last Republican presidential candidate (Romney) called the US's number one foe.
He's already talked about possibly not supporting Nato allies, about pulling out of the WTO, about how at least Putin is 'a leader unlike what we have here' just as 3 recent instances of inflammatory rhetoric - are they all jokes and sarcasm? Is that how he will run the country - as a reality TV freakshow special?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
Trump did not call for espionage. He is just asking to take advantage of potential espionage that "may" have already occurred. And since it is clear out own government is corrupt, it is more sad that there is a call to a foreign power to do a justice that our own refused to perform because "political favors and corruption"
Trump worded things very specifically to out idiots like you. It's working.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
Let's say the Russians hand over a bunch of emails to the FBI, or to whoever you like. And Russia swears, hand on heart, Scout's Honor, that the information dump is absolutely 100% genuine and real. Why, specifically, do YOU want to believe the Russians? What proof could YOU offer that the Russian offer is not real instersed with fake, in other words a disinformation operation. You want the US electorate to take the word of the Russians? Hello?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
I have no intention of believing anything that a government says. Anyone dumb enough to just believe this shit is an idiot.
The data contained in the emails do not have to directly corroborated to start a backlash. You know as well as I do that the unwashed masses just love them some good ole political soap operas and will go gaga over them. Plus the fact that it would piss off a few politicians... it might get them to take nation security more seriously than hand stomping a pulpit as they lie to the people about their intentions.
There is a lot more value in this story than just who is right or wrong, lies or truth.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
The Damage that Party sycophants have caused to this nation cannot be calculated by human means. Hillary is Trash, all the party had to do was present a decent candidate, but it is not possible because Hillary has paid her dues and she is OWED this!
I would feel sorry for the Bernie idiots if they didn't hate America so much they want to see it destroyed! I saw all of this going down from the get go and they just held on to false hope. This is not hard to understand in the least either. These political games have been going on for centuries and they will not be stopping until a Superior being stops it or we are all dead!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Let's look at the facts.
You mean the uptight twist-words-into-something-they-are-not crowd. FTFY.
Most normal human beings should see it for what it was.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Let's look at the facts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:Ditto
it's turtles all the way down
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think this whole campaign was designed to have the American people's eyes off what really matters, and that is Congress. Trump could be president and nothing will change.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Besides, according to Clinton there's nothing classified in those 30k emails, right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I am no fan of Trump but I have to give the clown props for putting on a Hillaryious show.
(yes, the misspeeling was intentional internet gramma and speelin nazis.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Does anyone doubt Hillary wants that power?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Does anyone doubt Hillary wants that power?
Anyone that wants that power, is pretty much the very definition of unqualified for that power.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Does anyone doubt Hillary wants that power?
And yet that's the caliber of individual that wants that power. The ultimate catch-22.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Does anyone doubt Hillary wants that power?
I could not even serve as a Judge in trial because the laws are so fucked up and require a judge to become corrupt to now serve. The best and only thing I can do is serve as a juror and help ensure that the government is not fucking my fellow citizens over. If I could just get a few more million citizens to see the light, no one would need to run for office for the power, but to make sure things operate smoothly as possible, because the corrupted will not be able to consume power nearly as easily that way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A party subverts the vote and you want me to support their candidate? Not a chance.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Skunk world order
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Skunk world order
There is certainly a very dark corner in government that is pulling a lot of strings on things, and they like to keep it that way by getting all of the stupid people to fight over the Party in power.
In reality the Democrats and Republicans are after the same thing. Tyranny, they just disagree on how to accomplish that goal, so the people you see giving to both parties are likely the worst of them all, because it does not matter which party wins, the shadow-players with all of the money and power win either way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Skunk world order
So true.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What about this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What about this?
"Why doesn't someone just .."
You're someone, why ask someone else to do it? Please let us know how it goes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What about this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: What about this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: What about this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: What about this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
50/50
I am an uninterested bystander at this point.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 50/50
Right now the ONLY opposition between Trump and the rest is essentially immigration or if we sell out our local communities to the rich and powerful. Trump is still a fucking liberal just not as much of a cocksukking liberal as hillary.
The destruction of the Constitution, American Principles, and the Operation of the US Government is assured with both candidates and parties... just as George Washington said it would.
You just won the solid gold Kewpie doll prize... the one for idiots falling for the stupid shit that get spewed by lamestream media?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: 50/50
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 50/50
Do you actually think the New World Order lets the populace decide who is going to be their new voice for another eight years?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trump: I want attention!
Last week, Trump got all the attention in the world because he was nominated as the Republican candidate.
This week, the attention is on Hillary Clinton as she becomes the Democratic candidate.
