Intelligence Officials: Russians may have Compromising Information on Trump - Polidicks

If it's so fake it should be investigated and verified. Better safe than sorry, right? [editline]11th January 2017[/editline] [Media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/819155311793700865[/media] Pack it up Russia said it was all a lie.

Im glad people here are taking buzzfeed more seriously, in a few months of releasing content like this we should have them on the allowed sources list.

idc about hypocrisy cuz its overrated i'll still call him a pisslord and say fake news is shit even if its not real lmao

Buzzfeed isn't claiming these allegations are true, on the contrary. It's just that it's worth publishing and talking about, since the report has been going around for a while now. What it does is give people reason to go out and seek the truth.

Let's examine a hypothetical: Say Bernie won the democratic primary, and someone like Bush or Rubio was the GOP nom. Russia would obviously rather have Bernie as President than any of those neocons. Say Bernie won because a bunch of embarrassing info was leaked about the Republicans during the campaign. The republicans whine about how the evil Russians helped the socialist win the election and then the CIA (in a large part founded to prevent the spread of socialism) starts releasing a whole bunch of poorly sourced "reports" which only serve to legitimatize the paranoid republican conspiracy mongering. Would Bernie's left wing supporters not immediately see the shades of McCarthyism and Cold War fear-mongering? Would they not express outrage at what they saw as a bunch of un-elected spies trying to preform a deep-state coup against America's first truly socialist president? I would fully sympathize with the Bernie supporters in that scenario, because history tells us who these spies really are. They have agendas and are not too keen to let little things like whoever wins the election stand in their way. I ask that you guys give Trump the same benefit you would give Bernie in the same situation. We can't have a precedent that spies can just put out a bunch of questionable info the media refuses to question in order to get rid of a President they don't like. One day they might do it to your preferred president.

Bernie doesn't have the same conflict of interests that Donald Trump has already been shown to have. If he did though, I would want I would want any claims to be investigated, to be certain. I appreciate that you can't defend Donald Trump on his own merits and have to make something up though.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51654388]Let's examine a hypothetical: Say Bernie won the democratic primary, and someone like Bush or Rubio was the GOP nom. Russia would obviously rather have Bernie as President than any of those neocons. Say Bernie won because a bunch of embarrassing info was leaked about the Republicans during the campaign. The republicans whine about how the evil Russians helped the socialist win the election and then the CIA (in a large part founded to prevent the spread of socialism) starts releasing a whole bunch of poorly sourced "reports" which only serve to legitimatize the paranoid republican conspiracy mongering. Would Bernie's left wing supporters not immediately see the shades of McCarthyism and Cold War fear-mongering? Would they not express outrage at what they saw as a bunch of un-elected spies trying to preform a deep-state coup against America's first truly socialist president? I would fully sympathize with the Bernie supporters in that scenario, because history tells us who these spies really are. They have agendas and are not too keen to let little things like whoever wins the election stand in their way. I ask that you guys give Trump the same benefit you would give Bernie in the same situation. We can't have a precedent that spies can just put out a bunch of questionable info the media refuses to question in order to get rid of a President they don't like. One day they might do it to your preferred president.[/QUOTE] You're comparing a clean candidate lIke Bernie to a scummy piece of shit, already questionable, lying sack of potatos. Rest of your argument doesn't really hold up.

[QUOTE=Lambeth;51654282]If it's so fake it should be investigated and verified. Better safe than sorry, right? [editline]11th January 2017[/editline] [Media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/819155311793700865[/media] Pack it up Russia said it was all a lie.[/QUOTE] Pathetic liar thinks anyone trusts what he has to say about this. Humourous!

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51654388]Let's examine a hypothetical: Say Bernie won the democratic primary, and someone like Bush or Rubio was the GOP nom. Russia would obviously rather have Bernie as President than any of those neocons. Say Bernie won because a bunch of embarrassing info was leaked about the Republicans during the campaign. The republicans whine about how the evil Russians helped the socialist win the election and then the CIA (in a large part founded to prevent the spread of socialism) starts releasing a whole bunch of poorly sourced "reports" which only serve to legitimatize the paranoid republican conspiracy mongering. Would Bernie's left wing supporters not immediately see the shades of McCarthyism and Cold War fear-mongering? Would they not express outrage at what they saw as a bunch of un-elected spies trying to preform a deep-state coup against America's first truly socialist president? I would fully sympathize with the Bernie supporters in that scenario, because history tells us who these spies really are. They have agendas and are not too keen to let little things like whoever wins the election stand in their way. I ask that you guys give Trump the same benefit you would give Bernie in the same situation. We can't have a precedent that spies can just put out a bunch of questionable info the media refuses to question in order to get rid of a President they don't like. One day they might do it to your preferred president.[/QUOTE] We can talk about whatever we like. We're not the ones that verify evidence, decide on prosecution, and convict someone. I'm not giving Trump any benefits, I just want to see how the big man-child handles a taste of his own medicine.

