Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The US 2020 Presidential Election & Attempts To Overturn It

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by TopHatter View Post

    Direct military responses, I can see. A full-on nuclear war, no. But, as the Colonel corrected me, apparently Putin is/was under the impression that if a hypothetical Madame President Clinton had proof of Kremlin-induced election rigging, that she would push the mythical red button on her desk. Given the famous Russian paranoia, I would say that's a definite possibility for that to be in Putin's head.
    That does not make a bit of sense

    Clinton and the DNC via Perkisn Coie colluded via Steele as a cut out with Steele's "Russian sources" to fabricate the Russian dossier.

    Trump sanctioned Russia.
    Trump pushed NATO to spend more to defend against Russia.
    Trump deployed US troops to Poland.
    Trump thumped Assad twice despite Russian protection.
    Trump blocked Nordstream II and pushed for US energy exports to Europe to counter Russia.
    While Trump was POTUS, the US smacked the hell out of the Russian mercs in Syria.
    Trump pushed for modernization of both our nuclear arsenal and means of delivering it to counter Russia's Posieden doomsday weapons.
    Trump provided lethal aid to the Ukraine

    Trump was a disaster for Russia

    Comment


    • Originally posted by TopHatter View Post

      Your second source (NBC) doesn't have anything to do with your initial claim though.
      Indeed it doesn't, both show progression in her views of the 2016 and subsequent election.
      In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

      Leibniz

      Comment


      • yeah, none of which = "Trump stole the election and that she was the rightful President."

        let alone -taking action- like repeatedly pressuring DOJ, repeatedly pressuring commissioners at multiple states to stop counting votes, whipping up a mob to threaten Congress with certification...
        There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

        Comment


        • What I find disturbing is that once this fiorum examined every bit of intel to death, now, respected forum members take at face value extremely questionable intel.
          that's not a right characterization.

          note my original post:

          i'd like to see this confirmed first, but really now, is this that much of a stretch?
          joe's response:

          No, it's not a stretch at all
          BF's response:

          If all of that is true none of it will come as any surprise.
          IE not a single poster here has said LOOK THIS PROVES PUTIN DID IT!

          that these allegations ring true aren't really a surprise; previously published US intel pretty much collaborates every single allegation. even the most problematic issues -- for instance, as you say, the term "‘all possible force" -- those are recommendations from the expert department, vs an order from Putin. the other weird thing I noticed is that the classification is only "secret"; I'd assume the Russians have multiple classification layers like we do, and that this would be rated higher.

          anyways, the fact that the Russians screwed around with us in 2016 isn't exactly hidden; even Putin has smirked and bragged about it and made domestic propaganda with it.

          Putin is a Cold Warrior.
          let's not give Putin more credit than he deserves.

          back then, he was at best a junior/mid-level KGB officer serving at a backwater post, monitoring comms. assumptions about his appetite for risk based on strategic-level thinking in the Cold War is probably not applicable, especially given his penchant for relatively risky hybrid war stuff that have, if anything, worsened Russia's strategic situation.
          Last edited by astralis; 18 Jul 21,, 17:40.
          There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

          Comment


          • I'm off to Philly for 2 weeks, for work. I'll reply in full when I'm settled in there. Probably have to visit USS New Jersey while I'm there
            “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

            Comment


            • Originally posted by astralis View Post
              that's not a right characterization.
              And note not a single one of you quesetioned the intel. You all assumed it be true, "is it a stretch?" Red flags serviced to me as soon as I start reading it. Who leaked this? Why now? Western intel had it for months and no movement and all of a sudden the Guardian has it? A newspaper? What possible motive would a spook has to release it to a newspaper? If anything, it's another hint to the counter-spook guys to start hunting.

              Their spooks risks a hell of a lot more than our spooks when releasing intel. Whole families disappears. So what are the rewards for such a risk? I didn't read any high level defection lately.

