United States Corrupt Twattery

[Wij]

So, Russia hacked the Democrats, found out that the Clinton campaign was working with the DNC to rig the election and the DNC are suing Wikileaks for publishing the emails that prove this.

This helped the Trump campaign - so Russia helps Trump. Gettit.

But Democrats were money laundering and rigging elections, and are suing Wikileaks because they posted, er, the truth?

I get that Russian interference is bad. But criminality is criminality, no?


If that's an own goal - I don't follow this shite closely. But from what I'm reading from the links - that looks about right?

No. Not at all.

 

[Scouse]

No. Not at all.

Come on then. Don't just say "no". I've already said I don't follow it.

You post this stuff, and I cba digging deep into it - but on the face of it, that looks like the facts. And I actually want to follow what you're writing - but unless I've been following it as closely as you I've no hope in hell.

So, why not line-by-line tell me what I've got wrong, and tell me how it is? Or why are you bothering posting it in the first place if you don't want people to understand it?

Happy to accept you as the expert over me here. But blergh, if all you say is "no"...

 

[Wij]

Come on then. Don't just say "no". I've already said I don't follow it.

You post this stuff, and I cba digging deep into it - but on the face of it, that looks like the facts. And I actually want to follow what you're writing - but unless I've been following it as closely as you I've no hope in hell.

So, why not line-by-line tell me what I've got wrong, and tell me how it is? Or why are you bothering posting it in the first place if you don't want people to understand it?

Happy to accept you as the expert over me here. But blergh, if all you say is "no"...

Your characterisation and framing is wrong for a start. Wikileaks didn't publish this because they are deeply concerned about the lax nature of campaign finance in the USA. They could have had a field day with the Republicans. They published it because the GRU had stolen the emails to aid the Trump campaign and stir up resentment amongst Bernie supporters. Remember also that Russia had been running a lot of pro-Bernie accounts too to split the Democrat vote and get Bernie supporters disillusioned enough to not vote.

They are suing Wikileaks because it took stolen material from a hostile foreign intelligence agency and published it.

There are some emails in there that aren't exactly flattering to the DNC but that's not really news. No one wants their dirty laundry washed in public. I'm sure many staffers did prefer Hillary since Bernie isn't exactly a loyal Democrat. I've not seen any well-founded allegations of anything illegal though. We don't even know that all the emails are genuine. The Democrats would be in an even worse spot if they got into a public battle about the contents of each and every one:

Are the Clinton WikiLeaks emails doctored?

What's with the money laundering charge too? Criminal proceeds? Where's any evidence for that?

Have you ever seen Wikileaks or Glenn Greenwald publish something critical of Russia?

And the DNC hack was just one part of Russia's interference effort in the election. The indictments of 12 Russians already revealed loads of details about the scale of the operation. Mueller's report if we get to see it will have a lot more.

 

[Wij]

Look up @TEN_GOP for instance...

 

[Scouse]

Sorry @Wij. I don't necessarily disagree with your context at all, but the DNC are still suing wikileaks for publishing emails. That is a barrel of shite.

Two wrongs and all that. Source of information may be dodgy, but if the information is correct then tough titties.

 

[Job]

At what point do anti Trumpists just start looking ridiculous and desperate.
About 3 months ago.
We get it, hes not very polite, or smooth talking and doesnt PC speak.

But the response should have been a sensible alternative to his policies...
Not Russia!!!

 

[Scouse]

May I caveat that in no way does that lend support to Job's blinked orange ass-rimming PoV.

Trump is a massive, massive cunt.

 

[Wij]

Opinion | The Many Problems With the Barr Letter

 

[Wij]

Sorry @Wij. I don't necessarily disagree with your context at all, but the DNC are still suing wikileaks for publishing emails. That is a barrel of shite.

Two wrongs and all that. Source of information may be dodgy, but if the information is correct then tough titties.

Not tough titties if it’s a criminal offence.

 

[Wij]

View: https://twitter.com/chrisinsilico/status/1109983298397310976

 

[Scouse]

Not tough titties if it’s a criminal offence.

Rubbish. Publishing material under first amendment rights that shows Clinton campaign dodgyness - something Nancy Pelosi has admitted - trumps some bullshit criminal offence issues.

Or do you fall down on the side that Edward Snowden should be prosecuted because it was technically illegal to prove that the US government was lying to congress and WAS spying on the entire US population - in violation of their constitutional rights? (And benefitted us all globally - because he shone a light on how our governments treat us).

I admire your tenacity on going after Trump. He's a dodgy, probably criminal, asshat that needs taking down.

Don't for a second let that blind you to other dodgy stuff. Rolling out "criminal offence" or "its teh law" is a very weak argument.

 

[Wij]

Rubbish. Publishing material under first amendment rights that shows Clinton campaign dodgyness - something Nancy Pelosi has admitted - trumps some bullshit criminal offence issues.

Or do you fall down on the side that Edward Snowden should be prosecuted because it was technically illegal to prove that the US government was lying to congress and WAS spying on the entire US population - in violation of their constitutional rights? (And benefitted us all globally - because he shone a light on how ourgovernments treat us).

I admire your tenacity on going after Trump. He's a dodgy, probably criminal, asshat that needs taking down.

