NP - Did Putin Swing the Election to Trump? Of Course He Did. (less bluster, more evidence)

Tue Jan 10 12:38:18 CST 2017

That one is for Joseph: Bravo!

(Long time not heard from you – too long for my taste.)

2017-01-10 18:09 GMT+01:00 Allan Balliett <allan.balliett at gmail.com>:

> What did Lindsay Graham say?
>
> I hope the US spies can prove that Trump or his team were in contact with
> Putin or his team.
>
> How are the Sessions' hearings going?
>
> -Allan in WV
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 12:01 PM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Sen Lindsay Graham(!) at the Sessions' sessions: "I have no doubt that,
>> etc.".
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Simple facts:
>>>  1.There isn’t a chance in hell that Putin caused Americans to vote for
>>> Trump.  Trump worked with pre-existing anger and hate, and made typical
>>> lame sales pitch that he would Make America Great Again and we’d be back to
>>> grabbin pussy like the good old days.  about 49% of american voters really
>>> are that gullible…. Emails were just fuel on a burning fire and probably
>>> were an inside leak from Americans who hate Hillary. Suspiciously, Trump
>>> did get tremendous amounts of free coverage from the big media networks.
>>> Maybe they are geting paid by the Russians too, but probably they just went
>>> for the local cash flow.
>>> 2. Trump appears to aspire to be a Russian style strong man with a team
>>> of rapacious oligarchs so of course Putin likes that. There is actually no
>>> international crime in favoring assholes. Netanyahu also liked Trump and
>>> probably has far more influence on US politics. Won’t nobody be after his
>>> ass, though. People all over the world weigh in on our elections, make up
>>> internet shit etc. The alternative is a police state of which we have too
>>> much already.
>>> 3 War with Russia and Nato based invasions are a bad idea. A real bad,
>>> stupid, fucked up idea which can easily be avoided.
>>> 4 America is not a champion of Democracy but a self interested empire
>>> addicted to oil and theft. Dropping bombs is not a good way to make
>>> peaceful democracies. Ignoring black lives gunned down in the street is not
>>> a good way to get out the vote. We have our own problems and shouldn’t be
>>> starting wars that only multiply suffering.
>>> 5 I  suggest that insulting people is not a good tactic of persuasive
>>> discourse and your list isn’t that great either.
>>> 6 for bonus points   Russia didn’t kill millions of Vietnamese ,
>>> Laotians and Cambodians, Russia didn’t send Americans to die in those wars.
>>> Russia did not support murderous coups in Chile Argentina Guatemala, the
>>> Dominican Republic etc. Russia presided over a nasty totalitarian state and
>>> engaged in idiotic showdowns witht the US but they have also gone through
>>> big changes and reviving the cold war is  a     shitty plan. There are a
>>> lot of people on this planet who don’t admire either of these big shots and
>>> their little habit of polluting the planet with fossil fuels and nukes and
>>> terror. We should all feel some responsibility to work for  major changes.
>>>
>>> > On Jan 9, 2017, at 11:40 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Simple facts:
>>> >
>>> > 1. Russia did its active best via internet hacks to get Trump elected.
>>> > 2. When Trump got elected they celebrated.
>>> > 3. Trump has deep money support from Russian mobsters (like Putin).
>>> > 4. Trump campaigned on weakening NATO, and thinks Russian sanctions
>>> are "political" (meaning unjust).
>>> > 5. Trump is the first President ever to be actively supported by
>>> Russia, our 20th Century premier enemy.
>>> >
>>> > Go figure.
>>> > David Morris
>>> >
>>> > On Monday, January 9, 2017, Matthew Taylor <
>>> matthew.taylor923 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > The "Russia hacked the election" hysteria is so outrageously
>>> overblown. There are so many more pressing issues.
>>> >
>>> > The fact is, no one in the Democratic party and none of the liberal
>>> pundits were at all prepared for Trump's election. Their trusty charts and
>>> technocratic methodologies and quantifiable data showed otherwise.
>>> Shockingly (not), that failed at predicting human behavior.
>>> >
>>> > The Democrats pulled a Dale Earnhardt. They crashed into the fucking
>>> wall and burned because they couldn't turn Left. But instead of admitting
>>> their own shortcomings and the pressing need for reforms, they're working
>>> themselves into a frenzy over this Russia stuff.  I think there's a lot of
>>> sense in this article, which I excerpted a relevant part of below:
>>> >
>>> > Before anything else, let’s remember what Russia’s “hacking the
>>> election” (a bizarre term) is actually supposed to have entailed to begin
>>> with. If we assume all the facts as alleged, Vladimir Putin did not
>>> actually change the result of the election by throwing away ballots or
>>> hacking voting machines (even though many Democrats evidently believe this
>>> to be the case). He did not send Russian agents to pose as voters, or
>>> exercise some form of sophisticated mind-control. The allegation, instead,
>>> is that the Russian government embarrassed the Democratic Party by
>>> releasing a series of documents from the Democratic National Committee and
>>> the email account of John Podesta.
>>> >
>>> > Now, the documents in question are not alleged to be fabricated. The
>>> Clinton team made some noises suggesting this was the case early on, but
