Did Donald Trump really just ask Russia to hack the US govt? Yes, he did In the latest of a series of implausibly appalling statements, Republican presidential nightmare Donald Trump encouraged the Russian government to hack into the servers of US government officials in order to provide him political ammunition against his Democratic rival. Speaking at a press conference on Wednesday, Trump said …
Trump was going under the assumption that the Russians ALREADY HAVE the Clinton email, from a server that no longer exists.
If they do, then the Hillary defense ("no security compromise") is a lie.
And if that's a lie, then Hillary's the one who compromised national security and should go to jail.
Trump was calling for the Russians to supply evidence of Hillary's crimes.
You were saying?
*pedant alert*
You honestly believe a man who can give a speech for over an hour and not make a string together a single meaningful sentence knows anything about how email works?
Shall I explain it to you then?
/pedant
/coat :-)
-----------------------------------------------------------
Actually, yes. Any Wall Street type is going to have the SEC watching, always watching. Knowing how email works and the security thereof would be part of the job(security), yes? There's always business competitors watching too.
Trump was calling for the Russians to supply evidence of Hillary's crimes.
What crimes? It's always smoke and never fire from the Clinton-haters.
Trump, on the other hand, is a proven racist, lying fraud.
Forget any claims of false equivalence, too; Trump is a threat to democracy and the world. Clinton isn't.
"Trump was going under the assumption that the Russians ALREADY HAVE the Clinton email, from a server that no longer exists."
that was MY first impression as well.
A thumb-UP from me, even though the 'howler monkeys' are thumbing you down [a badge of honor, heh]
and, did ANYONE ever think that Trump *might* be telling a JOKE? *I* thought it was UPROARIOUSLY funny!
"and, did ANYONE ever think that Trump *might* be telling a JOKE? *I* thought it was UPROARIOUSLY funny!" --- it was a joke, a sharply sarcastic and cutting one, but the left don't like it when they are the butt of said joke. So now they feign more outrage and clutch their pearls ever so tightly when Trump jokes about missing emails than they ever did when Hillary actually put said emails out there to be hacked in the first place.
> and, did ANYONE ever think that Trump *might* be telling a JOKE? *I* thought it was UPROARIOUSLY funny!
Very obviously was. He said the media would reward them for it. The media is paid for by Clinton and will not publish things that harm her campaign.
Even discussing this is part of the fail media's plan, but... There is no part of the government that could be hacked to reveal Hillary's missing emails. Unless there is a larger treason scandal involving Obama and every department of the government, including FBI and Justice Dept. So right off the bat, the liberal/Clinton false story this article is running on is disproven.
Second, Hillary said under oath that the deleted emails contained no sensitive information. So even if the Russian could hack something and get them, that would represent no risk at all to security, unless Hillary lied under oath. If she did, then she is no longer eligible to hold office.
Finally, the Russians already have the information, as they compromised Hillary's server. The fact that they haven't released the emails yet shows they are working with Hillary's campaign, which is probably why they're so bent on claiming the opposite with Trump.
> the one who compromised national security and should go to jail.
Just like Cheney went to jail when he compromised security by outing a covert agent?
Just like Reagan went to jail when he compromised security by illegally selling arms to Iran and then using the proceeds to fund the Contras? And then lying about it to Congress?
Just like W went to jail when he compromised security by lying about WMDs in Iraq and using that as a pretext for a multi-billion dollar war that cost thousands of lives; and triggering a domino retaliatory effect of terror attacks in in the US and Europe?
The fuckwits who are calling for HRC to be variously hung, shot, or executed have convenient fucking memories. To say nothing about the relative scale of HRC's alleged transgressions compared to some real criminals who got off totally scott free.
Next you'll be suggesting that the gwb43.com email scandal is anything like the Clinton one.
But it's very clear in tribal politics, whatever the other guys do is terrible and should involve jail, flogging and hanging, but our lot are pure as the driven snow. Because ideals, ends justify means, them lot want to destroy our country etc etc.
> Trump was going under the assumption that the Russians ALREADY HAVE the Clinton email, from a server that no longer exists.
Was he now? How exactly do you know this? Are you suggesting we should just take his PR flack's feeble attempt at damage control at face value?
His exact words were: "Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing."
Maybe they do, maybe they don't already have them. If they do have them, they don't need to go hacking. But I think the implication is clear: he meant go for it.
I dunno, that's how I hear it. I only have 50+ years as a native English speaker, so what would I know.
>> Easy to tell who has never used a database in their life in this thread.
It is, isn't it?
Or at least who finds DBs an apparently unfathomable and insurmountable challenge, if one takes into account that you seem to be equating locating files locally stored in a presumably well structured and indexed archive to clandestinely retrieving files that were stored by a non-cooperative remote entity, that have supposedly long since been deleted and, further, that the bleeding FBI already tried to recover -- with presumably much more cooperation than the Russians are likely to get, one might add -- and reportedly couldn't!