So OF COURSE Trump has to make another outrageous statement to get the attention back on him. Is he really such an egotistical narcissist that he can't let other people have some attention for one week?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
C'mon Mike
"Russia hack into Hillary Clinton's emails" Tsk tsk Mike.
"“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” Trump said at a press conference in Doral, Florida, Wednesday morning after the second night of the Democratic convention. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press. Let’s see if that happens.”"
But yet... the idiots are out in force claiming he said something he didnt:
"“This has to be the first time that a major presidential candidate has actively encouraged a foreign power to conduct espionage against his political opponent. That’s not hyperbole, those are just the facts. This has gone from being a matter of curiosity, and a matter of politics, to being a national security issue.”"
LOL... I just love to watch propaganda unfold.
So Trumps "call for a hack" were on an email server that has already been taken down. I guess it's easier for anti-Trumpers to make stuff up for a sensational headline.
Funny the focus is on this rather than prosecuting Billary for compromising national security by running her own email server.
I personally would have called out to the NSA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Greenwald: "That is such unmitigated bullshit."
So, literally, the lead story in the New York Times today suggests, and other people have similarly suggested it, that Trump was literally putting in a request to Putin for the Russians to cyberattack the FBI, the United States government, or get Hillary Clinton’s emails.
***That is such unmitigated bullshit.***
What that was was an offhanded, trolling comment designed to make some kind of snide reference to the need to find Hillary’s emails.
He wasn’t directing the Russians, in some genuine, literal way, to go on some cybermission to find Hillary’s emails.
If he wanted to request the Russians to do that, why would he do it in some offhanded way in a press conference?
It was a stupid, reckless comment that he made elevated into treason.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2016/07/glenn_greenwald_on_don ald_trump_the_dnc_hack_and_a_new_mccarthyism.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perhaps HE doesn't know the email server has already been taken down. I mean, let's face it...Trump IS something of a retard when it comes to the comments he makes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
He said, jokingly, that if the Russians were the ones that were responsible for the DNC hack that maybe they were smart enough to also have hacked her personal email server, and if so, if they have the 30,000 missing emails, that they should disclose those to the media, and that the media would reward them greatly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh why yes, it is.
A person commits the crime of tampering with evidence when he or she knowingly:
•alters, conceals, falsifies, or destroys
•any record, document, or tangible object
•with the intent to interfere with an investigation, possible investigation, or other proceeding by the federal government.
Note the "possible"
If convicted, can face a prison sentence of not more than 20 years and/or a fine.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No matter who wins, people be moving to Canada.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yet another who believes the POTUS actually "runs" the country. He would no more be running it then, than Obama does now, and that is to say - not at all. PRESIDENTS DO NOT RUN THE COUNTRY. THEY REMAIN (A CURRENT) SPOKESMAN FOR A REGIME BEHIND THE SCENES. THAT REGIME DOESN'T CHANGE. THE PRESIDENTS INTERFACE TO SAID REGIME MANIFESTS ITSELF AS A SET OF "ADVISORS" (SUPPOSEDLY "CHOSEN" BY THE POTUS ITSELF!).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No need to shout. But ASK TRUMP about that. He is the ONLY ONE who can fix things - he SAYS SO.
Can't wait for the almighty Twitter Tantrum if/when he finds out he isn't allowed to be THE ONLY ONE who can fix things.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"I'm Hillary Clinton. Yes, I'm a terrible terrible candidate. I'm a dishonest corrupt crook who will sell out the American people. But what's the alternative ..."
and, sadly, it's a compelling argument to vote for her.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hillary speaks nutty stuff through her campaign
Hillary really says nothing that hasn't been vetted by the DNC. That doesn't mean that what has been vetted isn't nutty. In fact, a lot of what we hear recently is batshit crazy. I heard an audio clip where someone superimposed two "far separated by time" statements that Hillary made about the email scandal. It was amazing to hear and proved she had been coached to say exactly the same thing every time.
Russians helping Trump? If Hillary looses then blame it on the Russians? Russians interfering with the election process by leaking emails? Assange influencing the election process? Assange hates Hillary so he's doing this to damage her? The DNC parroting claims by Yahoo that it was the RSAs that hacked an underling's email so it must be these same people that hacked the DNC? The DNC parroting claims that because a Russian keyboard was used by someone at least once that it was RSAs that hacked the DNC? No one else that uses a Russian keyboard uses these commonly used hacking tool sets? That Wikileaks is distributing malware to catch more DNC members in their trap so they can get more on them? Claims that Trump is encouraging more hacks on Hillary? This shit is rich and it goes on.
Wikileaks is a whistleblower site. They only expose the crimes, they don't perpetrate the hacks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Hillary speaks nutty stuff through her campaign
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]