On Julian Assange & WikiLeaks, The Russians, Trump, Hillary, and the DNC
What a disaster.
Amidst the unrest in the ranks, it’s so delicious to watch the media carry water where, just a week ago, it was a YUGE story that Melania Trump had the audacity to employ common expressions of childhood inspiration and motivation that so very surprisingly, were used by Michelle Obama a mere four years ago. Nobody is trying to find out where the ideas of work hard, don’t give up, keep your word came from, originally. So foreign. What did parents tell children before Michelle Obama came along?
Now this. Quite important and Assange is difficult to smear reasonably. Watch for yourself.
On the other side, one reason I have so tranquilly dropped so many longtime friends over years is partly because of this, also Snowden. I just checked. Crickets. Bunch of pussy boys.
Yep. You don’t get to have it both ways and remain credible.
I am a staunch supporter of both Wikileaks and Snowden, and I don’t give a flying fuck if Putin is behind all of it.
Publish it all. The state is illegitimate on all counts and scores, an immoral institution backed by force and coercion. Keep exposing that plain fact, and perhaps the idea of State and President will whither over time and people will come to devote their time and efforts to voluntary and free associations based upon mutual value exchange, rather than trying to sway the leviathan to do their bidding by State force, against those with whom they share no values.
Trump told a “woman reporter” to “be quiet” after she interrupted him several times while he was trying to answer her question. Read the reactions at that link, but watch the exchange.
LOL. Trump just has the media chasing its tale. People love this stuff. The media, with its Social Warfare, indoctrinated, knee jerk sensitivities is so out of touch. They’re just going apeshit and it’s YUGE! It’s gonna be great. Big. The best.
…Besides, “be quiet” is hardly all that direct, or rude. “Shut up,” maybe, but never miss an opportunity to play the “victim” card (“female journalist”). Poor little womyn. And weren’t we just told last night how formidable they’ve become—a FIRST—even though it’s the 17th time a woman has been nominated by a political party for president going back to 1940?
At any rate, Ill vaut mieux en français: “Ferme ta gueule!”
Now that’s insulting, since the human mouth in French is bouche, while gueule refers to the mouth of an animal.
But anyway, dismissing the DNC complaint, that in spite of the truth of the leaks (they have not denied veracity a single time to my knowledge), they are the work of Putin—or Trump in cahoots with Putin because mensch—is just a diversion for the children. Once again, Trump tizzies them so easily, so very predictably.
Those who complain about the possibility of Russia, China, or any other foreign institution messing in our electoral process are being part of the problem. If you want to make a case that it’s disinformation, fabrication, or just plain false, then make your case.
But if your case is: this is another nation state, and that’s more important than the veracity of the leaked info, then sorry: you’re part of the systemic problem. You might have been indoctrinated to make meaningless distinctions when more critical ones were called for.
What you are saying is, in essence: “just leave us to our own lies. They are our lies, and how dare you shine a light on them. There are borders.”
Good luck with that. You’ll go down in history.
Join Over 5,000 Subscribers!
Get exclusive content sent directly to your inbox.
What’s more is they’re incompetent. In the wake of their own systemic corruption, they try to cover with the plot of an 80’s spy thriller: RUSSIAN SPIES! OH NOES! It’s all been very amusing to watch in real time on twitter.
I don’t know, Richard. I think you’re just another troll.
What in the fuck is wrong with you?
I have been reading your blog for about four years. Thoroughly fantastic stuff.
I think Trump comprehensively represents a stern “fuck you” to the entire leftist culture of victimhood, third wave feminism, and nonsensical divisiveness inherent within all their narratives. I’m Canadian, and it’s even more ridiculous up here. Within the public sphere, fun has been suffocated.
Just curious as to how you felt about what a Trump presidency would represent for the future of political correctness?
I don’t honestly know but he’s gotten this far pretty much not giving a fuck what anyone thinks about that stuff.
In terms of governance, finance, etc., his presidency will be just as big of a miserable failure as any other. You can’t vote your way out of socialism. Voting is what got you socialism and it’s baked in the cake.
But if Trump can set back the clock on CULTURAL and SOCIAL levels of plain human interaction, that could be a very good thing.
Start with: “listen, I really don’t give a fuck how you feel about anything. Anyone who says they do, that’s not friend, family, or associate is lying to you.” Keep driving it home. Ridicule faux concern at all levels.
very nice essay. good point about the fact that a great deal of usa parents would tell their children to work hard, and keep your word etc.
Melania did not just offer up common sentiments. Her words, in sequence as spoken, had something like an 8 million to 1 odds of being accidental. I’m sorry I don’t have a link for that, I recall it as a credible source. Trump’s incestuous campaign mismanagement didn’t even run her speech through a plagiarism checker which can be had for free, no less. They can’t keep their story straight as to who wrote it. You think it was that woman who fell on her sword? Not likely. Just as Melania never graduated from college in Slovenia and the disappearance of her website claiming that yesterday.
