How many different ways can the anti Donald folk try to reverse the election?

[scooperhsd]

I'll bite, over the weekend I saw a commercial on NatGeo asking the electors to ignore their constitutional duty and not vote as the populace has instructed them to since the winning candidate is unfit for office. For some reason that is still unexplained, the dolts seem to feel the other parties candidate was or is fit for office?
I am as worried about the direction of this government as I was before the election, but willing to give the Orange Don an opportunity to prove he has the best interest of the country at heart before condemning him to the history books as the second worst Presidential choice in the last decade. With a few exceptions, his cabinet choices have been solid conservatives with histories of having ideas on matters as opposed to being mere syncopates as we have seen over the last 8 years.

A commercial asking people to ignore their constitutional duty....SERIOUSLY???  What the hell kind of network is NatGeo?

Can anyone provide a link to that commercial?...Serk?

Why don't you all go read the CONSTITUTION about the duty of the Electors - it is NOT to vote for the popular vote winner for the state (contrary to what some states have decided). The duty of the Elector is to vote for who THEY think would be the best President / Vice President.  I'd be half tempted to ask to be an elector , vote opposite, then when NC fines me $500 / and disqualifies my Elector vote - sue the state in Federal Court for violating the US Constitution - but I have strong doubts that would ever happen - I'm officially Non-affiliated .

[Jess from VA]

Voting is not yet complete but.....


Of the six “faithless” electors (so far) that were officially recorded, four of them were in Washington state, where three voted for Colin Powell and one voted for Faith Spotted Eagle. Two Republican electors in Texas voted for Ron Paul and John Kasich.  In recent history, it is not uncommon for a stray elector to cast a rogue vote. 

In the video, old crap for brains Sheen refers to a man.... but it was really a woman. 

[Willow]

Why don't you all go read the CONSTITUTION about the duty of the Electors - it is NOT to vote for the popular vote winner for the state (contrary to what some states have decided). The duty of the Elector is to vote for who THEY think would be the best President / Vice President.  I'd be half tempted to ask to be an elector , vote opposite, then when NC fines me $500 / and disqualifies my Elector vote - sue the state in Federal Court for violating the US Constitution - but I have strong doubts that would ever happen - I'm officially Non-affiliated .

Perhaps, scooperhsd, you should read the Constitution rather than echoing what someone has told you that the Constitution says.  The Constitution specifically assigns the number of electors per state and then leaves each state to determine how those electors will be selected.  Most states (all states) select by election electors that are committed to vote for a certain candidate.  That is why the ballot upon which we vote lists names of the candidates rather than names of the electors.  The electors are legally and ethically bound to vote for the candidate upon whose ticket they were elected.

[..]

A new one.

Voter ID laws caused Hillary to lose. As reported in Salon.

http://www.salon.com/2016/12/19/voter-id-laws-contributed-to-hillary-clintons-loss-in-crucial-swing-states/

It's slowly morphing from laughable to sad.

[scooperhsd]

Why don't you all go read the CONSTITUTION about the duty of the Electors - it is NOT to vote for the popular vote winner for the state (contrary to what some states have decided). The duty of the Elector is to vote for who THEY think would be the best President / Vice President.  I'd be half tempted to ask to be an elector , vote opposite, then when NC fines me $500 / and disqualifies my Elector vote - sue the state in Federal Court for violating the US Constitution - but I have strong doubts that would ever happen - I'm officially Non-affiliated .

Perhaps, scooperhsd, you should read the Constitution rather than echoing what someone has told you that the Constitution says.  The Constitution specifically assigns the number of electors per state and then leaves each state to determine how those electors will be selected.  Most states (all states) select by election electors that are committed to vote for a certain candidate.  That is why the ballot upon which we vote lists names of the candidates rather than names of the electors.  The electors are legally and ethically bound to vote for the candidate upon whose ticket they were elected.

Actually - I just did read the text of the 12 th Amendment on Wikipedia - nothing said about how the states select / nor set what the electors will vote. The Electors are NOT bound by the constitution nor the 12th amendment on who they should vote for. The Congress, however - IS limited per the voting in the E.C. 

All this still doesn't change my fundamental assertion that the E.C has outlived it's usefulness with today's rapid communications. Heck you could go back to the telegraph in the 1850's to argue this one. At the very least  - "all or nothing" is an out-dated notion .

You are not ever going to convince me that the E.C. is the best way to elect a President / Vice President .

[Moonshot_1]

Why don't you all go read the CONSTITUTION about the duty of the Electors - it is NOT to vote for the popular vote winner for the state (contrary to what some states have decided). The duty of the Elector is to vote for who THEY think would be the best President / Vice President.  I'd be half tempted to ask to be an elector , vote opposite, then when NC fines me $500 / and disqualifies my Elector vote - sue the state in Federal Court for violating the US Constitution - but I have strong doubts that would ever happen - I'm officially Non-affiliated .

