Hillary Clinton is Done: part 3

[CapelDodger]

Why? To read the finest of russian propaganda tampering with emails and their big dog, of course!

Ironically, the tampering I'd expect would be by omission - selective release to conceal context. That's what happened with the notorious email hack of the Climate Research Unit at UEA.

Of course the fact that the Sputnik story has featured tells us all we currently need to know about what they've got to work with. It's diddly.

 

[The Big Dog]

Why on Earth would I want to do that?

Because one would think that one is a skeptic, of course.

 

[The Big Dog]

Bu-bu-bu-bu-bu-Clinton!

Oh dear.... are you intentionally not using that correctly or just is that you do not know any better?

/the Ostrich approach of her supporters is refreshing on a board for "skeptics."

 

[CapelDodger]

You should face the facts.

Donald Trump is nothing but a stupid, idiotic, greedy, liar who is about to lose the election, therefore Hillary Clinton will be your President starting at noon on 20 JAN 2017.

And they are so gonna take your guns this time, oh yeah.

 

[Shalamar]

Oh dear.... are you intentionally not using that correctly or just is that you do not know any better?

/the Ostrich approach of her supporters is refreshing on a board for "skeptics."

That is your entire 'argument'. "BUT CLINTON!" You aren't a skeptic, but berate others for not being skeptical.. because they're skeptical of the claims you make, and the sources you cite.

It's almost as if you think Hillary is so evil, that she opened hospices and then didn't provide either basic pain killers, or basic hygiene protocols for the patients.

You want to complain that people here aren't skeptics? Then try being skeptical yourself, which starts at the claims and sources you provide.

You could also stop whinging 'SHILLARIES!' as if that will get people to blindly accept your biased positions.

In the meantime, keep on going 'Bu-But-But-But-CLINTON!'

 

[CapelDodger]

Because one would think that one is a skeptic, of course.

Why would a sceptic feel the need to plough through a wikileaks dump? Trump clearly didn't : he went with the Sputnik story unquestioningly, and I've got a strong suspicion that you did as well until put straight.

 

[Foolmewunz]

Because one would think that one is a skeptic, of course.

Nope. One is willing to accept that the Podesta emails might be real. And then one laughs at you. Ha Ha Ha! Because they are so insignificant that only someone looking for pyrrhic victory in internet debate points is going to care about them.

Hillary and her team planned to do well and actually suggested all sorts of things to each other as to how to reach those ends. OMG, I'm shocked, shocked I say.

Really? This is it? We have to listen to this crap every day that Julie releases another few thousand less-and-less significant and not in the least bit damning emails? Meanwhile you're missing the big parade and the Meltdown on Fifth Avenue. Trump is declaring civil war on the GOP. His supporters (all two dozen of them) are going to vote for President and not the down-ticket Republicans.

And all the liberals and Democrats are laughing. Ha Ha Ha!

Is she done, yet?

 

[CapelDodger]

And all the liberals and Democrats are laughing. Ha Ha Ha!

Is she done, yet?

She ain't done taking their guns. Oh, how we shall laugh then! There may even be Snoopy dances.

I wonder, are there Hillary and Trump masks in the stores for Halloween yet, and how are they selling? Any sightings out there?

 

[The Big Dog]

Why would a sceptic feel the need to plough through a wikileaks dump? Trump clearly didn't : he went with the Sputnik story unquestioningly, and I've got a strong suspicion that you did as well until put straight.

Oh really? I went with a Sputnik story I had never heard of nor read?

'k

Unlike you , I actually read the email. I searched the dump for "Blumenthal" came across it looked at the raw source, and realized that Sid had cut and pasted an article mentioning him into an email.

That is what skeptics do, they investigate.

 

[The_Animus]

Why on Earth would I want to do that?

Why would you look at primary sources about the topic you're posting about?

 

[The_Animus]

Doesn't matter what she said.

The alternative is admittedly guilty of sexual assault, of working with Russians in collusion to affect the outcome of the election, and is threatening to jail his political opponents.

Only dictators do that, kiddo. ONLY DICTATORS.