              Originally posted by astralis View Post
              let's not give Putin more credit than he deserves.

              back then, he was at best a junior/mid-level KGB officer serving at a backwater post, monitoring comms. assumptions about his appetite for risk based on strategic-level thinking in the Cold War is probably not applicable, especially given his penchant for relatively risky hybrid war stuff that have, if anything, worsened Russia's strategic situation.
              Really? NATO expansion eastward has effectively stopped. The Siberian border is secured with China is now a defacto ally. Moscow has a defacto veto in the Middle East with her military presence. If anything, Putin is in a far stronger position than Yeltsin.
              Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 18 Jul 21,, 18:38.
              Chimo

              Comment


              • Originally posted by astralis View Post

                yeah, none of which = "Trump stole the election and that she was the rightful President."
                No, it doesn’t kill me because he knows he’s an illegitimate president,
                And so I know that he knows that this wasn’t on the level. I don’t know that we’ll ever know what happened.
                Oookaaayyyy......
                In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

                Leibniz

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                  No, we did not. If only to learn whom our friends are and whom our enemies are.
                  I'm sorry Sir but that directly contradicts the memoirs of CIA officers like Tony Mendez.

                  Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                  Clark went to Shinseki (who refused) and then Clinton (also refused) to insert an American task force into Pristina. The point is that had it been an American taks force instead of a Canadian Battle Group, there would have been shooting. Putin was aware of that fact and WOULD NOT commit to an operation as suggested by that article.
                  Sir, I don't think we can say with such absolute certainty what Putin would or would not do.

                  I'm going to leave this one alone now because we're just talking in circles....
                  “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                    Anyway, I linked every claim with a valid media or edu source. I'm sure you will find some reason to reject them, cognitive bias is a bitch, but they are all supported by evidence most damningly that laptop.
                    Contrary to what you have firmly planted in your head, I'm not an apologist or defender of Joe Biden or his family, unlike you and Donald Trump.

                    But, let's review your sources:

                    Frontpagemag:
                    Reasoning: Propaganda, Conspiracy, Anti-Muslim
                    Bias Rating: EXTREME RIGHT
                    Factual Reporting: LOW
                    Country: USA (44/180 Press Freedom)
                    Media Type: Organization/Foundation
                    Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
                    MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY

                    Ouch. Well, we're off to a roaring start.

                    The U.S. Sun
                    *sigh* ffs...that's a supermarket tabloid

                    Townhall.com
                    Questionable Reasoning: Conspiracy, Propaganda, Numerous Failed Fact Checks
                    Bias Rating: RIGHT
                    Factual Reporting: MIXED
                    Country: USA (45/180 Press Freedom)
                    Media Type: Website
                    Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
                    MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY

                    The Federalist
                    Questionable Reasoning: Conspiracy Theories, Propaganda, Failed Fact Checks
                    Bias Rating: RIGHT
                    Factual Reporting: MIXED
                    Country: USA (45/180 Press Freedom)
                    Media Type: Website
                    Traffic/Popularity: High Traffic
                    MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY

                    LawEnforcementToday
                    Bias Rating: RIGHT
                    Factual Reporting: MIXED
                    Country: USA (45/180 Press Freedom)
                    Media Type: Website
                    Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
                    MBFC Credibility Rating: MEDIUM CREDIBILITY
                    These are your "valid media sources"....What, was InfoWars down?

                    You did manage to throw in some CNN, CNBC and MSN, which I do give you full credit for. As for the rest of it...why didn't Trump and his DoJ go after Hunter Biden?
                    (That's the usual excuse thrown out by Trump's apologists: "If Trump did something wrong then why wasn't he arrested??")

                    Here's something though that tells me that Joe Biden, whatever else his faults, is infinitely better than Donald Trump:

                    Since taking office, President Joe Biden has left Weiss — a Republican appointed by Donald Trump on the recommendation of Delaware’s two Democratic senators — in place. That puts him in one of the most sensitive positions in the Justice Department, deciding how to proceed with an investigation of the president’s son that has proven politically fraught on several fronts.

                    Whereas Donald Trump used the DoJ and AG Barr as his own personal obstruction of justice squad, Biden left a Trump-appointed Republican in charge of investigating his own son. Trump threw every last roadblock that he possibly could to prevent any investigation into his illegal affairs (more on that in a minute).

