US Elections 2016

[jake]

Posters actually having to check that obama dropped 26,000 bombs in 2016 whilst scoffing because trumps people wouldnt call putin a war criminal.

 

Up is down and down is up.

 

Actually pathetic.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Here's a link from the NY Times that says otherwise. You've always got to follow the money

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/15/world/15aid.html

 

Yes, the US was openly involved in promoting activism, civil society, and promotion of free speech.  This is hardly the same as what we did to Allende.  Conflating the two promotes evil -- stop it.

 

jake, you said the US invented propaganda. There's no doubt we used it in the Spanish-American war.  But its use is millennia older than that and it will go on being used long after the US ceases to exist.  This proves nothing.

 

To both of you -- all actions of the US are not equal.  Some are naked power or resource grabs.  Some are ideologically driven misadventures.  Some are genuinely concerned with human welfare.  Most are some mix of all of these. Some are carefully executed and promote peace and safety around the world.  Others are murderous and tyrannical and have led to atrocities which weaken the knees.  Simply pointing out that the US has done atrocious things in the past is a useless argument, unless someone is actually arguing (which I am most certainly not) that the US is completely without fault in history.

[JamboX2]

Delete post.

Edited January 12, 2017 by JamboX2

[Space Mackerel]

Yes, the US was openly involved in promoting activism, civil society, and promotion of free speech.  This is hardly the same as what we did to Allende.  Conflating the two promotes evil -- stop it.

 

jake, you said the US invented propaganda. There's no doubt we used it in the Spanish-American war.  But its use is millennia older than that and it will go on being used long after the US ceases to exist.  This proves nothing.

 

To both of you -- all actions of the US are not equal.  Some are naked power or resource grabs.  Some are ideologically driven misadventures.  Some are genuinely concerned with human welfare.  Most are some mix of all of these. Some are carefully executed and promote peace and safety around the world.  Others are murderous and tyrannical and have led to atrocities which weaken the knees.  Simply pointing out that the US has done atrocious things in the past is a useless argument, unless someone is actually arguing (which I am most certainly not) that the US is completely without fault in history.

Well, you can hardly moan when Russia hacks the DNP servers etc then? Or maybe the didn't?

And, for the record, I love America, been several times. I'm hoping to do Route 66 on a bike or camper sometime. I doubt I'll ever go back to that shite hole Miami ever again though

[jake]

Yes, the US was openly involved in promoting activism, civil society, and promotion of free speech. This is hardly the same as what we did to Allende. Conflating the two promotes evil -- stop it.

 

jake, you said the US invented propaganda. There's no doubt we used it in the Spanish-American war. But its use is millennia older than that and it will go on being used long after the US ceases to exist. This proves nothing.

 

To both of you -- all actions of the US are not equal. Some are naked power or resource grabs. Some are ideologically driven misadventures. Some are genuinely concerned with human welfare. Most are some mix of all of these. Some are carefully executed and promote peace and safety around the world. Others are murderous and tyrannical and have led to atrocities which weaken the knees. Simply pointing out that the US has done atrocious things in the past is a useless argument, unless someone is actually arguing (which I am most certainly not) that the US is completely without fault in history.

UA.

I apologise if it seems im anti american.

Im not.

Its not strictly speaking american interests that drive these recent wars .

Russian american chinese european arabic powers drive it.

 

They use religion fake news etc etc.

 

 

Im on no ones side on this .

I think im consistant in arguing against all.

 

I also apologise if it seems im getting at you.

Its already been pointed out to me my posting styles aggressive.

Im singling you out cos you seem sound .

[jake]

Chill out, Jake.

 

You're getting awfully worked up over these debates.

 

 

Its not so much worked up as nipped.

 

Family history has taught me to always suspect the given.

[jake]

Obama rejected arms embargo to Sudan.

 

Relevant.

 

Subtext is available if any apologists would like to hear.

 

Thats unless their eyes and ears only want to hear dogma

[jake]

Fair enough, mate.

 

You're a decent poster, and a lot of what you say is interesting.

 

I did for example, have a look at your link you've been talking about.

 

Some interesting points raised, I'll grant you. I'll always try and have a look at both sides of the argument.

 

By the way, my username doesn't reflect my personal political views on Obama. Just so we're clear. I just liked the photo.

 

My view on Trump and his capabilities as CiC, I've spoken about previously.

 

Re-examining this thread after his first year in office, will be an interesting read. Never mind the first 100 days.

 

Cheers.

 

Appreciate your response.