[QUOTE=Clavus;51654341]Buzzfeed isn't claiming these allegations are true, on the contrary. It's just that it's worth publishing and talking about, since the report has been going around for a while now. What it does is give people reason to go out and seek the truth.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Lambeth;51654282]If it's so fake it should be investigated and verified. Better safe than sorry, right? [editline]11th January 2017[/editline] [Media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/819155311793700865[/media] Pack it up Russia said it was all a lie.[/QUOTE] You know who also don't fact check or check if the story is true or not? Places like Infowars and the Sun. So i guess that next time they will post a story about how the world is run by reptilians and there proof is some shitty pdf that some hack put together we should not dismiss it either right?

i like how hard trump is trying to do damage control, as though it implies he has something to hide

[QUOTE=The Rifleman;51654400]You're comparing a clean candidate lIke Bernie to a scummy piece of shit, already questionable, lying sack of potatos. Rest of your argument doesn't really hold up.[/QUOTE] It absolutely holds up, the spies hate radicals, on left and right, anything they say to discredit them simply can't be trusted. As hard as it is for "progressives" to admit the two men have quite a bit in common, which is why the transition from Bernie-bro to Trumpkin was fairly easy for me. [QUOTE=Clavus;51654404]I'm not giving Trump any benefits, [B]I just want to see how the big man-child handles a taste of his own medicine.[/B][/QUOTE] So it all comes down to partizan bitterness, OK, thanks for confirming my worst stereotypes.

Paul Wood, BBC Washington correspondent was just on the BBC News at One and he says he has spoken to people in the know about this sort of stuff and he says the allegations were regarded as credible (But that does not mean they are entirely accurate).

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51654424]It absolutely holds up, the spies hate radicals, on left and right, anything they say to discredit them simply can't be trusted. As hard as it is for "progressives" to admit the two men have quite a bit in common, which is why the transition from Bernie-bro to Trumpkin was fairly easy for me. [/quote] The only thing have in common is the fact they were considered alternatives to establishment politicians. Their actual stances and policies are near completely opposed.

[media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/819164172781060096[/media] oh boy

[QUOTE=mdeceiver79;51654445]The only thing have in common is the fact they were considered alternatives to establishment politicians. Their actual stances and policies are near completely opposed.[/QUOTE] Bernie has already said he's prepared to work with Trump to implement some of his campaign promises, provided he was serious about them.

It's only poetic justice that Donald Trump, one of the founders of the Obama birther movement and someone who closely surrounded himself with people who helped spread #PizzaGate, has to go into his inauguration dealing with a story as humiliating and ridiculous as this. I would say that I hope this story would make right-wing nutters who believe in the aforementioned conspiracies reevaluate how and why they came to believe such blatant and malacious bullshit, but I know that they would sooner have their heads collapse from the vacuum left by their complete lack of irony.

he's spent the past hour continuously tweeting about how its false and untrue if that was evident I wonder why he is panicking so much

[QUOTE=Kecske;51654449][media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/819164172781060096[/media] oh boy[/QUOTE] He gets his twitter taken way on the 20th right? RIGHT?

[QUOTE=Kecske;51654449][media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/819164172781060096[/media] oh boy[/QUOTE] But he's right, if you're OK with these leaks your implicitly condoning a precedent that allows spy agencies to undermine and their down a newly elected president through these unsubstantiated "leaks". Those short sided anti-Trumpers might feel it's all well and good it's being done to a "nasty" right wing populist like Trump as punishment for all the mean things he said. but one day it might be done to a "nice" left wing populist like Sanders, or Corbyn in the UK, the intelligence agencies have just as much reason to keep them out of power as Trump. If you're OK with all this we might as well give the CIA, NSA and others the right to veto the election results. [editline]11th January 2017[/editline] [QUOTE=Sobotnik;51654466]he's spent the past hour continuously tweeting about how its false and untrue if that was evident I wonder why he is panicking so much[/QUOTE] Maybe because he's sees the tell-tale signs of a coup, and those don't end well for the deposed leader.

