(02-24-2018 04:11 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 04:03 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 03:53 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 03:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(02-24-2018 03:00 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  If anything will encourage Russia to keep it up, it is the continued hue and cry from the left. That spells SUCCESS, if what was wanted was to sow discord and distrust. I think every time Adam Schiff approaches a microphone, glasses of vodka are hoisted in Moscow for toasts. Nobody is helping Russia more at this time than Adam and his adherents.

I am not sure what you mean by the “severity”of all this. Nobody has shown that even one vote was turned from either candidate to the other, and certainly nobody has shown or alleged that electoral votes were shifted.

Your last comment perfectly proves my point - it seems like we can't all come to an agreement on how severe these actions were. You and Owl#s appear to hand wave away the overt acts as business as usual. That we just shouldn't care about it. Me and others believe that this was a more serious act than previous operations (both known and unknown).

I really fail to see why we should hand wave this away - the intent and brassiness of the actions alone merit concern, and even Congress agreed that they merited an actual response. Unfortunately, our POTUS disagrees with that.

I also think it's pretty ignorant to assume that all of the actions didn't change any votes - the number of people who saw the fake news and propaganda that were pushed by the trolls (POTUS and his son retweeted them!!!) indicates that there is a good chance that at a minimum, either people were made more or less likely to vote in the election. The question of whether that had any sway on the winner is a better one, and one that I agree with you likely has a negative response. But the Russians have always been very effective at putting out propaganda, and they've done a masterful job again.

And finally, nice job somehow flipping the script and alleging that no, it isn't the Russians that are to blame for our divisions, its a Democratic Senator who seems to care too much that a foreign adversary actively meddled in our elections. I guess if a bank robber tried to rob your PO box and was caught after the fact, you'd be more angry at the bank than the robber?

Not at convinced that either I or Owl#s ever said it should be waved away. Is that your perception? I think you can investigate Russian meddling all you want - just don’t use it a vehicle to justify a stupid investigation into “collusion”.

Schiff s actions continue to divide us and increase distrust in our elections. So, wittinglyor not, his actions are in the best interests of those who want discord and distrust - the Russians.

I imagine some votes were changed by the Russian actions - probably on a very small scale, and very unlikely to have flipped Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, AND Michigan.

This collusion myth just plays into their hands, and the perpetuators play into their hands.

If you want an investigation in Russian meddling, set it up as such, not as an investigation into collusion netweeen the Trump campaign and Russians.

I'm still onboard that a collusion investigation was justified. I mean, Trump doesn't care about orphans that much and Trump Jr. was far too in love with getting dirt on HRC from Russians.

WAS?

Wasn’t it the Hillary campaign that paid for Steele to get dirt on Trump from the Russian?

Personally, I cannot see that either campaign “colluded”with the Russians. i don’t care if the dirt uncovered comes from the Russians, the Mafia, or the Little Sisters of the Porr, as long as it is true. Another case of both sides do it, but only the Republicans are bad.

Ah yes, the wonderful false equivalency of paying for oppo research versus being positively ecstatic when a foreign national offers up dirt on the political opponent. If you're annoyed about the Steele dossier, I assume you want to ban oppo research?

Let's compare this situation to the real world. You're interviewing two candidates for a job, so you hire a PI to do some background digging on both them. Out of the blue, someone who you don't know and is from a competing firm comes to you and says, "Hey, I've got dirt on candidate A." Is your response, "I love it!" or to look at things a bit more cautiously because you don't know their motives?