Trumps presidency will i expect be as bad as obamas.

The difference being the left will post more facebook memes and not actually care about the broken bones the burning flesh and death of children.

Especially those who have brown skin.

[Ulysses]

What nonsense.

 

One minute im anti muslim then im anti european now im anti american.

 

No answer to the clues of history repeating itself.

 

Anti american.

No.

 

Are you actually suggesting that the Syrian conflict is a civil war of its own making.

 

Maybe you should look at every conflict america has been involved in.

Check the narrative.

 

Oh by the way check any empire its no different.

 

Please try to argue the points without trying to imply that those who see things differently are bigots or racists.

 

Most of us dont define by colour or race anymore but by whats wrong and whats right.

 

But i forgot you are a moderator so we must be careful.

 

Have you viewed the link i posted on the thread titled Syria.

 

Or am i just a bigoted trump supporter .

Anti islam anti eu anti american.

 

A small minded bigot who doesnt believe your truth.

 

Shame on you all .

 

 

I'm going to ignore most of it because it's an over-emotional rant (and not for the first time a pain in the arse to parse).  You're entitled to do that if you wish, but I don't see why I should play along. 

 

But two points to pick up on.  Firstly, don't drag the JKB management team into it.  I'm not a member of the management team, and I haven't been for a considerable period of time.  It gives me the slight satisfaction of seeing you demonstrate both your paranoia and your limited analytical ability, but it's hardly fair on the people who actually do run the team.

 

Secondly, it is as plain as a pikestaff from your posts that you are anti-American. Why you are is a matter for you, but my guess is that you are somewhere on that foreign policy/lefty axis.  But I don't care whether you are anti-American or not, and I don't care why.  I've often been a critic of American foreign policy myself.  Also, being anti-American doesn't make you a racist or a bigot.  I'm not criticising you for what you are; I'm just drawing it to UA's attention so he wastes less time thinking he can change your mind.

[elvoys]

I will own my country's responsibilities if you will own yours.

 

Long before the US was a country British colonialism was meddling around the world. "Fake news an American invention?" You must be joking! Propaganda is as old as government itself! Does nobody read Machiavelli anymore?

 

While the US has destabilized governments around the world for decades, I categorically reject and denounce this notion that the US is the sole source of authoritarianism, or that Putin is "no worse." I encounter this garbage on the left constantly and it drives me batty. Removing the US's influence from world politics would not lead to total peace and security -- that is a daft essentialism of the worst sort. I am sure those tortured in Qaddafi's underground prisons would love to hear about Libya's "peace and security."

 

You mention Saudi Arabia -- use your brain. The Arab Spring overthrew multiple allies of the Saudi regime. And again, another of the US's closest allies was Hosni Mubarak, who was overthrown by Egypt's Tahrir Square uprising.

 

International politics are complicated -- they do not all resolve to pro-US or anti-US. It is a particular kind of laziness on either side to just see which side the US picks before supporting or opposing an action.

I was on the ground in Pearl Roundabout protests Manama, Bahrain in 2011 after expats had fled and it looked like it could be the first gulf regime to fall. Was also in Alex and Cairo Tahrir Square a year later in the hiatus period between mubareks overthrow and morsis election. Trust me, people on the ground cared pretty much zip zero about America and were more interested in access to rights and jobs and not be under the heel of autocrats. What was also clear though was that the CNN depiction of the western orientated secularists holding sway was pretty much a fantasy too. It was a mixture of family men and women, groups of feral teenagers and actually a lot of old arabs. America didn't know what was going on there and largely held out hope from the sidelines.

[Ulysses]

I was on the ground in Pearl Roundabout protests Manama, Bahrain in 2011 after expats had fled and it looked like it could be the first gulf regime to fall. Was also in Alex and Cairo Tahrir Square a year later in the hiatus period between mubareks overthrow and morsis election. Trust me, people on the ground cared pretty much zip zero about America and were more interested in access to rights and jobs and not be under the heel of autocrats. What was also clear though was that the CNN depiction of the western orientated secularists holding sway was pretty much a fantasy too. It was a mixture of family men and women, groups of feral teenagers and actually a lot of old arabs. America didn't know what was going on there and largely held out hope from the sidelines.

 

I recall at the time there was plenty of media talk about how the Arab Spring would usher in a new era of "democratic values" in the countries where it happened.  Not a chance.  What we regard as democratic values in our part of the world did not develop overnight.  Unless you have a well-established history of developing government and civil society structures that support "democratic values" you won't foster them.  Those countries don't, as is true of many predominantly Muslim countries, so they revert to some variation of either authoritarianism or chaos, with a dose of corruption thrown in for good measure. 