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51654473]But he's right, if you're OK with these leaks your implicitly condoning a precedent that allows spy agencies to undermine and their down a newly elected president through these unsubstantiated "leaks". Those short sided anti-Trumpers might feel it's all well and good it's being done to a "nasty" right wing populist like Trump as punishment for all the mean things he said. but one day it might be done to a "nice" left wing populist like Sanders, or Corbyn in the UK, the intelligence agencies have just as much reason to keep them out of power as Trump. If you're OK with all this we might as well give the CIA, NSA and others the right to veto the election results. [editline]11th January 2017[/editline] Maybe because he's sees the tell-tale signs of a coup, and those don't end well for the deposed leader.[/QUOTE] This already is what happened to the left wing candidate.

[QUOTE=Big Bang;51654476]This already is what happened to the left wing candidate.[/QUOTE] By the DNC, yeah, but he never got far enough to merit the attentions of the Intel services.

[QUOTE=Big Bang;51654476]This already is what happened to the left wing candidate.[/QUOTE] So that makes it better somehow? Also which candidate are you referring too?

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51654482]By the DNC, yeah, but he never got far enough to merit the attentions of the Intel services.[/QUOTE] I actually meant Hillary. The DNC was hacked by Russian intelligence, resulting in the leaking of documents and sensitive information that affected the election quite directly. The intelligence community has already affected the results of the election, you only care about this now, because it affects the candidate you support this time.

[QUOTE=Kecske;51654449][media]https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/819164172781060096[/media] oh boy[/QUOTE] Godwin's law

[QUOTE=Big Bang;51654490]I actually meant Hillary.[/QUOTE] There's a world of difference between "left-wing" and "liberal", they're not mutually inclusive. [QUOTE=Big Bang;51654490]The DNC was hacked by Russian intelligence, resulting in the leaking of documents and sensitive information that affected the election quite directly. The intelligence community has already affected the results of the election, you only care about this now, because it affects the candidate you support this time.[/QUOTE] 1. No evidence DNC was hacked by Russians, people who claim to have said "evidence" can't be trusted. 2. Comey announcement had more of an affect than DNC leaks. 3. The purpose of these leaks is not to affect public opinion, but to build a case for a sham of an impeachment proceeding which will pave the way for a deep-state coup d'etat. 4. DNC leaks were released by activist seeking to expose the truth of what the powerful get up to, these "leaks" are done to protect the powerful and maintain the status quo.

On the one hand I think the major driving focus of this whole thing should be the question of how deep Trump's ties to Russia are and how much influence Putin might actually be able to exert on him and the RNC at large On the other hand man I just cannot get enough of shit like this [media]https://twitter.com/KyloRenzer/status/819167732130320384[/media]

this is [I]surreal[/I]

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51654510] words words words[/QUOTE] [QUOTE]1. No evidence DNC was hacked by Russians, people who claim to have said "evidence" can't be trusted.[/QUOTE] There is but it's classified. The intelligence community supports that including head of the FBI James Comey [QUOTE]2. Comey announcement had more of an affect than DNC leaks.[/QUOTE] Probably true. [QUOTE]3. The purpose of these leaks is not to affect public opinion, but to build a case for a sham of an impeachment proceeding which will pave the way for a deep-state coup d'etat.[/QUOTE] hah okay this is a pretty wild claim do you have a source for this [QUOTE]4. DNC leaks were released by activist seeking to expose the truth of what the powerful get up to, these "leaks" are done to protect the powerful and maintain the status quo.[/QUOTE] hah okay this is a pretty wild claim do you have a source for this

[QUOTE=Whoaly;51654510]There's a world of difference between "left-wing" and "liberal", they're not mutually exclusive. 1. No evidence DNC was hacked by Russians, people who claim to have said "evidence" can't be trusted. 2. Comey announcement had more of an affect than DNC leaks. 3. The purpose of these leaks is not to affect public opinion, but to build a case for a sham of an impeachment proceeding which will pave the way for a deep-state coup d'etat. 4. DNC leaks were released by activist seeking to expose the truth of what the powerful get up to, these "leaks" are done to protect the powerful and maintain the status quo.[/QUOTE] 1) That's convenient. 2) Which wouldn't have happened if the information wasn't leaked. 3) It affected public opinion quite clearly, there's no evidence of a coup d'etat, if all, they serve the exact same purpose as previous leaks, "[I]transparency[/I]". 4) Or so you heard, not really something you can confirm. I'd rather have the status quo be conserved rather than let Russia have control. The point is, you can't really complain about intelligence agencies affecting public opinion, when it was through their direct action that Trump was elected.