Random Politics & Religion #24

No, no no. When he first mentioned he was going to drain the Swamp his promises were to limit congressional terms and prevent foreign lobbying from previous congressional members. I may have the exact wording a bit wrong but that was pretty much the premise. I'm sure it became something more after that since people wanted him to drain every swamp in DC but that was the initial statement and what was initially meant.

He gave a speech that mentioned it and later the day (or the next day) his campaign website had a section about draining the swamp and that is what was listed. You are absolutely wrong here KN.


No I quoted the Forbes argument you leaked to try and prove that the general public knew that the Russians for sure attempted to do something to our election. If you read the article you linked you would know what I quoted.

Also, I wasn't referencing the NPC opinion piece but rather "The Intercept" piece that I will link again here. It just talks about the actual leak without too much opinion interjected. The point I made was about the actual leak though.

Well she is going to jail for breaking her legal contract, I think if we can't identify that we are just as bad as the idiots denying the leak.

So, case closed? Or are US intelligence agencies stupid?

Go for it Vic.

I never took that position, so I'm good.

We have a "report" of a Russian attempt to gain local official information. The report does not mention any attempts to hack the us election.

1) is this report real or is it something made up (like that trump dossier)? What evidence is there to support this?

2) how sure is the IC that it was the Russians? What evidence is there to support this?

3) even if it is all true, this is not the "hack the election" everyone is looking for.

Considering Winner herself said that no conclusions could be drawn about their success shows how little confidence there was in this leak. I don't understand why you would leak something like that without it actually being a smoking gun.

Just to address this, we can assume the report is real considering she was jailed for leaking it.

No, you were inferring that Russians hacked election software.

Or do you still deny your very words?

She was jailed for leaking a top secret report.

That doesn't mean it's true.

Remember, this is the same type of intelligence reports that stated that Iraq had WMDs. Which they did, but not the type that was first reported.

You are somewhat correct. The report IS real and definitely not made up. But the certainties in it may be false.

Funny article that popped up on msns:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/breitbart-editor-fired-after-anti-muslim-tweets/ar-BBC9jIA?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

Apparently Breitbart has some principles.

The report is real as it was made.

The report could be false, but we would (and should) never know it.

The report could be also be a bait to smoke out leakers. That is also possible (unlikely, but possible).

Regardless of anything, the report is basically what the public already knows.

Who knew?

Can we? I mean "unnamed officials say" is getting so old.


Because this girl is a rabid anti-trumper. She probably so foaming at the mouth that she's willin to do anything to get out her perverted form of the truth (which in reality is a nothing burger).

Seriously, check out her social media account.

People checking her schedule show she was meeting with Obama's White House a week before other leaks had happened as well.

Thats what I said last night before KN went off on his little tangent, its a silly thing to go to jail for because we already knew the info she leaked.

What the public assumed, and now "knows" which is the differentiating argument here.


I will take your word for her Social media accounts as I don't doubt it. Her punishment is most likely just.

I wouldn't only defend a leaker if the information they leaked was a "smoking gun" at that point they would be a whistle-blower. A good example of that is Snowdens NSA leaks which no one really cared about.

I think he thought that you meant that it was silly to jail her for it, when I think you meant that it was silly of her to risk going to jail for something of very little gain.

KN likes to generalize your argument into his narrative then continues arguing that narrative, letting it evolve if it fits him. He contradicts himself too, like a mini trump. Maybe he is Trump.

Hate to break it to you, but Snowden broke the same law Winner did.

Why else is he afraid of leaving his little pen?

Sure eliroo, whatever you say.

Care to elaborate your little analysis, or are you going to go the Vic route and say that it's true because you say so?

I touched on that last night as well, but I don't think he is dumb enough to be Trump.

I agree he broke the law, but it revealed some knowledge that the public needed to know which I think is the difference here. Which is why Whistle-blower protection acts should be a thing. If the information that is kept secret negatively effects the general populace and if it is leaked, I personally don't think the leaker should be held liable for breaking their contract since it was in the best interest of all the people (Who in the end are the true bosses of this nation).

This case is adverse to that because what she leaked wasn't implicating at all.


He is probably hiding in his pen though because our current president said he should be killed for Treason. When in reality his act was in favor of the USA but not in favor of the government itself. I digress a bit though, another issues about Snowden is that he leaked that information to other governments which is pretty bad.

Sure here is a source for my findings. It is a lengthy read but I'm sure you can manage.

Snowden is a criminal, running away just made his crimes even worse. I mean this Reality Winner is facing up to 10 years, thats not exactly a life ending sentence. Manning was in jail for 7(?) or so, these aren't harsh sentences. if Snowden had just faced the music he would be out right now and free to go to Cubs games. Instead he is stuck going to women's basketball games or at best KHL hockey.

If he didn't divulge the leaks to other governments he probably wouldn't be in as much hot water as he was. It would have also made the NSA issue a lot bigger than what it became.

What he leaked was specific tools the NSA was using to collect data. It didn't state what the data was, except that it was practically everything online.

I mean, it's pretty obvious that the government would be collecting such information. All we really know (and now, foreign powers knows specifically too) what and how it was collected. He has done more harm towards this country than "whistle blowing."

Tell us, how exactly are you harmed in the metadata collection?

His act was not in favor of the US. It actually hurt us more politically and figuratively, as it was a great tool to combat terrorism, now that everyone knows that such information is being collected in the manner it was. In this case, it's best for criminals to know not what is being collected.

Anyone with a sense of government intelligence, prior to Snowden's reveal, had a sense of government collections. It was how it was used to determine the legality of the issue. 99.9% of the data collection wasn't even thought up to be used for or against a US citizen.

I don't want to go down this Snowden trail.

I do agree that he is a criminal, simply because he leaked that information to foreign entities. I know I am contradicting myself but I often forget that when speaking about him. I still think him leaking the how the NSA has access to all of our devices was a positive for this country.

Regardless let's get back to Trump.

Fun fact, the same law that Comey used to give Hillary Clinton a pass is the one that Reality is being arrested under 73

Reality should just claim she had no idea what she was doing and that she didn't intent to damage the country.

No reasonable prosecutor would prosecute someone with such a glaring lack of intent.

I guess you could say that Clinton is...




detached from Reality.