The 2016 US General Election

[JRT]

lol...YF...adds a good laugh to a pleasant evening, if I may putin that way. Let's get serious here. How this all going to end up? Do you still think it will blow over soon?

No. But regardless the efforts of foreign propagadists, ~1/2 of the electorate voted for Trump, and he has a strong majority among the electors. Even if a few electors flip, Trump will win. There will be nothing significant connecting him to any foreign interference.

Trump will be POTUS 45.

The anti- Dick Nixon sentiment evaporated slowly after his resignation, especially among the political left.

The anti- Bill Clinton sentiment has evaporated slowly after the end of his second term, and is still strong among the political right.

A large swath of the electorate have strong dislike for both Donald and Hillary. That is not going to end soon. Comedians and television newsertainment shows will be milking this for a very long time, for as long as they can profit from it.

The left will oppose Trump for as long as Trump remains in power, and soon some on the right will also more strongly oppose him. I think that his "honeymoon" period will be very brief, if he gets one.

I think that there is significant possibility that Trump will be treated as a lame duck for his full term in office.

[tbm3fan]

I think that there is significant possibility that Trump will be treated as a lame duck for his full term in office.

My thinking exactly. Even some of those who voted for him will eventually turn from him. People, who didn't already know, will learn that Trump is a sociopath. I have never liked the man going back decades. He has always and will always be about me, myself and I. That means everyone takes a back seat to him.

The Russian hacking issue shows his real colors in my opinion. He could have said I am not completely convinced that the Russians hacked our election but I will affirm that no foreign government will ever be allowed to interfere with our elections. That would have been the leadership thing to say. Instead he showed his true colors in denying and then doubling down on it. His true colors are that he will go to no ends to protect his reputation, already demonstrated multiple times, even over the best interests of America. You may disagree, and if I am wrong I'll eat my words, but I don't think I am wrong at all.

[GVChamp]

If that were actually the best option, then McCain would have been elected in 2008, and Lindsey Graham would have fared much better in the primaries. The best option is to be the Messiah to your political side and cast damnation upon your political opponents and stretch the rules as much as possible to cram your agenda through.

[snapper]

I cannot see this 'going away' anytime soon and one of the reasons for this was the way Trump and his pals managed the campaign. Remember they warned that the election might be 'rigged'? It was as if they were ready to call for some 'national insurrection' in the event that they had lost. Suppose their campaign had been hacked and emails released and suppose Clinton had called on an outside power to hack her opponent? Would that have constituted a 'rigged election'? I would bet it would. It is therefore a little hypocritical for them to call those who did not vote for Trump 'bad losers' and urge them to get on with it as normal when it is evident they would not have the same if the events and outcome had been reversed; Trump made this agenda and cannot call 'bad play' when it is used against him. Nor do I think his Kremlin style flat denial "give us the proof" type rebuff of the view of all the US intelligence agencies has legs long term; you can deny it is raining all you like but nobody is going to believe you for long when they are getting wet.

[YellowFever]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn...kov/index.html

(CNN) The United States must either stop accusing Russia of meddling in its elections or prove it, a spokesman for Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday.

Presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov said it was "indecent" of the United States to "groundlessly" accuse Russia of intervention in the US election campaign, Russian state news agency Tass reported.

"They should either stop talking about that or produce some proof at last. Otherwise it all begins to look unseemly," Peskov reportedly said about the latest accusations that Russia was responsible for hacker attacks.


President Barack Obama on Thursday vowed retaliatory action against Russia in the light of allegations that it meddled in the US presidential election campaign.

"I think there is no doubt that when any foreign government tries to impact the integrity of our elections that we need to take action and we will at a time and place of our own choosing," he told NPR.

What is known about the hacking

• Data and thousands of emails were stolen from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta, among other targets.

• US intelligence agencies in October pinned blame on Russia for campaign-related hacking.

• WikiLeaks, which published much of the information obtained by hacking, has refused to reveal its sources.

• The United States has not alleged that Russia interfered with the voting process on Election Day.

'Sophisticated tools'

A US official familiar with the election-related hacking told CNN Thursday that the operation was carried out with sophisticated hacking tools, suggesting that Putin was involved.

(Yep...there's your definite proof...lol) -YF

The source said while Putin's "fingerprints" were not on the hacking, "the nature of the operation was such that this had to be approved by top levels of the Russian government."