I think it would come under "incitement." But then him and "Dobby" do seem to see eye to eye on many things.
Personally I'd rather like Donald (or "The D" as I like to think of him, since so many of his supports just can't seem to get enough of him) to win.
Like Brexit for the British.
But without it being so completely impossible to reverse.
TRUMP ROCKS YOUR SOCKS OFF!
Get over it!
Additionally,. he's probably the only thing that stands between us and nuclear war with Russia.
But then again, humanity ending because the politically correct thing to do is to vote for a mendacious imperial neocon that happens to be female (though sadly not black and gay, one cannot have everything) is just a cynical glimmer in God's scheme of things.
See me not care.
Your evidence that Clinton is prepared to use nuclear weapons against Russia pre-emptively?
As for Trump:
“Europe’s a big place,” he said on Fox. “I’m not going to take cards off the table. We have nuclear capability. Now, our capability is going down rapidly because of what we’re doing. It’s in bad shape, the equipment is not properly maintained, there’s a whole lot of talk about that, and that’s a bad thing, not a good thing.”
(http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/apr/1/donald-trump-threat-nuclear-weapons-europes-big-pl/)
I don't think there's anything in The Art of the Deal which suggests that having a weapon, making sure it's ready to use, declaring that its use is "on the table" and suggesting that other parties (e.g. Saudi and Japan, but not presumably Iran) could and should have their own nuclear capability, amounts to ruling out the possibility of actually using it. Plus, of course, using nukes against ISIS is a possibility he's suggested - and American nukes would really help sort out the Middle East.
And still there are people who think Clinton a bigger danger!
I don't think there's anything in The Art of the Deal which suggests that having a weapon, making sure it's ready to use, declaring that its use is "on the table" and suggesting that other parties (e.g. Saudi and Japan, but not presumably Iran) could and should have their own nuclear capability, amounts to ruling out the possibility of actually using it. Plus, of course, using nukes against ISIS is a possibility he's suggested - and American nukes would really help sort out the Middle East.
Speaking of "Art of The Deal" - it's real writer said :
“I put lipstick on a pig,” he said. “I feel a deep sense of remorse that I contributed to presenting Trump in a way that brought him wider attention and made him more appealing than he is.” He went on, “I genuinely believe that if Trump wins and gets the nuclear codes there is an excellent possibility it will lead to the end of civilization.”
"And still there are people who think Clinton a bigger danger!" --- Ask the Libyan's, Egyptian's, Syrians, Kurds, Yazidi, Iraqi's, etc. who the bigger danger is? They are not dying in their thousands thanks to Trump, but thanks to Hillary's inept and downright negligent foreign policy.
Here is the constitutional definition of treason:
Section 3.
Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.
The Congress shall have power to declare the punishment of treason, but no attainder of treason shall work corruption of blood, or forfeiture except during the life of the person attainted.
Analysis of Trumps statement:
Levying war - no.
Adhering to their enemies - no.
Giving them aid and comfort - no.
Answer to your question - no.
Depends if you consider Putins Russia to be an enemy of the US, does it not?
Putin certainly considers the US to be an enemy of Russia. The little man is paranoid, but I guess he has to live with the constant fear of defenestration.
What's truly scary is that one day, this man could be POTUS. I only hope that the smart citizens of the USA see beyond the bluster and rhetoric. I do, however, worry that they won't. As for the accusation of Treason, I'd say it was close, but no cigar....yet.
Truly scary, but partly because he's not organised. He just shoots his gob off without any thought to the consequences.
The comment caused dismay even among reporters who have grown used to Trump's outrageous off-the-cuff comments, typically designed to make him the focus of that day's news cycle.
I don't think he wakes up in the morning, slides his feet out of the golden Trump Towers bed, extends his hands to the golden fire to warm his tiny fingers in the heat of burning international treaties, and thinks, "I know! I'll slag off menstruating Native Americans today. That'll get me a few more newsroom minutes than just harping on about illegal Mexican rapists again."
I don't think he wakes up in the morning, slides his feet out of the golden Trump Towers bed, extends his hands to the golden fire to warm his tiny fingers in the heat of burning international treaties, and thinks, "I know! I'll slag off menstruating Native Americans today. That'll get me a few more newsroom minutes than just harping on about illegal Mexican rapists again."
I'm pretty sure he does.. That's how he ended up as the Republican nominee without having to spend much on campaigning - get free media attention.
"Maybe he could be kept around for amusement after the election - make him foreign secretary or something."
Or ambassador to Great Britain. Be careful what you wish for, as they say.
If he becomes President he might make Michael Savage Ambassador to Great Britain.
"Maybe he could be kept around for amusement after the election - make him foreign secretary or something."
- Between him and Boris, R.I.P. Diplomacy. Good time for a career in International relations damage control. Better still, create a new BDSM fashion and have them ball-gagged most of the time.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