Perhaps, scooperhsd, you should read the Constitution rather than echoing what someone has told you that the Constitution says.  The Constitution specifically assigns the number of electors per state and then leaves each state to determine how those electors will be selected.  Most states (all states) select by election electors that are committed to vote for a certain candidate.  That is why the ballot upon which we vote lists names of the candidates rather than names of the electors.  The electors are legally and ethically bound to vote for the candidate upon whose ticket they were elected.

Actually - I just did read the text of the 12 th Amendment on Wikipedia - nothing said about how the states select / nor set what the electors will vote. The Electors are NOT bound by the constitution nor the 12th amendment on who they should vote for. The Congress, however - IS limited per the voting in the E.C. 

All this still doesn't change my fundamental assertion that the E.C has outlived it's usefulness with today's rapid communications. Heck you could go back to the telegraph in the 1850's to argue this one. At the very least  - "all or nothing" is an out-dated notion .

You are not ever going to convince me that the E.C. is the best way to elect a President / Vice President .

There is more to the Constitution than the amendments.

From Article 2, section 2 of the Constitution
2: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress: but no Senator or Representative, or Person holding an Office of Trust or Profit under the United States, shall be appointed an Elector.

In over 240 years, the Electoral College system has never, ever, failed to peacefully elect a President. The ability to peacefully transfer such political power is one of the vestiges of the process.
The system gives the individual states, and their citizens, the right and obligation to give their voice to the process.

Imagine the dynamic of this election under a "popular vote" system. The campaigns would have been drastically different but I would think that Trump would have prevailed as he would have campaigned to that end (the popular vote) as opposed to campaigning to the States.

The popular vote is also know as, and can be achieved by, eliminating the opposition. Not beating them with better ideas, but actually eliminating them.

That dynamic doesn't exist in the Electoral College as it is the States that ultimately choose the President. It explains the 240+ years of peaceful transition.

The Electoral College is time tested.

Has a perfect record of producing the leader of the Executive Branch of this Federation.

Provides each State and respective citizens with the same representation of electing a President as they have for Legislation.

It is elegantly simple.

We change it at our peril.

[Gavin_Sons]

Why don't you all go read the CONSTITUTION about the duty of the Electors - it is NOT to vote for the popular vote winner for the state (contrary to what some states have decided). The duty of the Elector is to vote for who THEY think would be the best President / Vice President.  I'd be half tempted to ask to be an elector , vote opposite, then when NC fines me $500 / and disqualifies my Elector vote - sue the state in Federal Court for violating the US Constitution - but I have strong doubts that would ever happen - I'm officially Non-affiliated .

Perhaps, scooperhsd, you should read the Constitution rather than echoing what someone has told you that the Constitution says.  The Constitution specifically assigns the number of electors per state and then leaves each state to determine how those electors will be selected.  Most states (all states) select by election electors that are committed to vote for a certain candidate.  That is why the ballot upon which we vote lists names of the candidates rather than names of the electors.  The electors are legally and ethically bound to vote for the candidate upon whose ticket they were elected.

Actually - I just did read the text of the 12 th Amendment on Wikipedia - nothing said about how the states select / nor set what the electors will vote. The Electors are NOT bound by the constitution nor the 12th amendment on who they should vote for. The Congress, however - IS limited per the voting in the E.C. 

All this still doesn't change my fundamental assertion that the E.C has outlived it's usefulness with today's rapid communications. Heck you could go back to the telegraph in the 1850's to argue this one. At the very least  - "all or nothing" is an out-dated notion .

You are not ever going to convince me that the E.C. is the best way to elect a President / Vice President .

  wow, you must not be comprehending anything you are reading. Or just don't want to believe it.
If we just went with popular vote then the major cities would rule and us rural folks would have no say.

[scooperhsd]

Why don't you all go read the CONSTITUTION about the duty of the Electors - it is NOT to vote for the popular vote winner for the state (contrary to what some states have decided). The duty of the Elector is to vote for who THEY think would be the best President / Vice President.  I'd be half tempted to ask to be an elector , vote opposite, then when NC fines me $500 / and disqualifies my Elector vote - sue the state in Federal Court for violating the US Constitution - but I have strong doubts that would ever happen - I'm officially Non-affiliated .

Perhaps, scooperhsd, you should read the Constitution rather than echoing what someone has told you that the Constitution says.  The Constitution specifically assigns the number of electors per state and then leaves each state to determine how those electors will be selected.  Most states (all states) select by election electors that are committed to vote for a certain candidate.  That is why the ballot upon which we vote lists names of the candidates rather than names of the electors.  The electors are legally and ethically bound to vote for the candidate upon whose ticket they were elected.

Actually - I just did read the text of the 12 th Amendment on Wikipedia - nothing said about how the states select / nor set what the electors will vote. The Electors are NOT bound by the constitution nor the 12th amendment on who they should vote for. The Congress, however - IS limited per the voting in the E.C. 

