Dear Russia: Please disrupt more U.S. elections

1. 0

   promisemposted 7 years ago

   But only as long as you get MY candidate elected.
   
   Sincerely,
   Party First, Country Second
   
   McCain: Russian election-related hacks threaten to 'destroy democracy'
   http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/18/politics/ … index.html

   replyreport
   1. 95

      wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Dear Elector:
      
      Please violate the law and your written promise to the voters you "represent".  But only as long as you get MY candidate elected.  Or anybody but the one I've chosen to hate.
      
      Sincerely,
      Party First, Honor and Integrity Second.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Electors can only violate the law in states requiring them to vote for the candidate who won the state. Twenty nine states have that requirement and the other 21 do not.
         
         The Constitution and historical precedent allow the electors in those 21 states to vote any way they want. If "integrity" leads them to vote against a candidate who has attacked democracy and the Constitution, then more power to them.
         
         Otherwise, your response is not relevant to my post and secondary to Russia attacking our electoral system.

         replyreport
         1. 95

            wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            The constitution voids the inherent contract in a signed pledge as who to vote for?  Fascinating!  Almost as fascinating as saying that integrity allows it!

            replyreport
            1. 0

               promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               An "inherent" contract? As in non-existent?
               
               Do you believe that Russia should face consequences for interferring in the election of any candidate for either party?

               replyreport
               1. 95

                  wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  in·her·ent
                  ADJECTIVE
                  existing in something as a permanent, essential, or characteristic attribute:
                  
                  Contracts need not be written, although that one (A promise to vote the will of the people) was.  Therefore there is a contract even though there is no piece of paper with the word "CONTRACT"  in bold letters across the top.  Inherent in a promise is a contract, if both parties agree to the promise.
                  
                  Do you disagree?
                  
                  Russian consequences: only if we can apply them and only if we're willing to take similar consequences for our past interference in their politics.  Personally, I might say that there should be no consequences, for anything we do will only drive their activities further underground and make them harder to find next time (and if you don't think there will be a next time you really shouldn't be discussing international operations or politics).  At least this time we found out and don't find any harm done...

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     I don't disagree with your definition of inherent.
                     
                     Can you tell me where in the Constitution or Federalist Papers (I own a copy of both) there is a description of an inherent requirement that electors must vote exactly according to the state population vote?
                     
                     Claiming that no harm is done is naive and wishful thinking.

                     replyreport
   2. 59

      Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      How seriously do you believe Russia 'disrupted' the elections?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         I think the link says it all. When Republican senators, the CIA and the FBI are all saying the Russians interferred, that's pretty good confirmation.

         replyreport
         1. 62

            PhoenixVposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Let me guess.Lindsey Graham involved? I remember when he took off to Benghazi to get to the bottom of it. Graham couldnt find a mint on a hotel Benghazi pillow. Mccain and Graham are like the Abbott and Costello version of Las Vegas magicians. Lots of smoke and misdirection with deer in the headlights looks. A person would have to be a complete fool to buy their nonsense. Theyre worse than cats in a litterbox. Its their job to bury this stuff.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               I get it now. CIA is bad. FBI is bad. Any Republican like U.S. Senators John McCain and Lindsey Graham who dare to speak up are bad. Only wishful thinking is good.

               replyreport
         2. 59

            Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Interference and disruption are two totally different things. Are you claiming that Russia disrupted the election? That's what your title states.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               If we start to get into subtle differences in the meaning of words based on individual interpretations, we will get nowhere in this discussion.
               
               Whether you want to use the word interfere or disrupt, do you think Russian involvement in our elections is wrong?

               replyreport
               1. 86

                  DzyMsLizzyposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  It IS wrong, on so many levels.  But overriding that, is the fact that Trump was in contact with the Russians prior to the elections.
                  
                  There is a one-word definition for that:  TREASON! 
                  
                  And, I believe (though I could be mistaken), that the penalty for treason is death, and is still on the books.   
                  