And they want to run a country? Not even looking at ideology, those are reasons enough to not think they are capable.
Big fuckimg deal, you leftist pussy. You’re calling her a copycat. Wow!
This is how fucking pathetically stupid leftists are. You get no quarter here on politics, pzo. Fuck off.
….BTW, everyone ought to link up Scott Adams’ blog. The Dilbert guy. Now, he endorses Hillary but, unlike a fucktarded leftie, actually has a lot of crazy fantastic analysis from a persuasion angle.
My favorite, in his post about Trump’s acceptance speech:
“A week ago you compared ugly Donald Trump with ugly Hillary Clinton and declared them a visual tie. That matters because our visual “brain” generally wins against whatever part of the brain is pretending to be logical that day. But once we got a look at the entire Trump family, acting as a group, our visual brains started seeing them as a package deal. And when you compare the entire Trump family’s visual appeal to the entire Clinton family’s visual imagery it’s a massacre.
“Would you prefer seeing Bill and Hillary Clinton decompose in front of your eyes for eight years, or watch the Trump family develop their dynasty? Entertainment-wise, that’s no contest. And people usually vote for entertainment over policy. They just don’t realize it. That’s the biggest news from the convention, and you won’t see it in any headline.”
Many, many other quotables in the half dozen or so articles I read this morning.
Indeed Scott has been bang on with his insights on the Trump phenomenon and politics in general. And his Clinton endorsement is purely defensive, as he states on his website. Hilarious. I don’t know what his actual politics are, though I suspect a bit more libertarian, but certainly not anarchist, at all.
That is spot on. It comes down to the 20% of voters who don’t have a clue and who will decide on a last minute gut feeling which will be based on looks.
Hillary usually looks very haggard. Even Bill looks like an old man now. Trump in comparison looks vibrant. He still looks like a fighter. Who do you want fighting for you?
The Trump family reminds of of the one family in Modern Family. Trump is the old guy Jay and Melania is the hot Columbian wife Gloria. They even have a young son about the same age. Even though Jay comes across as a big grump, everyone knows that he’s actually a very nice guy.
Many people are like Scott Adams. They can’t actually come out and say they like a lot of what Trump says because they fear being ridiculed. There are many diverse factions that will all use Trump as their vessel to stick it to the Establishment. They are just waiting to send the big F**k You to to main stream politicians and main stream media. I can’t wait to see all of those media pundits in disbelief on election night. That is going to be priceless.
Yes, and the last time the media was all agape like that was Reagan – Carter, 1980. Reagan blew a 1st term Dem incumbent out of the water, 48-2 if I recall.
I think this is shaping up similar, but the “polls” will always plausibly “too close to call,” so as to “keep on believin.'”
The left operates on cheap slogans and bromides because they’re all such emotion driven fucktards only circumventing Darwin through their fraudulent social system that promotes Idiocracy, the DOCUMENTARY.
From Scott Adams’ latest blog post:
“For the record, I endorse Hillary Clinton for president, for my personal safety, because I live in California where it is dangerous for people to think you are a Trump supporter. My political views don’t align with either candidate and I don’t vote, in order to protect my objectivity.”
I can’t help enjoying the subtle humour and thinking of this guy 😀
“I think this is shaping up similar [to the 1980 Reagan upset]”
I doubt it very much. Reagan had a one in a million charm as a speaker, and to my knowledge never resorted to farcical sensationalism or aimed for outrage. Trump is making palpable waves, but not in a way that appeals to the obsessive, stern respect the average American inexplicably harbors for government.
Why won’t the people reject Hillary for the same reason? Because the flawed signals they’ve been conditioned for decades to trust are not flagging her as nearly so outrageous, so “inappropriate.” As you routinely point out, people do not think for themselves, and they are going to either ignore or rationalize away Clinton’s putrid record because she “acts more presidential.”
Many folks say they’re fed up with the government, and it’s easy to think Trump would win on that sentiment. But that’s still a minority of the population. The “anti-corporate” (i.e. anti-capitalism/anti-freedom) camp is still a great, big, prolific problem, and we’re not in desperate enough straits for most swing voters to quite embrace the antithesis of their precious paradigm. People are comfortable, even if they’re restless and frustrated. They’re dependent. They’ve got little incentive to put aside their fear of the unknown.
Ronnie scratched the people’s needy itch for articulate flattery, and reassured them that everything was going to be all right. Trump has no such thing going. There’s also the record attention Gary Johnson is grabbing, which is poison for the Republican ticket.