 

The same can be said - though in a less obvious and immediate way - for the countries of the former Soviet bloc.  For their time behind the Iron Curtain - and for most of history before that - they had none of the structures or institutions that people in democracies are more familiar with.  So we can hardly surprised to discover after dabbling with experiments in democracy that "democratic values" haven't taken hold in many of those societies; we can see that in the authoritarian and autocratic tendencies emerging in the likes of Hungary, Poland and Romania.

Edited January 12, 2017 by Ulysses

[jake]

Not one poster has returned the view of a proper journalist in the thread titled Syria.

[JamboX2]

Not one poster has returned the view of a proper journalist in the thread titled Syria.

What makes her a "proper" journalist?

 

Where is the corroboration for her statements?

 

Answer the questions. Don't just say I'm claiming this or that. Answer these two questions.

[jake]

I recall at the time there was plenty of media talk about how the Arab Spring would usher in a new era of "democratic values" in the countries where it happened. Not a chance. What we regard as democratic values in our part of the world did not develop overnight. Unless you have a well-established history of developing government and civil society structures that support "democratic values" you won't foster them. Those countries don't, as is true of many predominantly Muslim countries, so they revert to some variation of either authoritarianism or chaos, with a dose of corruption thrown in for good measure.

 

The same can be said - though in a less obvious and immediate way - for the countries of the former Soviet bloc. For their time behind the Iron Curtain - and for most of history before that - they had none of the structures or institutions that people in democracies are more familiar with. So we can hardly surprised to discover after dabbling with experiments in democracy that "democratic values" haven't taken hold in many of those societies; we can see that in the authoritarian and autocratic tendencies emerging in the likes of Hungary, Poland and Romania.

The arab spring.

 

Please someone with better spelling and better mental health who isnt a teenager explain the real reasons behind that.

[Ulysses]

What makes her a "proper" journalist?

 

 

One thing that makes you a "proper" journalist is having a job in journalism.  She has worked (and maybe still works) for RT, which if you don't already know is a round-the-clock news service previously called Russia Today and funded by the Russian government.

 

Does that answer your question?

[Space Mackerel]

What makes her a "proper" journalist?

Where is the corroboration for her statements?

Answer the questions. Don't just say I'm claiming this or that. Answer these two questions.

That's poor. Journalists prove their mettle on exposing un truths. And there has been plenty over the years.

[Maple Leaf]

Not one poster has returned the view of a proper journalist in the thread titled Syria.

I watched the video you posted.  She's bright and Canadian ... what's not to like.  

 

She certainly painted a different picture of Syria than other news outlets have given us, but who's to say that she's right and the others wrong?

 

Is she completely impartial, or does she have biases, like the rest of us?  For example, she never said a critical word about Assad, which I found odd.

[Ulysses]

Ah Jaysus, the poor oul' Grauniad is still hoping Trump won't actually be President.  They're asking if he could be impeached over the "Russia dossier". 

 

 

Yeah, right.

 

 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jan/12/donald-trump-russia-dossier-what-happens-next

[Space Mackerel]

I watched the video you posted. She's bright and Canadian ... what's not to like.

 

She certainly painted a different picture of Syria than other news outlets have given us, but who's to say that she's right and the others wrong?

 

Is she completely impartial, or does she have biases, like the rest of us? For example, she never said a critical word about Assad, which I found odd.

Why has Aasad suddenly become "odd" in our media? That's what I would like to find out.

Something going on?

Edited January 12, 2017 by Space Mackerel

[JamboX2]

One thing that makes you a "proper" journalist is having a job in journalism. She has worked (and maybe still works) for RT, which if you don't already know is a round-the-clock news service previously called Russia Today and funded by the Russian government.

 

Does that answer your question?

Had it at RT.

[Space Mackerel]

One thing that makes you a "proper" journalist is having a job in journalism.  She has worked (and maybe still works) for RT, which if you don't already know is a round-the-clock news service previously called Russia Today and funded by the Russian government.

 

Does that answer your question?

RT is propaganda but BBC or NBC isn't?

[JamboX2]

RT is propaganda but BBC or NBC isn't?

Not what he said.

[Ulysses]

RT is propaganda but BBC or NBC isn't?

 

Is RT propaganda?  JX2 asked a question about whether Eva Bartlett was a "proper" journalist.  I replied with some information which seemed to say that she had a proper job.