                  As far as the Electoral College votes, regardless of party, candidates, or 'pledges,' their single and overriding purpose is NOT to act as a rubber-stamp, but to prevent an unqualified person from gaining the presidency at all.  In this, they have failed miserably.

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     If trump were in contact with them and if that contact involved working with them to hijack an election it would be treason.
                     
                     However, we have no evidence he was in contact in that way, we have no evidence that disruption happened. Hacking a server and disrupting an election are not one in the same, no matter how much some might like to argue that it is. And without clear evidence it was the Russians it is speculation, no matter how educated a guess we believe it to be.
                     
                     But I would think proving any of it was worthy of punishment would be as difficult as proving punishment was warranted because Hillary ignored rules and laws in order to allow secret information to be easily gleaned by foreign powers, or that Hillary had a pay to play policy while Secretary of State, or that Hillary did not do all she could to protect civilians in Benghazi.
                     
                     Politics. What should we do about it?

                     replyreport
                     1. 95

                        wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                        "If trump were in contact with them and if that contact involved working with them to hijack an election it would be treason."
                        
                        Unlikely.  From the legal dictionary:
                        
                        "Under Article III, Section 3, of the Constitution, any person who levies war against the United States or adheres to its enemies by giving them Aid and Comfort has committed treason within the meaning of the Constitution. The term aid and comfort refers to any act that manifests a betrayal of allegiance to the United States, such as furnishing enemies with arms, troops, transportation, shelter, or classified information. If a subversive act has any tendency to weaken the power of the United States to attack or resist its enemies, aid and comfort has been given.
                        The Treason Clause applies only to disloyal acts committed during times of war. Acts of dis-loyalty during peacetime are not considered treasonous under the Constitution."
                        
                        While it's easy to fling the term "treason" around anytime we don't like what someone does, the legal definition and requirements to be a traitor are quite severe.  For instance, if it were known that Trump used Russia to do good for the US (elect Trump) it isn't treason.  If he made a business deal whereby Russia gained (sold them Uranium, maybe), it isn't treason.  Even if he gave them classified information (perhaps by using unsecured servers) it still isn't treason because we are not at war with Russia.

                        replyreport
                        1. 59

                           Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                           Thanks for the clarification.

                           replyreport
   3. 62

      PhoenixVposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      So, have they decided which story they are going with? Russia hacked democracy? Russia hacked the electoral system? Or Russia hacked some emails? Is CNN the official CIA-FBI leaks source? CNN has no credibility. Podestas emails had no bombshells. Except wasnt there collusion with MSM? Hillary is not "democracy". I can see why politicians and their propaganda apparatus are flipping out over a little alleged transparency. Cockroaches hate even a small flashlight.The only thing I want to hear about Russia is that the cast of ABC and NBC and assorted main stream fake news agencies are being sent to siberia. Their lies and propaganda are so blatant and obvious, a person In a coma should be able to see it.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Republican senators have no credibility? The FBI and CIA have no credibility?

         replyreport
         1. 62

            PhoenixVposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Im more likely to believe Brian Williams was shot down in his U2 plane and crashed into a joshua tree on bloody sunday than Mccain, Graham or a CNN/ CIA he said she said. They cant even get their story straight. Now what. Im starting to wonder if wikileaks is fixing to dump info about trading dope to pay for guns to train ISIS with, so theyre in a tizzy.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               Wow! Talk about diverting from the original point!

               replyreport
               1. 62

                  PhoenixVposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  You have no original or cogent point. MSM and their political puppets are sounding some alarm and you are blindly parroting it.  Which of their stories are you going with? Russians hacked the electoral system and democracy or " maybe russians hacked some emails and gave them to wikileaks and then they released them *last summer* although there really wasnt much in them.?
                  