All this still doesn't change my fundamental assertion that the E.C has outlived it's usefulness with today's rapid communications. Heck you could go back to the telegraph in the 1850's to argue this one. At the very least  - "all or nothing" is an out-dated notion .

You are not ever going to convince me that the E.C. is the best way to elect a President / Vice President .

  wow, you must not be comprehending anything you are reading. Or just don't want to believe it.
If we just went with popular vote then the major cities would rule and us rural folks would have no say.

You Really think so ?. Well, I don't. I think it would force the candidates to have to campaign everywhere. Heck - the current system encourages them to "concentrate on the urban areas" - those places with higher population density - especially if the other areas are not where you're strong.

[Rams]

You Really think so ?. Well, I don't. I think it would force the candidates to have to campaign everywhere. Heck - the current system encourages them to "concentrate on the urban areas" - those places with higher population density - especially if the other areas are not where you're strong.

The current EC system is not responsible for the decisions of where a candidate spends their time or resources.   That is based upon the judgement of the candidate and his/her advisors.    Obviously, Trump and his advisors understood the "system" better than Clinton and her advisors.    

Think about it.   Supposedly, she won the popular vote and yet Trump won the race.   The truth is, Clinton depended on votes from everyone but, the Deplorable(s) that put Trump in the White House.      Had she gotten her message out to those voters she ignored, there's always the possibility she might have won.    She wouldn't have gotten my vote but, there's always that chance.    Another consideration is, just maybe, her message was not the message that middle America was interested in hearing or, they heard it and didn't like what she said.   But, all of that is not the EC fault.   Pin the tail on the donkey that is guilty and stop looking for shadows that are not there and mean nothing.  

I keep reading that the Russians are guilty of trying to influence our election.   OK, so what.   I assure you, every entity that thought they could effect our election and get someone that would favor them most likely tried.    Surely, you don't believe George Soros was sitting back on his ass and not spending huge dollars supporting his socialist agenda.   Even if the Russians are responsible for "trying" to affect this election, all that is being blamed on them is simply putting Hillary's own people's and her own stuff out there for everyone to see.    Those that saw them made up their own mind on who to vote for.   Don't take that as support for any potential Russian hacking, it's not.   But, at no time did the DNC or Clinton deny the emails were accurate.   Let's also not forget those 30,000 deleted email we never did get to see.  

IOW, quit blaming the system on a failure of the candidate.   The DNC backed (most likely) the only person who couldn't beat Donald Trump, President Elect of the United States.

[ridingron]

  IOW, quit blaming the system on a failure of the candidate.   The DNC backed (most likely) the only person who couldn't beat Donald Trump, President Elect of the United States.   

It was her turn!!!  I think it was promised to her back in '08. That Bernie rascal just kept distracting everyone and disrupting the plan.

[Jess from VA]

Why don't you all go read the CONSTITUTION about the duty of the Electors - it is NOT to vote for the popular vote winner for the state (contrary to what some states have decided). The duty of the Elector is to vote for who THEY think would be the best President / Vice President.  I'd be half tempted to ask to be an elector , vote opposite, then when NC fines me $500 / and disqualifies my Elector vote - sue the state in Federal Court for violating the US Constitution - but I have strong doubts that would ever happen - I'm officially Non-affiliated .

Perhaps, scooperhsd, you should read the Constitution rather than echoing what someone has told you that the Constitution says.  The Constitution specifically assigns the number of electors per state and then leaves each state to determine how those electors will be selected.  Most states (all states) select by election electors that are committed to vote for a certain candidate.  That is why the ballot upon which we vote lists names of the candidates rather than names of the electors.  The electors are legally and ethically bound to vote for the candidate upon whose ticket they were elected.

Actually - I just did read the text of the 12 th Amendment on Wikipedia - nothing said about how the states select / nor set what the electors will vote. The Electors are NOT bound by the constitution nor the 12th amendment on who they should vote for. The Congress, however - IS limited per the voting in the E.C.  

All this still doesn't change my fundamental assertion that the E.C has outlived it's usefulness with today's rapid communications. Heck you could go back to the telegraph in the 1850's to argue this one. At the very least  - "all or nothing" is an out-dated notion .

You are not ever going to convince me that the E.C. is the best way to elect a President / Vice President .

  wow, you must not be comprehending anything you are reading. Or just don't want to believe it.
If we just went with popular vote then the major cities would rule and us rural folks would have no say.

You Really think so ?. Well, I don't. I think it would force the candidates to have to campaign everywhere. Heck - the current system encourages them to "concentrate on the urban areas" - those places with higher population density - especially if the other areas are not where you're strong.

Popular vote would certainly be more purely democratic (in theory and in fact), but if we abandoned the EC, the cities and urban areas (together with the committed liberal educated/affluent vote, also mostly in cities and universities, and a lot of young people) WOULD likely control the outcome of this (and all future) national elections; or really the solid democratic party control over those national urban areas would.  