 

Are you suggesting she doesn't?

[Space Mackerel]

Not what he said.

I've one eye on the daft right wing bints on the paper review, Sky News the now.

[Space Mackerel]

Is RT propaganda?  JX2 asked a question about whether Eva Bartlett was a "proper" journalist.  I replied with some information which seemed to say that she had a proper job.

 

Are you suggesting she doesn't?

Sorry, I get you. It's actually quite refreshing other people go out and read between the lines of the Six O'clock News and News atTen

[jake]

We can disagree on everything else but this is just wretchedly wrong and slanderous. Obama did not create the conflict in Syria. It is a product of a) the instability created by the invasion of Iraq and the botched occupation, particularly the disbanding of the Iraqi army, b ) the emersion of the Arab Spring revolts, which targeted Assad among other authoritarian regimes, and c) Putin's propping up of Assad who otherwise would have gone the way of Qaddafi.

 

To say that Obama created this conflict is just enormously wrong. You can say he's mismanaged the US's involvement in it -- that's a debatable point, but he did not create it.

 

Slanderous?

 

Didnt obama employ bushes war minister.

 

Wrong words right meaning.

 

Immediately

[jake]

Had it at RT.

 

Yes the bbc and guardian and the media owned by 7 people is to be believed.

 

Of course we must dissmiss the syrian people as well.

[Ulysses]

Not what he said.

 

I hadn't noticed before that you started this thread. 

 

It's all your fault! 

Edited January 13, 2017 by Ulysses

[jake]

I watched the video you posted. She's bright and Canadian ... what's not to like.

 

She certainly painted a different picture of Syria than other news outlets have given us, but who's to say that she's right and the others wrong?

 

Is she completely impartial, or does she have biases, like the rest of us? For example, she never said a critical word about Assad, which I found odd.

 

You decide.

 

I found her account along with other nin msm stories coming from the region far more compelling.

 

Not least the fact that Syria compared to other states of the same ilk were before this conflict more inclined to allie with the west.

Or the fact that russia wanted to pipeline through syria much to the distaste of saudi arabia.

 

 

But hey mental illness and spelling mistakes makes my argument obsolete.

 

 

Maybe i should grow up and see the real world

[Ulysses]

[Craig Gordons Gloves]

Appreciate your response.

Trumps presidency will i expect be as bad as obamas.

The difference being the left will post more facebook memes and not actually care about the broken bones the burning flesh and death of children.

Especially those who have brown skin.

Jake, your post insinuates that those of us who prefer an Obama presidency over a Trump one have racist bias against kids with brown skin. It's not the first time that you've made that point and frankly, it's a bit tiresome and insulting.

 

You don't agree with the American policy in Syria, funnily enough, neither do I. I do however disagree with you that the Russians and Syrians are the good guys and the Americans are the bad guys. It's far more complex than that, as you we'll know. It would be cool if you stop insinuating that just because I think Obama is a far better president than the incoming twat will be means I don't give a toss about children or children with brown skin.

[jake]

Jake, your post insinuates that those of us who prefer an Obama presidency over a Trump one have racist bias against kids with brown skin. It's not the first time that you've made that point and frankly, it's a bit tiresome and insulting.

 

You don't agree with the American policy in Syria, funnily enough, neither do I. I do however disagree with you that the Russians and Syrians are the good guys and the Americans are the bad guys. It's far more complex than that, as you we'll know. It would be cool if you stop insinuating that just because I think Obama is a far better president than the incoming twat will be means I don't give a toss about children or children with brown skin.

 

Talk about up is down .

[jake]

Im hearing cnn that trustworthy news outlet has retracted the accusation against assange.

 

Fake news i nearly missed it.

[jake]

Jake, your post insinuates that those of us who prefer an Obama presidency over a Trump one have racist bias against kids with brown skin. It's not the first time that you've made that point and frankly, it's a bit tiresome and insulting.

 

You don't agree with the American policy in Syria, funnily enough, neither do I. I do however disagree with you that the Russians and Syrians are the good guys and the Americans are the bad guys. It's far more complex than that, as you we'll know. It would be cool if you stop insinuating that just because I think Obama is a far better president than the incoming twat will be means I don't give a toss about children or children with brown skin.

 

Yes it is complex.

Your poster boy obama and the cia muddled it up enough to make it so.

 

If it was white american children being bombed you would be more inclined to discuss it rather than obamas after dinner speech quality.

 

Or if i as i have done often questioned the fascist islamic religious murdering movement it would be ok to accuse me of racism.