                  
                  Which story Promisem because I cannot debate 2 different vacuous innuendos. Pick one please

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     As usual, you didn't answer a simple yes or no question. Your personal attacks don't divert anyone.

                     replyreport
         2. 95

            wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            Thinking back to Little Bill and a certain airplane, followed by bogus FBI decisions...no, the FBI doesn't have a lot of credibility any more.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               And your theory (yet another diversion) is based on what evidence from a credible source?

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Are you saying that there wasn't a meeting? I think every credible source in America accepts there was.

                  replyreport
                  1. 0

                     promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                     Actually, I thought he was talking about something else back in the Clinton presidency. I know about the Lynch meeting.

                     replyreport
               2. 95

                  wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Bill Clinton, Hillary Clinton, Loretta Lynch and the FBI are all I can offer as sources here.  Sorry that none of them are very credible, that that's all I've got.

                  replyreport
   4. 60

      The Old Guardposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      LOL - No, I want the RNC to be run a campaign as corrupt as hillary killary's campaign was - biased brainwashing by the mass media, sending thugs to disrupt GOP rallies, stealing debate questions for their candidate before the debate. Then, of course, someone has to set up a Foundation and operate it as a cash laundering organization that allows the chosen GOP candidate to go from - how did hillary killary say it - "We were broke when we left the White House and we are now worth about $15 million on a government salary".
      Oh yeah, baby - I want that type of election every 4 years - that would be awesome to see how blatantly obvious it is that all Americans - whether demoncrap or republitard - are getting screwed!
      Bring it on promisem!
      Or maybe it's so easy to show the corruption in hillary killarys campaign it was just a suckers play by Russia. Think the CIA can, with all those wise men who lie to the American people daily, figure it out?
      HAHAHAHAHAHA - yeah - let's worry about Russia and forget about the corruption that was shown about hillary killary and the DNC. Smart deflecting, that's for sure!! I wouldn't want anyone spending too much time on the demoncraps corruption - heavens no. Let's deflect and blame Russia LOL
      
      
      

      replyreport
      1. 62

         PhoenixVposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         
         
         
         
         I will hack democracy and Bury You In Hillarys Emails!

         replyreport
2. 77

   colorfuloneposted 7 years ago

   

   replyreport
   1. 0

      promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Are you saying you approve of Russian interference?

      replyreport
      1. 60

         The Old Guardposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Are you saying you approve of the corruption in hillary killary's campaign and the corruption within the DNC?
         No ammo for Russia if we had anywhere close to honest politicians.
         You're concerned with Russia while your politicians steal from you and rig elections - that makes a lot of sense.
         Let's now care about the order in our own house - and the fact that in the last 20 years we've interfered with over 81 elections in foreign countries - let's blame Russia for showing us the corruption within hillary killary's campaign, the pay for play at the clinton foundation and the DNC rigging of primaries. Let's ignore all that and get mad at Russia.
         HAHAHAHA - what a joke!
         
         

         replyreport
   2. 77

      colorfuloneposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      I really thought Hillary was stupid when she disclosed our nuclear response time on national television.
      
      “As I’ve said repeatedly, if there is anybody who’s been in the pocket of Vladimir Putin, it is Hillary Clinton. Everybody needs to have out there, the millennials that they know, their nephews, their nieces, just watch Clinton Cash on YouTube. The fact that 20 percent of our uranium was sold to Kremlin front companies, in a deal that was signed off by Hillary Clinton as secretary of state, means if there’s anybody who can be bought by the Kremlin, it’s Hillary Clinton.” -  Dr. Gorka
      
      Wikileaks: Hillary Clinton Bragged About Being Invited to Putin’s ‘Inner Sanctum’
      *  http://www.breitbart.com/national-secur … r-sanctum/

      replyreport
      1. 0

         promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         Diversion, diversion, diversion. Take news, fake news, fake news.

         replyreport
3. 62

   PhoenixVposted 7 years ago

   
   
