Ooooh, do tell us about this Russian email hack. I would like to know about this one.Sam Lowry said:It began because of the Russian email hack. The government would have been remiss not to investigate.Doc Holliday said:Russiagate was absolutely constructed by Clinton and the feds in tandem.Sam Lowry said:The entire reason for the intelligence investigation wasn't created by the Clinton campaign. The problem is that Clinton's opposition research turned it into a pseudo-criminal investigation, without a proper basis, when there were people who knew better. My point is that it was refutable. Is there anyone still arguing that the Steele dossier was accurate?Wangchung said:No, the Russia hoax, that was created by the Clinton campaign, was not legitimate. The riots of 2016 at the inauguration was an attack on the whole electoral process spurred on by the Clinton lies. Four years into his presidency and they were STILL calling him illegitimate and saying we should #resist. Just as much an attack on our constitution as anything. You might have forgotten or suppressed memories of that behavior, but the rest of us haven't.Sam Lowry said:It doesn't matter what his rhetoric is like after six years. The damage is already done. The Russia investigation was legitimate in and of itself, but it was twisted for political purposes to attack Trump. He survived it. The Big Lie had no legitimate basis and was not just an attack on Biden. It was an attack on the whole electoral process, all three branches of government, and ultimately the Constitution itself. It remains to be seen which of those will survive.Wangchung said:No, you're ignoring the Russian collusion hoax that went on for years. Trump has only been out of office close to two years. Let's see what his rhetoric is like after 6 years, like with the Clinton Cult.Sam Lowry said:Democrats thought of Hillary the way many of you claim to think of Trump -- as the lesser of two evils. I don't hear anyone clamoring for her return.Wangchung said:other than Hillary and her cult followers, you mean.Sam Lowry said:I don't see anyone trying to re-litigate the 2016 election or claiming that Hillary actually won. If they really think Kavanaugh is illegitimate, they can impeach him or pack the Court. They're not doing that, even though it would be legal, unlike Trump's scheme.Wangchung said:They accepted the result? THEY STILL CLAIM HE COLLUDED WITH RUSSIA. Hell, they still call Kavanaugh a drunken rapist. Reality matters.Sam Lowry said:Dems sicced a special counsel on Trump, which I opposed, but when the process ran its course they accepted the result. Same with Kavanaugh. That's the difference between them and Trump.fadskier said:Again, he hasn't done anything to "divide" the nation. Look at how Dems acted when Hillary lost...they questioned the validity of the results, called him an illegitimate president, called for violence and harassment of Republicans, harassment and slander of Kavanaugh, rush to judgment on racial things (i.e. Covenant Catholic) and again the two wasteful impeachment hearings that we all know were an attempt to prevent him running again. and you compare all of this to a few mean tweets....again, I hope he doesn't run again but to blame him for dividing America is just false, misleading and being a Democrat.Sam Lowry said:If the only time he's not divisive is when we pretend he doesn't exist, that's pretty much an admission that he's divisive. And he brought the second impeachment on himself. He's also the front-runner for 2024, so it's not like he's sitting quietly on the sidelines.fadskier said:But he's not President...and the Dems ARE STILL focused on him and blaming him for everything. I'd say his reaction is what I'd expect after two wasteful impeachment hearings. Trump is and has always been focused on himself....but so are the Dems. THEY keep bringing him up.Sam Lowry said:Biden hasn't done much of anything. He is basically a living stereotype. If you think liberals are weak, pandering, and ineffectual, he exemplifies those qualities to an almost cartoonish degree.fadskier said:There are many Republicans, like me, who did not support Trump's divisive rhetoric. Dems call it out only when they other side does it.Sam Lowry said:That's the reaction to Biden's speech in a nutshell. The only thing Republicans hate about divisive rhetoric is the fact that it's coming from a Democrat.TexasScientis said:
George Orwell nicely outlined the hazards of choosing your side, and sticking with it no matter how misguided your side becomes. In his 1945 essay, "Notes on Nationalism," he wrote:
Actions are held to be good or bad, not on their own merits but according to who does them....
I fail to see how Trump "divided" the nation. When Hillary lost, the Democrats reaction was the divisive factor. Biden promised to unify and he has not,
Having said that, please tell me how Trump divided the nation....and how has Biden unified.
Trump lost the election in 2020. He demanded to be reinstated as president last week. That says all you need to know about how divisive he's been, but if you need more, just look at everything he's said and done in the last two years. You'd be hard pressed to find a quote that wasn't designed to provoke outrage. He's still selling the same lies that have led to violence in the past. He's got a majority of Republicans convinced the system only works if he and his chosen candidates win. And so on.
Hillary has also talked about 2024. I did not vote for a president in 2020, but if Trump wins the Republican primary, he's got my vote. The Democrats have damaged this country enough.
Trump has created an unfalsifiable conspiracy narrative, which in the minds of his followers will taint not only the 2020 results but any election that populists fail to win. There's been bad stuff on the Democratic side, but nothing yet that is comparable.
The Big Lie has been refuted, sure, but it doesn't matter because it was never based on evidence to begin with. No matter how many times it's disproved, there's always some supposed evidence out there that would prove it if only "they" would allow it to be heard. It's the difference between being wrong and being fully paranoid. Wrong is curable, at least in theory.
I assume you mean the wikileaks emails that have been proven to have been taken from someone with access to the DNC servers. We all know that someone was a Bernie bro (Seth Rich) who was later killed in a "botched robbery" where nothing was robbed from him and no cameras in Georgetown had any video footage. Sounds very similar to Epstein killing himself.