 

Pffft

[Craig Gordons Gloves]

Yes it is complex.

Your poster boy obama and the cia muddled it up enough to make it so.

 

If it was white american children being bombed you would be more inclined to discuss it rather than obamas after dinner speech quality.

 

Or if i as i have done often questioned the fascist islamic religious murdering movement it would be ok to accuse me of racism.

 

Pffft

I'm pretty sure you're on the troll now.

 

Let me explain why I like obama, and it's got **** all to do with the bombing of brown children.

 

As I explained earlier in this thread, the ACA has been good for my kid in that it prevents insurance companies from refusing coverage for pre existing conditions. Of which my child had 3. Autism, apraxia of speech and dispraxia. We can't be denied health insurance under the ACA to cover the therapy he needs. Trump has promised to get rid of the ACA and just last night, the senate voted to remove these safeguards for those with pre existing conditions.

 

So Jake, forgive me if I'm placing the welfare of my own kid above that of a child in Syria.

 

You carry on with your agenda though.

 

One final thing, **** off with the accusations of racism.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Jake is headed down niblick way!

[JamboX2]

I hadn't noticed before that you started this thread.

 

It's all your fault!

I know

[JamboX2]

Yes the bbc and guardian and the media owned by 7 people is to be believed.

 

Of course we must dissmiss the syrian people as well.

No we mustn't. I never agreed with our involvement there at any level beyond humanitarian support for the people. I'd have backed airdrops of UN aid.

 

I don't support either side of it. I would prefer a negotiated solution.

 

Putin is in there supporting an ally of his and his nation. We are in Iraq supporting ours. It's a mess the whole thing.

 

On the press, you are elevating RT over other media outlets. Why? Because you agree with their conclusions?

 

Why is the Kremlin backed 24 hour news chanel more believable than others?

 

I'm not downing RT. Merely suggesting you need to take your information from a wide range of sources of all medias on all wings and draw your conclusions from that.

[Seymour M Hersh]

Im hearing cnn that trustworthy news outlet has retracted the accusation against assange.

 

Fake news i nearly missed it.

 

Ah, CNN the Clinton News Network. 

[coconut doug]

His use of force on his people is sonething which looks repressive.

 

Which acts of force on his people?  Where were they? What were they doing?

Personally, Assad is the better of two evils. Lawlessness or him. I agree Western involvement to back Free Syrian Army leaders and troops was an act of sheer folly. But, Assads government's actions in Aleppo are pretty diabolical.

 

 

The U.K. government openly funded AL Nusra a proscribed terrorist organisation and branch of AL Qaida. This was our contribution to starting the war in Syria. We gave these people our support and some credibility and they called it the Arab Spring.

 

Are you telling me Syrian state media does not portray Russian assistance in Syria to Assad as bad? I refer you to the period between 1941 and 1945 and good old uncle joe.

 

I don't know what this has to do with anything.

 

So those popular demonstrations in Libya, Egypt, Syria, Morrocco and Tunisia didn't happen? Or were Western Manufactured? Bearing in mind we were pally with Ghaddafi and the Egyptian and Tunisian leadership up till then

 

Yes there were popular demonstrations in these countries although I'm not so sure about Libya (some poor quality BBC fake news exposed on this)https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_-lzI8I0_0 . We don't always know the strength of feeling or the reasons behind the demonstrations. We were told these "popular uprisings" were to do with poor living standards and a desire for democracy but Libya had the best social statistics in Africa by a substantial amount and the events in Tunisia were supposedly triggered by the maltreatment of one man. The notion that this is a spontaneous uprising of the oppressed is ridiculous. They could never have organised or armed themselves in a totally oppressive state. There was/is no Arab Spring in SA as far as I know, only a few ineffectual dissidents with little publicity and no help from the west. Of course people were unhappy and of course many were impatient but who goaded them, who armed them and who legitimised them. The west offers no support for insurrection in SA because they already have a massively compliant government ready to inflict atrocities on anybody who gets in the way of their cosy profitable arrangements. They should be careful not to get to big for their boots though or they will be taken out too

 

We were pally with Gaddafi. He paid substantial compensation over the Lockerbie bombing but denied Libya's involvement. He said he wanted to normalise relations with the West. In a speech to the Arab League he also said that Libya should and other Arab countries should beware being manipulated by the west and said that for trade Libya would look more to China. A few weeks later he was dead and Libya in ruins. A few weeks after the much publicised embraces with Bush, Blair, Brown and Clinton.

[coconut doug]

The arab spring.