READ MORE: Gloves-off White House creates rift between Obama, Trump teams

Russian cyberhacking activity has continued largely unabated since the election, including against US political organizations, US officials briefed on the investigation told CNN.

US President-elect Donald Trump dismissed the US intelligence community's assessment, in comments Sunday.

He suggested that there was no proof Russia had hacked the election, saying the snooping in Democratic Party servers and emails of Clinton campaign staffers could have been done by China or even someone sitting in New Jersey.

Clinton: Putin grudge was behind hack

Clinton said Thursday night that Putin's alleged involvement in the hacking of Democratic organizations during the 2016 election stemmed from a longtime grudge the Russian President has held against her.

Meanwhile, her campaign chairman, Podesta, issued a scathing rebuke of the FBI.

He wrote in a Washington Post op-ed that the bureau's "seemingly lackadaisical response to the very real Russian plot to subvert a national election" by comparison with its overzealous investigation of Clinton's emails "shows that something is deeply broken" there.

Russian hacking and the 2016 election, explained

Saakashvili: It's déjŕ vu

Former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili told CNN Friday that he was not surprised by the US claims against Russia.

"Well I almost was, like, vindicated when the same administration in Washington suddenly started to speak about Russian involvement in the election," he said, speaking in the Ukrainian capital, Kiev.

"Because we, for me, it's déjŕ vu. They were the same people telling us, "no, no, it cannot possibly be true." And now it came to their doorsteps. And of course he [Putin] does all those things. Of course he is a great master."

Intelligence expert tells White House, Trump to 'shut up'

CNN's Lindsay Isaac contributed to this report.

Yep, like I said, poorly played Barry.

You've cornered yourself to the point where you can't prove shit or you have to release valuable source and method in order to prove what you say is true.

But hey, none of this matters since all the idiot journalist wil move on to other stories after Monday, right?

[astralis]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...bb7_story.html

FBI backs CIA view that Russia intervened to help Trump win election

By Adam Entous and Ellen Nakashima December 16 at 2:20 PM

FBI Director James B. Comey and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. have backed a CIA assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election in part to help Donald Trump win the presidency, according to U.S. officials.

Comey’s support for the CIA’s conclusion suggests that the leaders of the three agencies are in agreement on Russian intentions, contrary to suggestions by some lawmakers that the FBI disagreed with the CIA.

“Earlier this week, I met separately with (Director) FBI James Comey and DNI Jim Clapper, and there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election,” CIA Director John Brennan said in a message to the agency’s workforce, according to U.S. officials who have seen the message.


“The three of us also agree that our organizations, along with others, need to focus on completing the thorough review of this issue that has been directed by President Obama and which is being led by the DNI,” Brennan’s message read.

Trump has consistently dismissed the intelligence community’s findings about Russian hacking.

The CIA and FBI declined to comment.

The CIA shared its latest assessment with key senators in a closed-door briefing on Capitol Hill about two weeks ago in which agency officials cited a growing body of intelligence from multiple sources. Specifically, CIA briefers told the senators it was now “quite clear” that electing Trump was one of Russia’s goals, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

CIA and FBI officials do not think Russia had a “single purpose” by intervening during the presidential campaign. In addition to helping Trump, intelligence officials have told lawmakers that Moscow’s other goal included undermining confidence in the U.S. electoral system.

A separate House intelligence briefing by a senior FBI counterintelligence official last week left some Republican and Democratic lawmakers with the impression that the bureau wasn’t on the same page as the CIA, according to officials present.

“The truth is they were never all that different in the first place,” an official said of the FBI and CIA positions.

In his message to the CIA’s workforce, Brennan said the administration has provided detailed briefings to lawmakers and their aides since the summer.

“In recent days, I have had several conversations with members of Congress, providing an update on the status of the review as well as the considerations that need to be taken into account as we proceed,” Brennan wrote. “Many – but unfortunately not all – members understand and appreciate the importance and the gravity of the issue, and they are very supportive of the process that is underway.”

[bfng3569]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world...bb7_story.html

FBI backs CIA view that Russia intervened to help Trump win election

By Adam Entous and Ellen Nakashima December 16 at 2:20 PM

FBI Director James B. Comey and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. have backed a CIA assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election in part to help Donald Trump win the presidency, according to U.S. officials.

Comey’s support for the CIA’s conclusion suggests that the leaders of the three agencies are in agreement on Russian intentions, contrary to suggestions by some lawmakers that the FBI disagreed with the CIA.