                    Which means that if Hunter Biden (who, the last time I checked, isn't the President nor working for the President in any capacity) is seriously suspected of wrongdoing, an investigation will take place and if he's found guilty, he'll be prosecuted accordingly.

                    Compare that with Donald Trump, who argued all the way to the Supreme Court (twice) that as president he was above all law, including committing murder, indeed was immune from so much as being investigated. But, assuming that you were even aware of that in the first place, that didn't really bother you did it.
                    “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by zraver View Post

                      That does not make a bit of sense

                      Clinton and the DNC via Perkisn Coie colluded via Steele as a cut out with Steele's "Russian sources" to fabricate the Russian dossier.

                      Trump sanctioned Russia.
                      Trump pushed NATO to spend more to defend against Russia.
                      Trump deployed US troops to Poland.
                      Trump thumped Assad twice despite Russian protection.
                      Trump blocked Nordstream II and pushed for US energy exports to Europe to counter Russia.
                      While Trump was POTUS, the US smacked the hell out of the Russian mercs in Syria.
                      Trump pushed for modernization of both our nuclear arsenal and means of delivering it to counter Russia's Posieden doomsday weapons.
                      Trump provided lethal aid to the Ukraine

                      Trump was a disaster for Russia
                      Another questionable Trump laundry list.

                      Right off the bat you can take the Russian mercs battle off that list. That had exactly zero to do with Donald Trump. That was a U.S. military unit defending itself against imminent attack.

                      But let's start another list:

                      Who was it that stood next to Vladimir Putin and announced to the world that he believed Putin over U.S. intelligence agencies? That was Donald Trump. Let's try to imagine Ronald Reagan doing something like that. Or Barack Obama. I'm sure you'd be defending Obama, right?

                      Who was it that met with Vladimir Putin in near-complete secrecy, even confiscating the notes of his interpreter and telling the man not to reveal anything of the meeting to other U.S. administration officials.
                      Remember when we were absolutely disgusted about the "more flexibility" that Obama promised Medvedev? But Trump apparently gets a pass for saying god only knows what to America's number one geopolitical enemy, something that even now nobody knows what was said.

                      And then there's this, but it's hardly exhaustive
                      • During the campaign, Trump repeatedly praised Putin and downplayed objections to Russia’s seizure of Crimea. In one extraordinary campaign rally, he called on Russia to hack emails from former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who happened to be his rival for the presidency. (Russian hackers made their first attempt to do so that very day.) He hired Paul Manafort as his campaign manager, despite copious warning signs including his work as a lobbyist for foreign dictators and his offer to work for free. Manafort was one of several aides who in June 2016 met with Russians who the aides believed were bringing damaging info about Clinton. (Trump would later dictate a misleading statement about the meeting.)
                      • Several Trump advisers, especially George Papadopoulos and Carter Page, had extensive contacts with Russians, which they have attempted to downplay. The Trump Organization also claimed that it had cut off discussions about building a tower in Russia, when in fact it remained in close contact with Russian government officials about the project.
                      • Before and after the election, Trump dismissed the judgment of the U.S. intelligence community that Russia was interfering in U.S. politics. During the presidential transition, Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner (who attended the June 2016 meeting), sought to set up a secret back channel with Russia that would bypass the federal government. Meanwhile, National-Security Adviser–designate Michael Flynn had conversations with the Russian ambassador, about which he lied to FBI agents and Vice President Mike Pence. Trump only fired Flynn when his lying was revealed in the press.
                      • During a February 2017 interview with Bill O’Reilly, Trump dismissed concerns about Putin killing dissidents and journalists. In May 2017, he abruptly fired FBI Director James Comey, citing the Russia investigation as his motivation. The day after he fired Comey, he welcomed Russia’s ambassador and foreign minister to the White House—an arrangement that rattled some intelligence experts on its own—where he told them that firing the “nutjob” Comey had relieved “great pressure [on him] because of Russia.” Trump also disclosed sensitive classified information to the Russians.
                      • During the summer of 2017, Trump continued to deny that Russia had interfered in the presidential election, despite a growing body of evidence. In July 2017, he met with Putin in Hamburg, with a tiny team of advisers; Trump greeted Putin warmly and, according to the Russians, Trump “accepted” Putin’s denials of election interference.
                      • That meeting turned out to be only a warm-up for a disastrous meeting with Putin in Helsinki the following summer, in which Trump kowtowed to the Russian leader, openly took Putin’s side over U.S. intelligence on the interference issue, suggested allowing Russia to take part in the inquiry, and entertained allowing the Russians to question a former U.S. ambassador to Moscow.
                      • More recently, Trump regurgitated a strange and bogus Russian assertion that the Soviet Union entered Afghanistan in 1979 to fight terrorists. According to the Times, the president has also discussed the idea of withdrawing the United States from nato, which would effectively destroy the organization and fulfill one of Putin’s greatest desires in geopolitics.
                      “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                      Comment