 

Please someone with better spelling and better mental health who isnt a teenager explain the real reasons behind that.

This boy's no teenager.

 

http://johnpilger.com/articles/david-cameron-s-gift-of-war-and-racism-to-them-and-us

[Rab87]

A very interesting read on the whole Russian dossier affair.

 

http://observer.com/2017/01/donald-trump-press-conference-prague-michael-cohen/

 

I agree with the assessment that some parts are untrue, which is bound to be the case with human intelligence gathering, some parts are true.

 

If proven correct, this would amount to treason.

 

What we need is a smoking gun, which I am sure is out there somewhere, it just needs to be found and corroborated. 

 

I'm not sure any of the Western Allies want a US President who is in the pocket of the Russians.

[Francis Albert]

A very interesting read on the whole Russian dossier affair.

 

http://observer.com/2017/01/donald-trump-press-conference-prague-michael-cohen/

 

I agree with the assessment that some parts are untrue, which is bound to be the case with human intelligence gathering, some parts are true.

 

If proven correct, this would amount to treason.

 

What we need is a smoking gun, which I am sure is out there somewhere, it just needs to be found and corroborated. 

 

I'm not sure any of the Western Allies want a US President who is in the pocket of the Russians.

The Western Allies don't choose the US President. Any more than Russia does.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Yes the bbc and guardian and the media owned by 7 people is to be believed.

 

Of course we must dissmiss the syrian people as well.

 

RT is operated by a Russian government headed by a former KGB agent who is strongly implicated in the poisoning deaths of many of his political opponents and critics.  I can't imagine why some might question its authority.

 

Al Jazeera has excellent Syria coverage.  Or are you going to argue that Al Jazeera is in the pocket of the US government too? 

 

http://www.aljazeera.com/topics/country/syria.html

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Couple of loose ends I collected over the last couple of days.  Jake has gone on considerably about the 26,000 bombs dropped by Obama.  I decided to look it up, and GWB dropped over 250,000 in the Iraq War alone.  Which of course was not the only military exercise that GWB participated in.

 

Also, a friend on Twitter made a good point.  We foisted Yeltzin on Russia, a corrupt kelptocrat who wrecked Russia's economy -- Trump may just be their revenge.

[zoltan socrates]

Posters actually having to check that obama dropped 26,000 bombs in 2016 whilst scoffing because trumps people wouldnt call putin a war criminal.

Up is down and down is up.

Actually pathetic.

Ignorance is strength

[Francis Albert]

Couple of loose ends I collected over the last couple of days.  Jake has gone on considerably about the 26,000 bombs dropped by Obama.  I decided to look it up, and GWB dropped over 250,000 in the Iraq War alone.  Which of course was not the only military exercise that GWB participated in.

 

Also, a friend on Twitter made a good point.  We foisted Yeltzin on Russia, a corrupt kelptocrat who wrecked Russia's economy -- Trump may just be their revenge.

Come on. The Russians have foisted Trump on the US? Or the US foisted Yeltsin on Russia? Do you really believe that crap? If anyone foisted Trump on the US it was Hillary, her disastrous campaign, and the DNC..

[Rab87]

The Western Allies don't choose the US President. Any more than Russia does.

Russia certainly had a hand in helping Trump to be elected. 

[Sraman]

Russia certainly had a hand in helping Trump to be elected. 

 

Are we to believe that the world's greatest exporter of "democracy" has a failed system of "democracy"? And, if this is the case, will they desist in exporting "democracy" to countries that don't do as they are told until they fix the problem?

[Watt-Zeefuik]

Come on. The Russians have foisted Trump on the US? Or the US foisted Yeltsin on Russia? Do you really believe that crap? If anyone foisted Trump on the US it was Hillary, her disastrous campaign, and the DNC..

 

The US absolutely helped put Yeltsin in power and then continued to help prop him up -- that shouldn't be a controversial statement. We were pretty out in the open about it.

 

Trump's victory had many parents, and Clinton's top-down campaign and poor engagement with on the ground volunteers certainly didn't help (nor did a supine and profit-driven US media or a deranged FBI director) but at this point refusing to believe that Russia did what it could to put its finger on the scale for Trump is just silly.

 

And for the last time, the DNC didn't give the nomination to Hillary.  The DNC is a gigantic committee, and yes the chair of it, DWS, was actively working for Clinton's campaign, and everyone knew it.  The RNC did everything it could to stop Trump and failed. Clinton beat Sanders because Sanders was a flawed candidate himself.