The rural (and middle America) areas would not lose all power, but it is simply a question of population.  The populations of the combined (and historically solid Democratic) urban areas has simply surpassed the rural and middle American populations (and will increasingly continue to dominate by pure numbers because they make more babies than conservatives do, a lot more babies).  As a subset of this, those same urban areas often control the outcome of individual state elections as well (more people, but way less land mass).  

Why do you think democrats are for open borders, unvetted immigration, no ID voting, extending the vote to released felons, and keeping a third of the workforce on permanent welfare?  Because they love them, or because they have sympathy for them?  Of course not, it's because they vote democratic in a big way.  

All you have to do is look at the National Blue/Red post election maps of the last several elections (especially the county by county maps).  California and NY have the highest populations and get the highest number of winner take all electoral votes (because they have the highest populations).  Add the Northeast, Northwest, IL and a couple other swing states, and they get the electoral victory, even when the vast majority of US land mass remains solid red.  This was exactly the case in both zero election victories.

The candidates campaign the most where they have the best chances of winning important swing states. They need not spend much time/money in states they will certainly win.  They put in pro forma stops in each other's territory, but intelligently don't waste much time there because they cannot win no matter what they do, say, or spend.  And the math is pretty well settled, both candidates worked hard in the second tier electoral vote number swing states of MI, WI, FL, OH, and PA... and winning those is what won Trump the election.    (Hillary spending more time in TX, and Trump in CA would have been a waste of time/money with or without the electoral college).

In my youth, I was against the EC, because it is not as democratic as popular vote.  Today, I support he EC wholeheartedly because it is the only chance conservatives have to win a national election (and it's only going to get harder over time, a lot harder).  



  

[The emperor has no clothes]

The Democrats are going to have to face reality now. The time for blaming everybody but themselves is over. They better get on with the future. Unless they want to be in the minority for the foreseeable future. I just heard a commentator say something that I thought was very pertinent . He said the Democrats are walking around like they are in "occupied France". They better pull their heads out and start planning and fighting before it's too late.
 This is not to say I don't think we should investigate what the Russians did. But it better be a bipartisan effort geared at helping the country, not trying to blame someone for losing.

[Robert]

Glad this portion is over with and wish all those who sent letters, protests, law suits encouraging electors to abdicate their duty would be branded traitors and thrown in jail as people who tried to overthrow the US. They have shown their true colors not to be able to accept the rule of law or even decent behavior. Petulant children that did not get their own way and cannot see beyond their own mislead desires leading to self destruction.

 They are truly blind, arrogant  not humble and even the idea of removing the electors would lead to a system they eventually would hate also since at some point in time it would not go their way also. No system, no structure could be good enough since at some point in time it could all go against them and send them railing into the frenzy of what we see today.

Accept the will of the American people with grace is not in their understanding, but win at all costs. Careful introspection that indeed they may not be totally right in their understanding and their decisions never seems to happen. Then we wonder why Comey said I see no intent, of course he didn't, he didn't want to see the ends justify the means thinking these people have. The sociopaths always think themselves correct and could care less about others. That have a pseudo caring about situations or people but fail to grasp the true nature of rule. That projection of thought in making balanced decisions that can last through time escapes them. Something our Founding Fathers had that is totally amazing. This type of foresight does not come without a price or wisdom. It takes those who can see beyond themselves and lay the ground work for every thought to see where it will end up.

This kind of thinking, tyranny and rebellion is what caused the uprising of the movement to elect Trump. We saw it in a president and we didnt like it how much more of an albatross around the neck of the US is it when we see it in people.

[Rams]

The Democrats are going to have to face reality now. The time for blaming everybody but themselves is over. They better get on with the future. Unless they want to be in the minority for the foreseeable future. I just heard a commentator say something that I thought was very pertinent . He said the Democrats are walking around like they are in "occupied France". They better pull their heads out and start planning and fighting before it's too late.
This is not to say I don't think we should investigate what the Russians did. But it better be a bipartisan effort geared at helping the country, not trying to blame someone for losing.

Rob,
I agree with you to a great extent, especially, the bolded sentences with one exception.   IMO, the Democrats should reconsider, think about their stance, their values and what caused them to be overthrown.    They send a very clear message of where they wanted to go and other than the largest populations areas, that message was rejected.   Pandering to those folks and ignoring the needs of the rest of the nation, lying, cheating and so on, has a price.   The Dems are now and for the next few years, continue to pay that price for the last eight years.

I also agree with investigating the so called intervention or attempt to influence the American voter's vote.    But as I've said previously, almost every entity that could tried to influence this election.    No one seems to have a problem with George Soros and his financial support of the socialist agenda.   No one seems to have a problem with news agencies spinning events in the direction that supports their particular agenda, even the news agencies owned by non-Americans.   The Russians haven't been accused of lying, just putting accurate and private emails out there.    Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the Russians but, if all they did was to provide the truth, well, isn't that what we all want?  The Truth...