                      • Ex-Joint Chiefs Chairman Mike Mullen: 'Incredibly disturbing' that military leadership reportedly feared Trump coup
                        Retired Adm. Mike Mullen, a former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Sunday that it was “incredibly disturbing” that reports detailed a top U.S. general’s fears that Donald Trump, in the waning days of his presidency, would attempt to use the military to stage a coup or take action against Iran.

                        “I think the reporting, from what I understand, has been pretty accurate,” Mullen said on CBS’s “Face the Nation,” according to the show transcript.

                        “Particularly after the election and the two threats that you talked about,” he told host John Dickerson when asked about the reports. “The external one, and whether or not we would commence some kind of combat or conflict with Iran. And then the internal one in terms of where it might go, particularly with respect to how the military would be used by President Trump to somehow validate that the election actually was a fraud and keep the president in power. I think that’s all very accurate and obviously incredibly disturbing, literally in every respect.”

                        The current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Mark Milley, had bluntly described his concern that Trump would use America’s armed forces to overturn the 2020 election, according to excerpts released of an upcoming book, “I Alone Can Fix It: Donald J. Trump’s Catastrophic Final Year,” by Pulitzer Prize-winning Washington Post reporters Carol Leonnig and Philip Rucker.

                        “They may try, but they’re not going to fucking succeed,” Milley told his deputies of a possible coup, according to CNN’s account of the book, which will be released Tuesday. “You can’t do this without the military. You can’t do this without the CIA and the FBI. We’re the guys with the guns.”
                        ____________

                        “He was the most prodigious personification of all human inferiorities. He was an utterly incapable, unadapted, irresponsible, psychopathic personality, full of empty, infantile fantasies, but cursed with the keen intuition of a rat or a guttersnipe. He represented the shadow, the inferior part of everybody’s personality, in an overwhelming degree, and this was another reason why they fell for him.”

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                          I'm sorry Sir but that directly contradicts the memoirs of CIA officers like Tony Mendez.
                          I will counter Mendez with Alexander Lebed and the resulting panic he caused when he claimed that 85 out of 250 suitcase nukes are unaccounted for. What's more, these were KGB devices and thus, were not part of the SRF inventory and thus not part of any Arms Control Treaties. Yeah, we paniced for years trying to find them.

                          Originally posted by TopHatter View Post
                          Sir, I don't think we can say with such absolute certainty what Putin would or would not do.
                          Not following you. What Putin would do or would not do is a matter of history. He did what he did and no more, Any more as hinted by that article is not based on the actions that we have determined.
                          Chimo

                          Comment


                          • MBFC is not a viable fact checker. But hats besides the point. I included a variety of sources with political bias, bias does not mean non-factual. CNN and MSNBC are horrible partisan and lie through ommission and even out right lies all the time. Doesn't mean the stories I linked too are wrong. And despite the fig leaf you give yourself, you are defending Biden by keeping your spot light on Trump who is not in office, and not on the dude who is. Its why I call you a liberal, you've made common cause with them.