“Earlier this week, I met separately with (Director) FBI James Comey and DNI Jim Clapper, and there is strong consensus among us on the scope, nature, and intent of Russian interference in our presidential election,” CIA Director John Brennan said in a message to the agency’s workforce, according to U.S. officials who have seen the message.


“The three of us also agree that our organizations, along with others, need to focus on completing the thorough review of this issue that has been directed by President Obama and which is being led by the DNI,” Brennan’s message read.

Trump has consistently dismissed the intelligence community’s findings about Russian hacking.

The CIA and FBI declined to comment.

The CIA shared its latest assessment with key senators in a closed-door briefing on Capitol Hill about two weeks ago in which agency officials cited a growing body of intelligence from multiple sources. Specifically, CIA briefers told the senators it was now “quite clear” that electing Trump was one of Russia’s goals, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

CIA and FBI officials do not think Russia had a “single purpose” by intervening during the presidential campaign. In addition to helping Trump, intelligence officials have told lawmakers that Moscow’s other goal included undermining confidence in the U.S. electoral system.

A separate House intelligence briefing by a senior FBI counterintelligence official last week left some Republican and Democratic lawmakers with the impression that the bureau wasn’t on the same page as the CIA, according to officials present.

“The truth is they were never all that different in the first place,” an official said of the FBI and CIA positions.

In his message to the CIA’s workforce, Brennan said the administration has provided detailed briefings to lawmakers and their aides since the summer.

“In recent days, I have had several conversations with members of Congress, providing an update on the status of the review as well as the considerations that need to be taken into account as we proceed,” Brennan wrote. “Many – but unfortunately not all – members understand and appreciate the importance and the gravity of the issue, and they are very supportive of the process that is underway.”

so I'd like to see how confident they are that it was a deliberate attempt to get Trump elected vs an attempt to just screw with and undermine the process, or an attempt to help Hillary lose vs someone else win, or an attempt to undermine Hillary with everyone assuming she was going to win.

[JAD_333]

We tried that "loyal opposition" thing back in 2001, and after being lied into an unnecessary war of aggression against an enemy that had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11, we ended up with ISIS.

Then, when Democrats returned to power, and attempted (are still attempting) to deal with the worst economic and financial crisis in living memory, the GOPers suddenly didn't want to have anything to do with "loyal opposition," even in the face of national threats ("one term president," remember?).

So, that whole "loyal opposition" thing isn't going to work this time.

Dor:

I don't think we are talking about the same thing. The concept of loyal opposition rests on the premise that the goal of all parties in enacting legislation is the greatest public good. So, loyal means loyal to the good of the country, not to the majority party. Opposition needs no explanation.

Ideally it works like this: If you propose legislation and you need my support, you will be inclined to make changes to satisfy me. I might find flaws you did not see. Or, I might want the legislation to also cover X and Y. If we iron out all our differences, then the final form of the legislation will have greater support and do the most public good.

This is how most of the business of legislating takes place. But not always, as the recent gridlock in Congress attests.

To your point about the bipartisan support for the 2001 Iraq invasion, those who supported it from both parties in Congress chose what they perceived to be the greater good. There is an old saying that illustrates what happened: It is better to err on the side of trust than it is to err on the side of distrust. It came down to the president saying we must act to protect our national security and here's the evidence; do you trust him or not?

[YellowFever]

lol...YF...adds a good laugh to a pleasant evening, if I may putin that way. Let's get serious here. How this all going to end up? Do you still think it will blow over soon?

My prediction is yes, it will blow over soon.

Here is another prediction:

Trump will get 303 electoral votes.
Hillary will get about 210-220 electorial votes
Bernie Sanders will get votes as well.

Yeah, I'm predicting more defects from Hillary to Bernie than Trump to Kaisch

[tankie]

Merrrrrrrrry Xmas , ho ho ho .

[YellowFever]

Meh.....for what it's worth......

No record of ‘faithless elector' Chris Suprun as a 9/11 first responder



Jason Whitely and Mark Smith , WFAA 10:09 PM. CST December 16, 2016

DALLAS - UPDATE: Responding on Reddit today, Chris Suprun said he worked as a firefighter in Dale City, Virginia on September 11, 2001. But there's no listing for Dale City on his publicly available and comprehensive LinkedIn résumé. In September 2001, according to Suprun's LinkedIn résumé, he was employed by the Manassas Park, Virginia fire department. Suprun also does not list being a firefighter in Dale City, Virginia on a recent lengthy seven-page paper résumé, which WFAA obtained. Neither Suprun nor his public relations firms have responded to WFAA since this story was first published.