If you want a dictator, move to an appropriate country. I suggest something in Africa.

Evidence please that Trump is "working with Russians in collusion to affect the election".

And I loved the media spin regarding his quip about how Clinton would be in jail. It was obvious he wasn't talking about jailing people because they are political opponents. It was specifically about a special prosecutor for Clinton because of her email BS and the appearance of corruption or a botched job by the FBI and the AG.

There are so many things to criticize him over that spinning stuff like this isn't necessary. In fact all it does is make it easy to see which people/media have lost all credibility.

 

[Crossbow]

You are the one who keeps hounding me to bet with you, so here’s my offer.

If, and only if, Chris Christie is nominated to be the next Attorney General of the US, and that nomination is then brought before the Senate for a vote:

If Christie’s nomination is confirmed by a Senate vote (which requires a simple majority), I win.

If Christie’s nomination is defeated by a Senate vote, you win.

And if there is no vote at all, then there is no bet.

Wager: $100 at 1-to-1 odds.

I am just posting a reminder to 'Slings and Arrows' about the bet that we have.

 

[caveman1917]

Oh man, you do know that old Kurt is not claiming that the emails were edited, but rather that they were misinterpreted by a media outfit called Sputnik?

Did you actually even try to read the article or the email or the raw source?

You shouldn't have said this so soon. It's always interesting to see who will just go with whatever conspiracy theory some nationalist rants about rather than checking the primary source - even if it is only a mouse-click away.

 

[Megalodon]

What primary source? The Wikileaks email dumps were dhown to have been edited in russian computers. There is absolutely no guarantee that you are getting the real emails.
And even if one conditionally concedes that the emails are not tampered with, we still have to see any kind of problematic discovery. TBD was wagging over the didcovery that someone thought that Chelsea was a brat. Stop the presses!

 

[jimbob]

What primary source? The Wikileaks email dumps were dhown to have been edited in russian computers. There is absolutely no guarantee that you are getting the real emails.
And even if one conditionally concedes that the emails are not tampered with, we still have to see any kind of problematic discovery. TBD was wagging over the didcovery that someone thought that Chelsea was a brat. Stop the presses!

From the US officially blames Russia Thread:

Newsweek



http://europe.newsweek.com/vladimir...on-donald-trump-benghazi-sputnik-508635?rm=eu

ETA

This is very interesting, since it's very much like the classical Mole Hunt method: see who is the only one with the fake top secret information, in this case Blumenthal instead of Eichenwald. At the very least it proves that Trump has someone actively monitoring Russian media for dirt on Clinton.

 

[NoahFence]

Evidence please that Trump is "working with Russians in collusion to affect the election".

And I loved the media spin regarding his quip about how Clinton would be in jail. It was obvious he wasn't talking about jailing people because they are political opponents. It was specifically about a special prosecutor for Clinton because of her email BS and the appearance of corruption or a botched job by the FBI and the AG.

There are so many things to criticize him over that spinning stuff like this isn't necessary. In fact all it does is make it easy to see which people/media have lost all credibility.

********

 

[The_Animus]

********

Exactly. Your claim was BS and you don't have evidence. Thanks for the honesty.

 

[caveman1917]

The Wikileaks email dumps were dhown to have been edited in russian computers.

An interesting conspiracy theory. Do you happen to have some evidence for this?

 

[CapelDodger]

Why would you look at primary sources about the topic you're posting about?

The wikileaks data dump isn't the primary source for the wikileaks story, nor the story that Trump took on faith and repeated a distorted story on Sputnik. What else do you think I'm posting about?

 

[CapelDodger]

What primary source? The Wikileaks email dumps were dhown to have been edited in russian computers. There is absolutely no guarantee that you are getting the real emails.
And even if one conditionally concedes that the emails are not tampered with, we still have to see any kind of problematic discovery. TBD was wagging over the didcovery that someone thought that Chelsea was a brat. Stop the presses!

I've no position on whether there's been tampering, except to point out that it's not been to any evident purpose given that "Chelsea is a brat" is regarded as a pearl in the dross. Not even Bernie die-hards are finding much in there to shout about.