                            Comment


                            • And note not a single one of you quesetioned the intel. You all assumed it be true, "is it a stretch?" Red flags serviced to me as soon as I start reading it. Who leaked this? Why now? Western intel had it for months and no movement and all of a sudden the Guardian has it? A newspaper? What possible motive would a spook has to release it to a newspaper? If anything, it's another hint to the counter-spook guys to start hunting.

                              Their spooks risks a hell of a lot more than our spooks when releasing intel. Whole families disappears. So what are the rewards for such a risk? I didn't read any high level defection lately.
                              oh, it could very easily be purposefully released "intel" that may, or may not, have elements of the truth. after all, Trump is gone now, and releasing bits and pieces of truth mixed with falsehoods would be just the thing to spin up the outrage machine.

                              but, the kicker is that overall nothing about the content jumps out as an outright lie, again, as I mentioned, with large elements of this previously reported on by US intel.

                              Really? NATO expansion eastward has effectively stopped. The Siberian border is secured with China is now a defacto ally. Moscow has a defacto veto in the Middle East with her military presence. If anything, Putin is in a far stronger position than Yeltsin.
                              after 2004, NATO could hardly expand eastward further. thanks to Putin's clumsy ham-handed response to Ukraine, he turned the wealthier section of Ukraine into a deadly enemy, and the poorer section of Ukraine into his own personal basket-case. the Siberian border is "secured" in the sense that the Chinese are just buying it wholesale. Moscow continues to expend resources rather meaninglessly in the Middle East (I am not sure what Syria and parts of Libya get them).

                              Putin is stronger than Yeltsin, but that's a pretty damn low bar to cross.

                              Putin's Russia in 2021 is hardly in a stronger position than Putin's Russia in say, 2009. that's not really an exaggeration-- the Russian economy of today is smaller than the Russian economy of 2008, and likely will need another 2 years of growth to get back to those 2008 levels.

                              so there's that Cold War strategic genius for you; took a bunch of stupid risks and shot his country for a generation and a half.

                              There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by astralis View Post
                                but, the kicker is that overall nothing about the content jumps out as an outright lie, again, as I mentioned, with large elements of this previously reported on by US intel.
                                You know how these things work. Leave enough gtruth in there to make it credible and make you jump through hoops to verify the rest.

                                Originally posted by astralis View Post
                                after 2004, NATO could hardly expand eastward further. thanks to Putin's clumsy ham-handed response to Ukraine, he turned the wealthier section of Ukraine into a deadly enemy, and the poorer section of Ukraine into his own personal basket-case.
                                You're blaming the UKR's self inflicted wounds on Putin? If anything, Putin stopped us from inherriting that basketcase.

                                Originally posted by astralis View Post
                                the Siberian border is "secured" in the sense that the Chinese are just buying it wholesale.
                                That's reaching and you know it. The Chinese are buying Siberia like they are buying California. No one in Siberia nor California is paying property tax to Beijing and those are Russian tanks and Russian nukes in Siberia, not Chinese just as Beijing has zero say in American nukes and American aircraft carriers in California. If shit hits the fan, we have their money and they've got squat. The same goes for the Russians.

                                Originally posted by astralis View Post
                                Moscow continues to expend resources rather meaninglessly in the Middle East (I am not sure what Syria and parts of Libya get them).
                                You're joking? Control of Israeli skies.

                                Originally posted by astralis View Post
                                Putin is stronger than Yeltsin, but that's a pretty damn low bar to cross.
                                Which also showed how much more powerful he is

                                Originally posted by astralis View Post
                                Putin's Russia in 2021 is hardly in a stronger position than Putin's Russia in say, 2009. that's not really an exaggeration-- the Russian economy of today is smaller than the Russian economy of 2008, and likely will need another 2 years of growth to get back to those 2008 levels.

                                so there's that Cold War strategic genius for you; took a bunch of stupid risks and shot his country for a generation and a half.
                                How could ANYONE done better? The UKR imploded. Yelstin bankrupted Russia. Putin fought 5 wars (Georgia, 2 Chechen, Syria, and the UKR) and still stopped the economy from sliding further.
                                Chimo

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X