The Republican elector who has gotten national attention for refusing to vote for Donald Trump at the Electoral College on Dec. 19 was apparently not a first responder on September 11, 2001 as he has stated for years and has a questionable career history, according to an investigation by WFAA.

Chris Suprun, 42, portrays himself as a heroic firefighter who was among the first on the scene after the third plane flew into the Pentagon on 9/11.

In a heavily-publicized editorial this month for the New York Times, Suprun stated that as a member of the Electoral College he will not cast his ballot for Trump because the president-elect “shows daily he is not qualified for the office.”

Suprun, a Dallas resident for more than a decade, even used his résumé to establish credibility in the Times piece, writing in the second paragraph: "Fifteen years ago, as a firefighter, I was part of the response to the Sept. 11 attacks against our nation."

He has founded a nonprofit called Never Forget and state records show he is a licensed paramedic -- but much of the rest of résumé, publicly available on LinkedIn, is questionable.

In addition, on at least two occasions over the last couple years at crowded Major League Baseball games, Suprun has been introduced as a 9/11 veteran before throwing out first pitches.

"He claimed to be a first responder with the Manassas Park [Virginia] Fire Department on September 11, 2001 and personally told us stories 'I was fighting fire that day at the Pentagon.’ No, I was on a medic unit that day at the Pentagon and you make a phone call to Manassas Park and you find out that he wasn't even employed there until October 2001,” said a first responder who knows Suprun and only agreed to speak about him if his identity was concealed.

The City of Manassas Park confirmed to WFAA that it hired Suprun on October 10, 2001, one month after the 9/11 attacks.

The fire chief there added that his department never even responded to the Pentagon or any of the 9/11 sites.

"It's no different than stolen valor for the military; dressing up and saying 'Hey, I earned a Purple Heart' when you weren't even in combat.' There's a big difference between shopping at Old Navy and being a Navy SEAL," said the first responder who knows him.

But Suprun's résumé raises even more questions.

It shows he was, at the time this story aired on WFAA, a paramedic with Air Methods air ambulance service. But Christina Brodsly, a spokeswoman for that company, said he is not an employee there.

Suprun also claims to currently be a paramedic with Freedom EMS in Dallas. But records from the Texas Department of State Health Services indicate there's no such company. A firm with that name used to exist in Houston, but it went out of business in 2008, according to DSHS.

Turns out, federal court records show Suprun has spent the last five years in bankruptcy while his résumé says he was working. He even collected unemployment during part of it, court records show. Suprun was just released from bankruptcy supervision this month.

He never responded to multiple emails from WFAA and calls to his telephone go to a recording which says his voicemail is full.

Two public relations firms he has hired – Megaphone Strategies and Fenton Communications – responded to our requests for an interview saying: “Suprun's schedule is jammed packed.”

His story raises a bigger question, though. How are presidential electors chosen? And more importantly, aren't they vetted? Unfortunately, not. They are selected in an almost informal process that each party undertakes at their state convention.

"Parties might want to ask for a little more background information, do a little bit of checking into people who would like to be members of the electoral college,” said Matthew Wilson, a political science professor at SMU.

He suggested that Suprun’s case might change things four years from now.

"I think in the future there will be a little more vetting and scrutiny given to prospective electors only because there's been so much discussion in this cycle of the possibility of faithless electors," continued Wilson.

If Suprun isn't working at the places on his résumé, whose uniform is he wearing at public appearances? Manassas Park, VA said it looks similar to theirs from 12 years ago but could not positively identify it.

Texas electors meet Monday in Austin. It's uncertain who will get Suprun's vote. But as Suprun questions Trump's credibility fellow first responders have doubts of their own about his.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/texas...nder/371421191

[JAD_333]

Meh.....for what it's worth......

No record of ‘faithless elector' Chris Suprun as a 9/11 first responder

Jason Whitely and Mark Smith , WFAA 10:09 PM. CST December 16, 2016

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/texas...nder/371421191[/QUOTE]

Just goes to show, anybody who makes a play for celebrity-hood better have a clean resume. Otherwise, the media will eat your lunch.