I say with no happiness whatsoever, it’s going to be Clinton by a mile in November.
I don’t mean to imply all the same elements are in place, but I expect a pretty big trouncing of Hillary (by Trump) because of other elements.
First of all, she’s loathed viscerally by way too many men, and lots of women too. I know lots of Dems, even women Dems, who just can’t stand her.
And now, she has the added thing of a huge portion of the Dems so royally pisses at her over the DNC scandal that they’ll toss their vote to Stein or Johnson explicitly to punish her, even if they know it helps Trump. Johnson seems to be pulling reasonably equally from everywhere. Not a Perot deal where, but for him, Bush would have had a second term in ’92.
Well, we shall see.
Libertarians and Greens are going to pull about evenly from both parties. Also, a ton of Bernie dems are going to head to Jill Scott, with a handful just saying fuck it, and voting for Trump. A lot of people are going to vote Trump in secret as well, but the main point is that a big 3rd party vote is not going to sway the outcome.
The Green Party has a fraction of the attention that the Libertarian Party does. Different league.
I want to believe Richard’s analysis, that the LP is pulling away left wingers/leaners, but I’m just not buying it. Overwhelming majority of leftists I’ve ever seen absolutely DESPISE libertarians. Whenever the topic is brought up, they bleat endlessly about the Koch brothers and all that shit.
At any rate, this debate ultimately boils down to whose crystal ball is more accurate, and I’m sorry to say I don’t have my specs handy. We’ll certainly see in three months.
You don’t have to be a leftist to acknowledge plagiarism, really. It honest makes next to no difference in practice, or to any who support Trump, Melania is not the presidential nominee. What I do despise is hypocrisy and willful ignorance to suit a political ideology on either side (wing-nuts of both flavors dislike me). Who knows where Michelle Obama got the speech from originally, but it’s clear that Melania Trump lifted parts of it wholesale, and it’s also clear that it’s completely meaningless. I really just don’t understand the rush to defend obvious plagiarism, especially when politically it’s an effective non-issue.
Sadly in response to another comment, it doesn’t seem likely that there will be too much of a contest in November and we’ll be stuck with the queen of corruption. I say this because Trump is heavily down in several key swing states, and historically these polls a couple weeks after the conventions have been fairly representative. I personally am hoping for a shake up with Gary Johnson and Jill Stein getting in on things and splitting the vote heavily because it would be interesting to see, but right now, the odds say that Clinton is going to have a heavy victory in 2016 and then in 2020 virtually any candidate who isn’t Trump will crush her. Trump’s problem is that he’s alienated basically every voter base on at least one instance besides white males, though he has a chance if he can start pressing Clinton on her own corruption and resisting the urge to keep the media coverage on him. This is going to be an election of people voting against who they hate, not for someone based on what they stand for.
Meh, I just don’t think it was plagiarism at all. It’s copycat. Plagiarism is lifting ORIGINAL ideas or perhaps unique and clever expressions as one’s own, not parroting inspirational bromides.
As for the way the election will turn it has proven to be interesting and will continue to be, but I have a different view of the ultimate outcome, essentially similar to polls vs. reality back in 1979.
Yeah, PZO, but Hillary doing something that would’ve sent me to Leavenworth (when I was a military officer) is really no big deal…just those nasty Republicans making something out of nothing..right? She was only the Secretary of State. You can’t expect her to follow basic security protocols.
Actually, it’s about 1 million times worse and more serious than Melania’s speech. And I’m not even touching other Clinton corruptions going back to the 1970s.
Here’s an interesting take on Trump and both parties from someone who has made a lot of accurate predictions so far:
The contradictions keep piling up.
Estoppel: the principle that precludes a person from asserting something contrary to what is implied by a previous action or statement of that person or by a previous pertinent judicial determination.
1. “There was nothing classified in my 33,000 deleted emails.”
2. “If Russia has my 33,000 deleted emails and hands them over to Wikileaks or the Trump campaign, it’s a national security issue.”
…And in terms of the DNC emails, now voicemails, the spin is something like this:
Trump shouldn’t be asking for Russia to give over hacked emails to the FBI—-which have already primarily shown collusion and corruption in the ELECTORAL PROCESS–because it would interfere with our ELECTORAL PROCESS.
Well, like I say, “The Onion gets scooped again.”
Actually I forgot that I wanted to comment on this too, the best thing for the country would be for Hillary to finally be indicted for what are definitely actual crimes and let anyone else vie for the presidency from the DNC, since she’s a monster.
Also whistleblowers and data dumps like those from Snowden, or provided to and divulged by wikileaks have shown to be extremely important to maintaining our democracy when they show the lengths to which the American people have been getting screwed by our government as a whole and by one of our candidates for Commander in Chief.