[The emperor has no clothes]

Well actually Ron, they have been accused of putting "fake news" into Facebook and such. I would consider that lying.

[Moonshot_1]

Well actually Ron, they have been accused of putting "fake news" into Facebook and such. I would consider that lying.

Wow. Russia puts "fake news" into Facebook. Lots of people put fake news into Facebook.

What would be the purpose of an investigation into the alleged Russian Hacking? To see if the Russian intel agencies are hacking? THAT IS WHAT THEY DO. WE ALREADY KNOW THIS.

Basically everyone is having a cow about this because Hillary, Huma and Podesta didn't upgrade their cyber security.

And what damage did the hacking do? It revealed the corruption, fraud, and stunning unethical behavior of the DNC and Clinton Campaign, not against Trump, but Sanders!
They don't screw Sanders, there is nothing worth hacking.

To see the proven, most corrupt and fraudulent Political Party of our time call out the Russians is rich!
To see them compare this to the Terrorism on 9-11 is nauseating. Beyond shameful.

If it is indeed the Russians, they are doing a better job than our own Justice department at rooting out the corruption.

Looking like it may be an inside job though. Someone on the DNC side found God or something and did Holy Hacking.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Well actually Ron, they have been accused of putting "fake news" into Facebook and such. I would consider that lying.

Wow. Russia puts "fake news" into Facebook. Lots of people put fake news into Facebook.

What would be the purpose of an investigation into the alleged Russian Hacking? To see if the Russian intel agencies are hacking? THAT IS WHAT THEY DO. WE ALREADY KNOW THIS.

Basically everyone is having a cow about this because Hillary, Huma and Podesta didn't upgrade their cyber security.

And what damage did the hacking do? It revealed the corruption, fraud, and stunning unethical behavior of the DNC and Clinton Campaign, not against Trump, but Sanders!
They don't screw Sanders, there is nothing worth hacking.

To see the proven, most corrupt and fraudulent Political Party of our time call out the Russians is rich!
To see them compare this to the Terrorism on 9-11 is nauseating. Beyond shameful.

If it is indeed the Russians, they are doing a better job than our own Justice department at rooting out the corruption.

Looking like it may be an inside job though. Someone on the DNC side found God or something and did Holy Hacking.

If you are good with our foreign enemies affecting our elections, that is your right. I'm not. I would like to keep them out, regardless of who they try to help.

[Chrisj CMA]

Just wondering if there's more folks that may have helped her lose that might turn up having committed a surprise suicide?

[Moonshot_1]

Well actually Ron, they have been accused of putting "fake news" into Facebook and such. I would consider that lying.

Wow. Russia puts "fake news" into Facebook. Lots of people put fake news into Facebook.

What would be the purpose of an investigation into the alleged Russian Hacking? To see if the Russian intel agencies are hacking? THAT IS WHAT THEY DO. WE ALREADY KNOW THIS.

Basically everyone is having a cow about this because Hillary, Huma and Podesta didn't upgrade their cyber security.

And what damage did the hacking do? It revealed the corruption, fraud, and stunning unethical behavior of the DNC and Clinton Campaign, not against Trump, but Sanders!
They don't screw Sanders, there is nothing worth hacking.

To see the proven, most corrupt and fraudulent Political Party of our time call out the Russians is rich!
To see them compare this to the Terrorism on 9-11 is nauseating. Beyond shameful.

If it is indeed the Russians, they are doing a better job than our own Justice department at rooting out the corruption.

Looking like it may be an inside job though. Someone on the DNC side found God or something and did Holy Hacking.

If you are good with our foreign enemies affecting our elections, that is your right. I'm not. I would like to keep them out, regardless of who they try to help.

If you are good with our Domestic enemies affecting our elections (ie. DNC deep seated corruption screwing Bernie) that is your right too.

The hacking isn't really the big problem here. The solution is readily available. It was the astonishing lack of adequate cyber security at the DNC and in the fellow high level Democrat operatives computers. In this day and age, and considering the high level placement and power of the players involved, this was beyond inexcusable. And discovery of Hillary's home server was a giant advertisement of lax security. "C'mon in boys, the hacking is fine"

Simple fact is that with the proper security on their computers our enemy would have been held at bay.
We are strong on that front as long as we don't let them in the door. Clinton and crew let them in and gave the the key to the liquor.

Whoever they were.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Well actually Ron, they have been accused of putting "fake news" into Facebook and such. I would consider that lying.

Wow. Russia puts "fake news" into Facebook. Lots of people put fake news into Facebook.

What would be the purpose of an investigation into the alleged Russian Hacking? To see if the Russian intel agencies are hacking? THAT IS WHAT THEY DO. WE ALREADY KNOW THIS.

Basically everyone is having a cow about this because Hillary, Huma and Podesta didn't upgrade their cyber security.