Don't for a second let that blind you to other dodgy stuff. Rolling out "criminal offence" or "its teh law" is a very weak argument.

It's not even remotely the same as Snowden (not that I think he's any shining light of goodness). PRISM was alleged to be unconstitutional. The DNC emails don't have any equivalent.

It's stolen private correspondence being used for a political end.

 

[Exioce]

Rolling out "criminal offence" or "its teh law" is a very weak argument.

Selective take from the guy with a dozen posts defending Michael Jackson and the rule of law in the thread below this one.

 

[Scouse]

Selective take from the guy with a dozen posts defending Michael Jackson and the rule of law in the thread below this one.

Not comparable situations at all.

One is "can the guilt of a person be determined by a television documentary".

One is "on balance is the publishing of material that shows the fixing of US primary elections, a public-interest case if ever there was one, protected by First Amendment rights"?


Apples <> Oranges.

 

[Wij]

that shows the fixing of US primary elections

That's a stretch.

 

[Deebs]

This is an interesting twitter thread...


View: https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1109913558333210629

 

[Wij]

This is an interesting twitter thread...


View: https://twitter.com/SethAbramson/status/1109913558333210629

Interesting yes. Already read it. However, I'd be careful with Seth. At the end of the days he's out for clicks. Take what he says with a pinch of salt.

 

[Deebs]

Interesting yes. Already read it. However, I'd be careful with Seth. At the end of the days he's out for clicks. Take what he says with a pinch of salt.

Agreed, but he does ask for other legal reps to comment on his thread. In the comments I did not see anyone disagreeing with him but then I didn't read every single comment.

Fact is tRump is still being investigated for crimes which is always a good thing.

 

[Scouse]

That's a stretch.

A stretch that Nancy Pelosi agreed with?

 

[Wij]

A stretch that Nancy Pelosi agreed with?

Link to exact wording vs 'fixing of US primary elections'. Don't go all Job on me.

 

[Scouse]

Link to exact wording vs 'fixing of US primary elections'. Don't go all Job on me.

OK. I'll dig when I get off work

 

[Scouse]

Link to exact wording vs 'fixing of US primary elections'. Don't go all Job on me.

To Elizabeth Warren: Do you agree with the notion that it was rigged?

"Yes."

 

[Gwadien]

To Elizabeth Warren: Do you agree with the notion that it was rigged?

"Yes."

I mean, as much as this is obviously not very democratic, isn't it kind of an open secret?

Isn't this like one of Trump's main criticisms of the Liberal Elites?

Very interesting that his main criticism of Liberalism is taking precedence in an investigation surrounding him.

 

[Wij]

To Elizabeth Warren: Do you agree with the notion that it was rigged?

"Yes."

OK. That's Elizabeth Warren, not Nancy Pelosi and she's entitled to her opinion (she's on the left of the party like Sanders) but that's still just an accusation of some bias in the party machinery. It's not like they actually falsified ballots. Like I said, dirty laundry. I'm sure all kinds of things went on to try to stop Trump becoming the GOP candidate

 

[Wij]

View: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1110124213690687488


Why weren’t they reported to the FBI then? Why did you all lie then they never happened then?

ffs

 

[Scouse]

"A stranger's illegal conduct does not suffice to remove the First Amendment shield from speech about a matter of public concern"

Yet, despite five resignations over this, the DNC are still suing Wikileaks for publishing accurate information.

Who cares if the Russians sent them the mails. If there wasn't dirt to dish they wouldn't have been able to dish it. It's a court case that produces a chilling effect.


I've already said Trump's an asshat. But there are a lot of asshats out there. Including Democrat asshats.

 

[Deebs]

"A stranger's illegal conduct does not suffice to remove the First Amendment shield from speech about a matter of public concern"

Yet, despite five resignations over this, the DNC are still suing Wikileaks for publishing accurate information.

Who cares if the Russians sent them the mails. If there wasn't dirt to dish they wouldn't have been able to dish it. It's a court case that produces a chilling effect.


I've already said Trump's an asshat. But there are a lot of asshats out there. Including Democrat asshats.

Asshat.

 

[Wij]

"A stranger's illegal conduct does not suffice to remove the First Amendment shield from speech about a matter of public concern"

Yet, despite five resignations over this, the DNC are still suing Wikileaks for publishing accurate information.

Who cares if the Russians sent them the mails. If there wasn't dirt to dish they wouldn't have been able to dish it. It's a court case that produces a chilling effect.


I've already said Trump's an asshat. But there are a lot of asshats out there. Including Democrat asshats.

You make the mistake of assuming that the GRU hackers and Wikileaks were acting separately rather than together.

(And that it's still reasonable to treat Wikileaks as journalism but that's besides the point if the above assumption is untrue.)

 

[Scouse]

Asshat.

Who? Me or the DNC?

 

[Scouse]

You make the mistake of assuming that the GRU hackers and Wikileaks were acting separately rather than together.

(And that it's still reasonable to treat Wikileaks as journalism but that's besides the point if the above assumption is untrue.)

You're the one encroaching on Job territory now, unless Chelsea Manning was a secret russian spy?

But the important point is - it's fucking dirty. And nobody gives even the slightest shit about the little people. And for the people that do? They ain't getting elected.