File 148322148644.jpg - (61.94KB , 1265x686 , images_duckduckgo_com.jpg )

>The sad thing is, I actually believe Russia did attempt to intervene on Trump's behalf
I'm still trying to understand what they did wrong. Whoever hacked her E-mails and put them out there, put out the truth. Obama and the FBI are screaming conspiracy because she didn't get elected when it was her lies that were exposed. Heaven forbid a population not voting for someone based on their character.

>>134
Oh, I agree. Regardless of their intent, what they did was essentially the right thing to do, and it isn't as if Trump needed any help assasinating his own character. If anything they balanced the scales in terms of the two's reputations.

>>133
>They made no economic or digital attempts to prevent further incursions
>chosen the most useless of all possible options: expel all the suspicious Ruskys.
In defense of the government they also said that they'd take some other unspecified actions, and one can only hope that that includes shutting and locking some back doors. However, the demands of politics require that they are seen to react in a big and obvious way, as the alternative is to appear to have done nothing, which is bad for getting votes in the future.

Someone of a more conspiratorial mindset could see attempts to fire up Cold War 2.0 as attempts to unify a divided country by giving the people a foreign villain to root against. If that's part of the plan it might be sooner than later when we might see Americans singing "Путин-хуйло! Ла ла ла ла ла ла ла ла!"

>>136
>said that they'd take some other unspecified actions
A promise with that promises nothing is no promise at all.

>the demands of politics require that they are seen to react in a big and obvious way
This is true and, sadly, the american public is not intelligent enough to understand the kind of actions that could be taken to protect US interests from Russian digital incursion. Even worse, no one is talking about how all those invasive spying mechanisms and under-the-table arrangements with major tech companies and internet service providers completely failed to prevent a foriegn government from conducting intelligence operations on the US side of the internet. Snowden is probably on 24/7 suicide watch at this point.

>attempts to unify a divided country by giving the people a foreign villain to root against
I might even endorse that, but it isn't going to work. They've been trying that with "radical extremism" since 2011, and it's brought nothing but grief. The American people are now irreparably divided--along political, racial, religious, and even gender lines--divided by unresolvable differences that will only get worse as billigerents like Trump cultivate them to build their power base. Maybe it never really was, but now for sure getting elected isn't about having the widest appeal--it's only required that you appeal to the most vocal groups.

>Путин-хуйло! Ла ла ла ла ла ла ла ла!
Nos vidania, western democracy.

File 14833914199.jpg - (180.39KB , 1280x848 , WelcomeToMyNightmare.jpg )

I, for one, cannot wait for the Trump administration to start so that people like OP suddenly start believing the US government again... simply because it's no longer being lead by a black man.

Russia was behind the attacks. If you're too pigheaded to see it you're either a hopeless idiot (the typical Trump cheerleader) or a Russian being paid to post this kind of idiotic crap online.

>>138
I appreciate that you are concerned on my behalf. I would indeed like to trust the US government as I did when I was a child, back when I thought the purpose of Operation Desert Storm was to protect the people of Kuwait and NAFTA was a progressive attempt to unify North America.

Obama isn't the problem. Ever since I was mature enough to see the big picture, American policy a home and abroad has always repesented a single motivation: concentrate all wealth and power into a handful of corporate and financial patrons. It's what the "liberals" want a strong government to do, it's what the "conservatives" want a weak government to do; no matter who makes the decisions the endgame is always the same.

I'm afraid Trump isn't going to restore my faith in the system. I'm not sure anything ever will. I am looking forward, however, to leadership as billigerent and agressive as our opposition. China and Russia's strength in recent years hasn't grown through their gradual acceptane of democracy or capitalism, but turning the west's economic and political weapons against it.

Europe is dead and the US has lost its soul. What hope does Trump offer? Anger, increased conflict, and worse international relations than ever in modern history. If he succeeds, he'll whip the world and the country back into shape and go down as the most hated president since Andrew Jackson; if he fails the US will implode with racial violence and isolation from its allies and he'll go down as the most hated president since Rchard Nixon.

The future is bleak for all of us.

>>142
>I'm afraid Trump isn't going to restore my faith in the system.
I don't doubt that for a minute, but consider this: there are people out there so loudly opposed to Trump that they've become primed to automatically take the opposite side of anything and everything he says almost as a gut instinct. That means that there's a chance that since Trump tweeted something critical of many government agencies quite a few folks--perhaps even some of the ones that are historically critical of the FBI, CIA, NSA, et al.--will want to take the side of the whole alphabet soup because it's the side against Trump, no matter what the real issues are.

I'm sure you're far too smart to fall for something like that, but you probably know quite a few people who aren't.

>>144
>I'm sure you're far too smart to fall for something like that
I think I'm just cynical; no one is immune to the level of propaganda we are innundated with in every aspect of our lives.

>you probably know quite a few people who aren't
That's most everyone I know. I rarely meet anyone who consideres two or more sides of things fairly. Most people only consider their self-interests, or adopt the agenda of an influential person or organization as their self-interest, and can only see other points of view as against them.

>>144
>That means that there's a chance that since Trump tweeted something critical of many government agencies quite a few folks--perhaps even some of the ones that are historically critical of the FBI, CIA, NSA, et al.--will want to take the side of the whole alphabet soup because it's the side against Trump, no matter what the real issues are.
The real fun comes when people who have been historically opposed to the alphabet soup suddenly become their biggest cheerleaders just because Trump starts supporting them once he's running them. Nothing will meaningfully change at the alphabet soup, mind you, the only difference is the putative figurehead at the top of the pyramid changed. And that alone will be enough for some conspiracy theorists and geriatrics (and some geriatric conspiracy theorists) to suddenly do 180s and believe that government can do no wrong now that a white man is running things.

>>133
Do you believe the 2020 election was manipulated?

>>2110
Just stop.

Stop.

There's nothing there.

There never was.

Stop.

>>2111
Listen, I'm pleased Trump lost, but there is most certainly something there.

There was something there in 2016 they practically admitted to it.

In 2020 they knew they couldn't pull it off again, even though they tried, because they had told everyone how they did it in 2016. That's why the right is screaming about a fraud. They are mad they couldn't do it twice. Trump is mad because he tried to play by the 2016 rules again, but this time it didn't work.

>>2113
Not trying to be negative but it seems like you're pulling that out of your ass.

File 163495563823.jpg - (65.31KB , 1476x891 , Trump Lost LOL.jpg )

>>2114
But, on the other hand, you're an idiot

>>2116
Ugh. The 60's were a mistake.

>>2112
Nope.