And what damage did the hacking do? It revealed the corruption, fraud, and stunning unethical behavior of the DNC and Clinton Campaign, not against Trump, but Sanders!
They don't screw Sanders, there is nothing worth hacking.

To see the proven, most corrupt and fraudulent Political Party of our time call out the Russians is rich!
To see them compare this to the Terrorism on 9-11 is nauseating. Beyond shameful.

If it is indeed the Russians, they are doing a better job than our own Justice department at rooting out the corruption.

Looking like it may be an inside job though. Someone on the DNC side found God or something and did Holy Hacking.

If you are good with our foreign enemies affecting our elections, that is your right. I'm not. I would like to keep them out, regardless of who they try to help.

If you are good with our Domestic enemies affecting our elections (ie. DNC deep seated corruption screwing Bernie) that is your right too.

The hacking isn't really the big problem here. The solution is readily available. It was the astonishing lack of adequate cyber security at the DNC and in the fellow high level Democrat operatives computers. In this day and age, and considering the high level placement and power of the players involved, this was beyond inexcusable. And discovery of Hillary's home server was a giant advertisement of lax security. "C'mon in boys, the hacking is fine"

Simple fact is that with the proper security on their computers our enemy would have been held at bay.
We are strong on that front as long as we don't let them in the door. Clinton and crew let them in and gave the the key to the liquor.

Whoever they were.

I have stated many times that Clinton's use of the private server was wrong and would be her downfall. I am not alright with the DNC screwing Bernie Sanders. Although I wouldn't characterize them as Domestic Enemies. But they are a private party and are free to operate how they see fit. There are reasons why there are laws against foreign players contributing campaign money. The same should be true for foreign players influencing our elections. Had the Chinese hacked into the RNC and divulged incriminating info I doubt you would have the same attitude.

[Skinhead]

Shame on those evil Russians for (allegedly) bringing the truth about the beast and the DNC out in the open where it belongs, not hidden away (not very well) on her  server, that she herself said wasn't hacked.  Oh and thank God for all the anti Trump protestors that interfered with Trump supporters trying to attend his rallies, oh yeah, and thanks to them for not trying to influence Trump supporters by assaulting them.  Russians?  That's all you got?

[Moonshot_1]

Well actually Ron, they have been accused of putting "fake news" into Facebook and such. I would consider that lying.

Wow. Russia puts "fake news" into Facebook. Lots of people put fake news into Facebook.

What would be the purpose of an investigation into the alleged Russian Hacking? To see if the Russian intel agencies are hacking? THAT IS WHAT THEY DO. WE ALREADY KNOW THIS.

Basically everyone is having a cow about this because Hillary, Huma and Podesta didn't upgrade their cyber security.

And what damage did the hacking do? It revealed the corruption, fraud, and stunning unethical behavior of the DNC and Clinton Campaign, not against Trump, but Sanders!
They don't screw Sanders, there is nothing worth hacking.

To see the proven, most corrupt and fraudulent Political Party of our time call out the Russians is rich!
To see them compare this to the Terrorism on 9-11 is nauseating. Beyond shameful.

If it is indeed the Russians, they are doing a better job than our own Justice department at rooting out the corruption.

Looking like it may be an inside job though. Someone on the DNC side found God or something and did Holy Hacking.

If you are good with our foreign enemies affecting our elections, that is your right. I'm not. I would like to keep them out, regardless of who they try to help.

If you are good with our Domestic enemies affecting our elections (ie. DNC deep seated corruption screwing Bernie) that is your right too.

The hacking isn't really the big problem here. The solution is readily available. It was the astonishing lack of adequate cyber security at the DNC and in the fellow high level Democrat operatives computers. In this day and age, and considering the high level placement and power of the players involved, this was beyond inexcusable. And discovery of Hillary's home server was a giant advertisement of lax security. "C'mon in boys, the hacking is fine"

Simple fact is that with the proper security on their computers our enemy would have been held at bay.
We are strong on that front as long as we don't let them in the door. Clinton and crew let them in and gave the the key to the liquor.

Whoever they were.

I have stated many times that Clinton's use of the private server was wrong and would be her downfall. I am not alright with the DNC screwing Bernie Sanders. Although I wouldn't characterize them as Domestic Enemies. But they are a private party and are free to operate how they see fit. There are reasons why there are laws against foreign players contributing campaign money. The same should be true for foreign players influencing our elections. Had the Chinese hacked into the RNC and divulged incriminating info I doubt you would have the same attitude.

Well, you'd be wrong.
Had the RNC been so lax in their computer security that the Chinese easily hacked them and then made emails public that chronicled, in great and accurate detail, the same kind of corruption, fraud, and criminality that was exposed by, allegedly Russia, I'd call for their demise, politically of course.
It is the integrity of the process that is sacred. I can give a little on the political margins on both sides as sometimes some tough calls must be made. But the process is sacred.