[YellowFever]

And a response from Salon....


http://www.salon.com/2016/12/16/gop-...sponder-claim/

FRIDAY, DEC 16, 2016 03:25 PM PST


GOP elector voting against Donald Trump faces smear campaign over 9/11 first-responder claim
Charges that Texas elector Christopher Suprun lied about his 9/11 service appear untrue, but threats pour in


MATTHEW ROZSA


TOPICS: 2016 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION, 9/11, 9/11 ATTACKS, CHRISTOPHER SUPRUN, DONALD TRUMP, ELECTIONS 2016, ELECTORAL COLLEGE, HAMILTON ELECTORS, VIDEO NEWS, ELECTIONS NEWS, NEWS, POLITICS NEWS


GOP elector voting against Donald Trump faces smear campaign over 9/11 first-responder claim


Christopher Suprun of Texas, who remains the only Republican elector to publicly join the Hamilton Electors and announce that he will not vote for Donald Trump on Dec. 19, is facing a smear campaign that he believes emanates from the president-elect.

Suprun has said he was a first responder during the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and has now been accused of falsifying that claim. Those accusations, however, revolve around evidence that Suprun was not in New York during or after 9/11, when he has never claimed he was. Suprun says he responded to the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon as a volunteer firefighter in northern Virginia. Salon has confirmed that Suprun worked at various Virginia fire departments between 1994 and about 2004.

On Friday, an ABC affiliate in Dallas ran a story suggesting that Suprun was lying about his 9/11 service:

The Republican elector who has gotten national attention for refusing to vote for Donald Trump at the Electoral College on Dec. 19 was apparently not a first responder on September 11, 2001 as he has stated for years and has a questionable career history, according to an investigation by WFAA.

Suprun believes these malicious reports are part of a smear campaign orchestrated against him by a worried Trump team.

“We’ve got multiple reports of them threatening other electors, saying ‘You’re not going to have a political future,'” Suprun told Salon in an interview. “I’m not really sure why anybody else would come after me this hard, this fast, and with a bunch of make-believe in a lot of cases.”

Suprun told Salon that he started as a volunteer in the Annandale Fire Department in Fairfax County, Virginia, in 1994, and was working as a volunteer in nearby Dale City, Virginia, at the time of the 9/11 attacks. He later became a professional firefighter in Manassas Park, Virginia, he says, before moving to Texas in 2004.

Suprun expressed dismay at the fact that “fully grown adults who support Donald Trump spend their nights bullying children,” saying that this “should be a red flag to all Americans about this man and his followers.”

“Since before my announcement, I’ve had people attacking me and threatening me, as you might have seen on my Twitter feed,” Suprun told Salon in an interview. “My wife and daughters were threatened with rape with a knife, before they kill me, if I didn’t vote for Trump.”

It isn’t just Trump’s followers, however, that Hamilton Electors see as the problem,.

“Trump is scared because he had the RNC [Republican National Committee] run a historically unprecedented whip count of Electors to make sure they have the votes on Dec. 19 when the Electoral College officially meets at statehouses across the country,” said Bret Chiafalo, a Democratic elector from Washington. “With allegations of Russia hacking our democracy and his picks for a potential administration, Americans of all political stripes are waking up to the fact that this man is a reality TV show starlet that is completely unprepared to be president.”

Michael Baca, a Democratic elector from Colorado, echoed these thoughts in the press release.

“When I enlisted in the Marine Corps, I swore an oath to defend the Constitution and the American people against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” said Baca. “On Dec. 19 and every day after, I’ll continue to stand beside fellow patriotic Electors who are committed to doing their Constitutional duty, like Chris Suprun, who is a brave and honorable man.”

Siprun said that Trump supporters have bullied his children online and accused him of lying about his service as a firefighter during the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

As Salon reported earlier on Friday, if the allegations that the Trump campaign is pressuring the Hamilton Electors into sticking by him are true, legal experts believe those actions would also be illegal.

Sources close to the Hamilton Electors believe there are anywhere from 16 to 28 other potential Republican defectors.


Matthew Rozsa

Matthew Rozsa is a breaking news writer for Salon. He holds an MA in History from Rutgers University-Newark and his work has appeared in Mic, Quartz and MSNBC

[Doktor]

Boo hop, someone put him on the list without checking who he is. Get over it and move on

[GVChamp]

CIA and FBI officials do not think Russia had a “single purpose” by intervening during the presidential campaign. In addition to helping Trump, intelligence officials have told lawmakers that Moscow’s other goal included undermining confidence in the U.S. electoral system.

So where does "elect Trump" figure on the hierarchy of Russian goals?