   Now that they have drug out the republican Boggy Creek creatures of the swamp, I am officially a supporter of Trump as opposed to just disgusted by any clinton. Thanks Promisem.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      It's time we throw any Republican in jail for daring to share opinions that don't jive with Phoenix and other protectors of fake news.

      replyreport
      1. 62

         PhoenixVposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         The difference between you and I is one of us claims to be non partisan or they are not all about quote "party first" and the other who actually exhibits it.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            You have no idea who I am. You simply trash the postings of anyone who doesn't agree with your extreme views.

            replyreport
      2. 62

         PhoenixVposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         LOL @
         
         Sincerely,
         Party First, Country Second

         replyreport
         1. 59

            Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

            It fascinates me how difficult the concept of 'sick of politics as usual' is to those immersed in it. Promisem appears completely clueless.

            replyreport
            1. 62

               PhoenixVposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               Its ironic that msm and career politicians are talking about threats to democracy when they killed it long ago.

               replyreport
            2. 0

               promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

               Now why would you throw in such a cheapshot? I thought you learned your lesson and cleaned up your act after abusing Pretty Panther until she left.
               
               Shame on you. I had hopes you and I were starting to talk with some civility.

               replyreport
               1. 59

                  Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

                  Cheap shot? I can't help but think what I said with these types of threads you keep starting.
                  
                  If you think I abused Pretty Panther until she left then I'm surprised. She, like you, had gone off the deep end of partisan politics (in my opinion) but I never thought she was weak enough to be pushed out. Actually, when you think about it, this was a cheap shot on your part.

                  replyreport
   2. 62

      PhoenixVposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      replyreport
      1. 0

         promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

         This is your best post yet.

         replyreport
4. 0

   calculus-geometryposted 7 years ago

   If only someone had warned Hillary it was a bad idea to set up an email server in her home...

   replyreport
   1. 0

      promisemposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      If you are being serious, they did. If you are being sarcastic, then it's one of many reasons why she lost.

      replyreport
5. 55

   suryavanshi412posted 7 years ago

   actually he is right as per my concern

   replyreport
6. 62

   PhoenixVposted 7 years ago

   Its just impossible to ever know if Hillary and Bill had knowledge in deals like Russia gaining uranium mining companies. Hillary and Bill use subsidiaries to funnel the cash into their "Charity"  and those shell I mean subsidiaries forget to disclose their donors. Bill and hillary are completely in position to deny knowledge of Russia acquiring enough uranium to nuke a small planet like Mercury.
   
   The most important thing to remember is that Hillarys biggest skill, talent and forte is to be in a position to deny knowledge of anything.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Live to Learnposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      And the left swallows it hook, line and sinker.

      replyreport
7. 62

   PhoenixVposted 7 years ago

   
   
   
   Meanwhile NBC "we are not fake" News spotted these two characters coming outa Trump Tower.

   replyreport
8. 77

   Kathleen Cochranposted 7 years ago

   Those who put Trump in office should not be arguing any point that involves honesty, fair play or character.  Talk about a pot calling a kettle black.

   replyreport
   1. 95

      wildernessposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      Kind of hurt, did it, when those people brought up such things (or lack thereof) about Clinton.  I'm sure a lot of people wished they had never been mentioned.

      replyreport
   2. 60

      The Old Guardposted 7 years agoin reply to this

      LOL - the hypocrisy of the left is astounding, but not surprising.
      Don't let facts about the corruption in the hillary killary campaign and the DNC slow you down in the chase to blame Russia for your debacle in the 2016 elections.
      If you want to blame, obammama is a good start, hillary killary is good, the DNC is good, but to blame Trump for walking all over your falsehoods is stupid.
      Your falsehoods and corruption were you undoing in the 2016 elections - nothing else. Clean your party up, and you may have a chance in 2020.
      Run another corrupt candidate like hillary killary, continue the corruption within thee DNC, and you surly will lose again.
      Liberals show their stupidity daily, and it would not surprise me to see another 4 years of it and a loss again in 2020.
      
      

      replyreport