The Democrats screwed the pooch with Bernie Sanders and when the video of the Democrat operatives came out with them plotting violence at Trump Rallies and voter fraud. Such actions qualify as the actions of Domestic enemies. To have such people attempt to school us about Russian interference in our Electoral Democracy is the height of insane arrogance.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Well actually Ron, they have been accused of putting "fake news" into Facebook and such. I would consider that lying.

Wow. Russia puts "fake news" into Facebook. Lots of people put fake news into Facebook.

What would be the purpose of an investigation into the alleged Russian Hacking? To see if the Russian intel agencies are hacking? THAT IS WHAT THEY DO. WE ALREADY KNOW THIS.

Basically everyone is having a cow about this because Hillary, Huma and Podesta didn't upgrade their cyber security.

And what damage did the hacking do? It revealed the corruption, fraud, and stunning unethical behavior of the DNC and Clinton Campaign, not against Trump, but Sanders!
They don't screw Sanders, there is nothing worth hacking.

To see the proven, most corrupt and fraudulent Political Party of our time call out the Russians is rich!
To see them compare this to the Terrorism on 9-11 is nauseating. Beyond shameful.

If it is indeed the Russians, they are doing a better job than our own Justice department at rooting out the corruption.

Looking like it may be an inside job though. Someone on the DNC side found God or something and did Holy Hacking.

If you are good with our foreign enemies affecting our elections, that is your right. I'm not. I would like to keep them out, regardless of who they try to help.

If you are good with our Domestic enemies affecting our elections (ie. DNC deep seated corruption screwing Bernie) that is your right too.

The hacking isn't really the big problem here. The solution is readily available. It was the astonishing lack of adequate cyber security at the DNC and in the fellow high level Democrat operatives computers. In this day and age, and considering the high level placement and power of the players involved, this was beyond inexcusable. And discovery of Hillary's home server was a giant advertisement of lax security. "C'mon in boys, the hacking is fine"

Simple fact is that with the proper security on their computers our enemy would have been held at bay.
We are strong on that front as long as we don't let them in the door. Clinton and crew let them in and gave the the key to the liquor.

Whoever they were.

I have stated many times that Clinton's use of the private server was wrong and would be her downfall. I am not alright with the DNC screwing Bernie Sanders. Although I wouldn't characterize them as Domestic Enemies. But they are a private party and are free to operate how they see fit. There are reasons why there are laws against foreign players contributing campaign money. The same should be true for foreign players influencing our elections. Had the Chinese hacked into the RNC and divulged incriminating info I doubt you would have the same attitude.

Well, you'd be wrong.
Had the RNC been so lax in their computer security that the Chinese easily hacked them and then made emails public that chronicled, in great and accurate detail, the same kind of corruption, fraud, and criminality that was exposed by, allegedly Russia, I'd call for their demise, politically of course.
It is the integrity of the process that is sacred. I can give a little on the political margins on both sides as sometimes some tough calls must be made. But the process is sacred.

The Democrats screwed the pooch with Bernie Sanders and when the video of the Democrat operatives came out with them plotting violence at Trump Rallies and voter fraud. Such actions qualify as the actions of Domestic enemies. To have such people attempt to school us about Russian interference in our Electoral Democracy is the height of insane arrogance.

Are you referring to the videos by James O'Keefe ?

[Bighead]

When someone comes up with some PROOF they actually did something I will listen until then not so much.
For some reason the Dems can't or won't see how corrupt the Clintons are, or just don't care. I just can't understand these folks way of thinking that a person who should be in Jail should be our Commander in Cheif makes Zero sense in any way,form or fashion.

[Pappy!]

So let's see here.......
Politicians are screaming that private emails that hid massive amounts of internal corruption were hacked and brought out into the light of day all the while saying nothing about the massive amounts of internal corruption...that was brought out into light of day.

Darn those hackers! They should be brought to justice! There should be a law against this!
 
Sound about right??

[The emperor has no clothes]

When someone comes up with some PROOF they actually did something I will listen until then not so much.
For some reason the Dems can't or won't see how corrupt the Clintons are, or just don't care. I just can't understand these folks way of thinking that a person who should be in Jail should be our Commander in Cheif makes Zero sense in any way,form or fashion.

I'm not sure if "PROOF" will ever be able to completely come out in the light of day. Much of the CIA's and FBI's methods are not going to be divulged to us peons. This is why in my opinion it needs to be an unbiased, bipartisan investigation by Congress. They will likely get the evidence and recommendations on it.

[The emperor has no clothes]

So let's see here.......
Politicians are screaming that private emails that hid massive amounts of internal corruption were hacked and brought out into the light of day all the while saying nothing about the massive amounts of internal corruption...that was brought out into light of day.

Darn those hackers! They should be brought to justice! There should be a law against this!
 
Sound about right??

I believe there are laws against this.

[Moonshot_1]

Well actually Ron, they have been accused of putting "fake news" into Facebook and such. I would consider that lying.