Who the fuck really cares? Nobody but you expected Melania to be Thatcher? I bet you never uttered a fucking peep when Biden lifted the entirety of Nile Kinnick’s speech or that Obama lifted Deval Patricks.
And the idea of foreign involvement in electoral processes? GMAFB…..how many US operatives were sent to Israel in order to swing their elections? Somebody was looking for regime change and in this case government sponsored Democrat flacks like James Carville and others.
Now fucking Putin and Snowden and Assange are fighting each other to see how much dirt they can let out without giving up all the cookies in the jar. I say….let it fly!! If it was about Trump (which it certainly will be at some point), the media hacks would be celebrating in prime time.
And Richard is absolutely correct……our own justice system at the highest levels of the Oval Office and Federal Law Enforcement establishment……played no part in the electoral process? Shit these folks are calling down plays from the executive suites… like Richard Nixon used to do for pro football games.
Glad you finally found Scott Adams, his blog is awesome and has almost daily posts. Super interesting and thought provoking, good luck getting anything done!
His trump posts are spot on and the fact he endorses Hitlary for his own safety is hysterical.
Yea, I’ve known about it for some time, but you know, limited attention and time. Mike Eades and I correspond a fair amount in email about stuff political and he’s an avid Scott Adams reader, and so has shot me some posts now and then.
But, when I popped in this morning, I just couldn’t stop reading them. 🙂
people will come to devote their time and efforts to voluntary and free associations based upon mutual value exchange
Ha Ha Hee Hee That’s a good one.
Then again people laughed at ending slavery once upon a time.
The water carriers. Last night the lead on NBC was a photo of the Kremlin with the stunning news that Trump was hiring the Russians to spy on Hillary.
Nothing about why anyone would be interested in 20,000 (or more) State Department e-mails that might be in the hands of the Russians. Or that their possession of those e-mails poses any significance to US security.
NBC. Never Bash Clinton.
It’s the classic wag-the-dog trick the Clintons always use to deflect attention from their scandals.
The networks never get that they’re being used to flog the Clinton’s false narratives. They’re dogs that love being wagged.
Look, I totally understand why people hate Hillary. But, Trump would be a DISASTER as a president, and the man mistakes ego for intellect. Leftists are annoyingly PC, sensitive, social welfare bs-artists, and Righties are overly self-oriented, insensitive, myopic bs-artists. Sure, Trump is wildly entertaining as the guy who ruffles feathers – and I admit he definitely has an important place in socio-political discussion – but, to think he’d make a good president??! People shouldn’t vote for Trump JUST because they hate Hillary. And they shouldn’t vote for him JUST because he’s entertaining. Thing is, both sides make me violently ill.
Andrew Jackson had no political experience but he had accomplishments. Though unlikeable and arrogant, Trump has accomplishments that contrast with Hillary’s string of failures. As Jackson successfully did against the anointed secretary of state Henry Clay, he’s good at hammering home the populism against Hillary’s modern “corrupt bargain”.
Was Jackson a good president? Democrats used to think that he was and held Jackson/Jefferson dinners in their pre-Progressive past. He toppled the central Bank, and nothing like it appeared until the Federal Reserve 80 years later. He also unified the country by suppressing the South Carolina nullification. And he was a primary force in creating the Cotton Kingdom of the Deep South and starting the Western migration. A self-made real estate tycoon. (I like Remini’s biographies of both Clay and Jackson.)
The DNC sabotaging of Sanders is very similar to the Clay/Calhoun/Adams corrupt bargain. This cronyism upset the unified Democratic apple-cart in 1832, resulting in the two-party system. It’ll be interesting to see how forcefully Trump plays this.
Hi there, thhq. I don’t totally disagree with what you’re saying. In many ways, a LACK of political experience would actually be a good thing for the presidency – I mean, cronyism and favor-mongering have ridiculously over-run the political system. All I’m saying, is that I personally do not feel Trump is the right outsider for the job. For my personal taste, Trump is too bombastic and lacks a certain intellectual finesse that my ideal candidate would possess.
Go fucking BIG ASS, or go home and Trump has demonstrated a willingness to tell anyone and everyone to fuck off.
Don’t be stupid. This is not something you finesse. This is something where you kick ass and display an open willingness to suffer the consequences. Check, and Check.
If he does nothing but mock political correctness and social justice BS from a bully pulpit for four years, that will be fine with me.
Hey, Richard – you definitely make a great point that if Trump does nothing but PC mockery & bullying the stupid for four years, then it will have been worth it. HA! Best argument I’ve heard for a Trump presidency!
Opednews is a progressive site and is scathing of Hillary and the Dems. There are at least three writers that are published both by Infowars and Oped – opposite ends of the political spectrum, one being Paul Craig Roberts.