Wow. Russia puts "fake news" into Facebook. Lots of people put fake news into Facebook.

What would be the purpose of an investigation into the alleged Russian Hacking? To see if the Russian intel agencies are hacking? THAT IS WHAT THEY DO. WE ALREADY KNOW THIS.

Basically everyone is having a cow about this because Hillary, Huma and Podesta didn't upgrade their cyber security.

And what damage did the hacking do? It revealed the corruption, fraud, and stunning unethical behavior of the DNC and Clinton Campaign, not against Trump, but Sanders!
They don't screw Sanders, there is nothing worth hacking.

To see the proven, most corrupt and fraudulent Political Party of our time call out the Russians is rich!
To see them compare this to the Terrorism on 9-11 is nauseating. Beyond shameful.

If it is indeed the Russians, they are doing a better job than our own Justice department at rooting out the corruption.

Looking like it may be an inside job though. Someone on the DNC side found God or something and did Holy Hacking.

If you are good with our foreign enemies affecting our elections, that is your right. I'm not. I would like to keep them out, regardless of who they try to help.

If you are good with our Domestic enemies affecting our elections (ie. DNC deep seated corruption screwing Bernie) that is your right too.

The hacking isn't really the big problem here. The solution is readily available. It was the astonishing lack of adequate cyber security at the DNC and in the fellow high level Democrat operatives computers. In this day and age, and considering the high level placement and power of the players involved, this was beyond inexcusable. And discovery of Hillary's home server was a giant advertisement of lax security. "C'mon in boys, the hacking is fine"

Simple fact is that with the proper security on their computers our enemy would have been held at bay.
We are strong on that front as long as we don't let them in the door. Clinton and crew let them in and gave the the key to the liquor.

Whoever they were.

I have stated many times that Clinton's use of the private server was wrong and would be her downfall. I am not alright with the DNC screwing Bernie Sanders. Although I wouldn't characterize them as Domestic Enemies. But they are a private party and are free to operate how they see fit. There are reasons why there are laws against foreign players contributing campaign money. The same should be true for foreign players influencing our elections. Had the Chinese hacked into the RNC and divulged incriminating info I doubt you would have the same attitude.

Well, you'd be wrong.
Had the RNC been so lax in their computer security that the Chinese easily hacked them and then made emails public that chronicled, in great and accurate detail, the same kind of corruption, fraud, and criminality that was exposed by, allegedly Russia, I'd call for their demise, politically of course.
It is the integrity of the process that is sacred. I can give a little on the political margins on both sides as sometimes some tough calls must be made. But the process is sacred.

The Democrats screwed the pooch with Bernie Sanders and when the video of the Democrat operatives came out with them plotting violence at Trump Rallies and voter fraud. Such actions qualify as the actions of Domestic enemies. To have such people attempt to school us about Russian interference in our Electoral Democracy is the height of insane arrogance.

Are you referring to the videos by James O'Keefe ?

Really? You would question me on that point?

This is what I do not get.

You see the depths at which the DNC went to torpedo one of their own. There is no question or debate about it. High level people had to resign over the corruption that was uncovered. People who had an obligation and duty to be unbiased and neutral in their process.

Yet you would dismiss a video out of hand that shows these folks plotting against the actual opposition. High level people resigned in this case as well. Yet we just dismiss it as it must be some kind of silly political ploy?

If they have no problem torpedoing Sanders how far will they go to destroy Donald Trump?
As far as they can. Laws and ethics be cursed.

This doesn't reflect all Democrats. Just their leadership at the moment. They are corrupt. They are criminal. They are a cancer.

There are some good Democrats in the fight. That Ryan guy that took on Pelosi... I like him.  I look for them to be embraced by the upcoming administration and the Republican Congress. They won't see eye to eye but will begin to work together.
The current Democrat leadership will be cast aside soon.

[The emperor has no clothes]

Moonshot, I asked the question because I wasn't sure what you were referring to. As far as the DNC leadership. Yes, they were in the bag for Clinton. It proved to be a pretty foolish strategy for them . Criminal ? I'm not aware of what laws were broken by them. If you do, I would be interested. I think you are missing my point about the Russians or any foreign country meddling in our elections. It does our country no good whoever they might be helping.

[Rams]

Heard a report where Moore said he would pay any and all electorates  fines to cast their vote for Clinton and Madonna was offering sexual favors as well

Ya know, we all have our weaknesses and I'll not say I can't be bought for the right price but, there's no way in hell I'd let Madonna get near me.   I mean really, I have some pride......... 

[The emperor has no clothes]

Heard a report where Moore said he would pay any and all electorates  fines to cast their vote for Clinton and Madonna was offering sexual favors as well

Ya know, we all have our weaknesses and I'll not say I can't be bought for the right price but, there's no way in hell I'd let Madonna get near me.   I mean really, I have some pride.........  

Same here. Seems they could have at least offered up Faith Hill.