>>> there is now almost complete consensus that they were real. So the
>>> allegation here is that the Russian government embarrassed the Democrats by
>>> exposing things about the party that were perfectly true. These included
>>> the biases of Debbie Wasserman Schultz in the primaries, the leaking of
>>> debate questions to the Clinton campaign by CNN contributor Donna Brazile,
>>> and Hillary Clinton’s speeches to Goldman Sachs. (Another part of the
>>> strategy, according to the recently-released intelligence report, involved
>>> broadcasting a documentary on Russian television favorably depicting the
>>> Occupy Wall Street movement. One might observe that running a program on
>>> Russian state TV is an unusual way to attempt to influence voters in
>>> Michigan and Wisconsin.)
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 7:54 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > Either you or Laura tell me what "specifics" you want refuted or STFU.
>>> >
>>> > Your digital signatures crap sounds a lot like Truther crap.  Are you
>>> a Truther?  You sound like one.  If so, you lost me @ go.  Talk about info
>>> bubbles!
>>> >
>>> > David Morris
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Monday, January 9, 2017, Joseph Tracy <brook7 at sover.net> wrote:
>>> > Actually the Intercept( the digital journal edited by Greenwald) has
>>> gone into more detail about the quality of the allegations and their
>>> digital signature than anyone I have read.( a list of articles can be
>>> provided) Laura asked you to address specifics but I hear only louder
>>> repetition. As for Obama , there are many reasons to distrust him and that
>>> mistrust has been articulated by  respectable black intellectuals also.
>>> Also it was not just Republicans projecting the nonsense about WMD. The
>>> vote on the Iraq war was bipartisan with Hillary as a decisive voice.
>>> >   The fact that Trump is obnoxious and dangerous simply does not mean
>>> credible evidence has been provided that Russia was decisive in the
>>> election. The claims are unspecific; they were  made by known liars,  and
>>> they need to be examined by neutral internet experts.
>>> >
>>> > One of my concerns is that this 'Russia did it’ story becomes an
>>> excuse to ignore the far more obvious and serious flaws in our electoral
>>> process like the 75,000 votes in Detroit discounted because the voting
>>> machines can’t read what can easily be read by humans, the long lines in
>>> black districts etc.  Sadly, when Jill Stein challenged the process in
>>> Detroit plenty of Trump lawyers showed up for the recount but few to no
>>> lawyers from the DNC.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > > On Jan 9, 2017, at 9:44 PM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > > All Greenwald says in this interview is "Don't believe [anything]
>>> that you hear from US intelligence."  No more than that.  We know Bush lied
>>> us into Iraq, but do we believe Obama is lying us into believing that
>>> Russia hacked the election for Trump?  The implied symmetry is crap.
>>> > >
>>> > > Why do you give him more credence than Obama?
>>> > >
>>> > > David Morris
>>> > >
>>> > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 4:13 PM, <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> > > As a courageous investigative journalist, do you think Greenwald's
>>> now become a mouthpiece for Putin merely because Russia cagily gave his
>>> past source Snowden asylum? Is that really all it takes to buy his
>>> collusion? Or is there some other reason for his alleged bias that you're
>>> speaking of. Which statements of his on the clip do you specifically
>>> disagree with?
>>> > >
>>> > > LK
>>> > >
>>> > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > From: David Morris
>>> > > Sent: Jan 9, 2017 5:07 PM
>>> > > To: "kelber at mindspring.com"
>>> > > Cc: P-list
>>> > > Subject: Re: NP - Did Putin Swing the Election to Trump? Of Course
>>> He Did.
>>> > >
>>> > > Nice try to paint your stance as beleaguered minority one. But the
>>> point is that Greenwald is not unbiased when it comes to Russia.
>>> > >
>>> > > David Morris
>>> > >
>>> > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 4:04 PM, <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> > > Is there any way to dissent from orthodoxy without being called a
>>> lunatic, a dupe or an axe-grinder?
>>> > >
>>> > > Laura
>>> > >
>>> > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > From: David Morris
>>> > > Sent: Jan 9, 2017 5:00 PM
>>> > > To: "kelber at mindspring.com"
>>> > > Cc: P-list
>>> > > Subject: Re: NP - Did Putin Swing the Election to Trump? Of Course
>>> He Did.
>>> > >
>>> > > Greenwald is NOT a reliable source in this case.  His axe grinding
>>> is as obvious as hell.
>>> > >
>>> > > David Morris
>>> > >
>>> > > On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 3:55 PM, <kelber at mindspring.com> wrote:
>>> > > As a Pynchon reader, I can simultaneously hold two ideas in my
>>> brain, one of which is supported and one of which is not supported by the
>>> liberal establishment: 1. Trump is a horror; and 2. Putin wasn't
>>> responsible for his election.
>>> > >
>>> > > http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/08/us/greenwald-intel-report-reli
>>> able-cnntv/
>>> > >
>>> > > Laura
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > -----Original Message-----
>>> > > From: David Morris
>>> > > Sent: Jan 9, 2017 4:35 PM
>>> > > To: P-list
>>> > > Subject: NP - Did Putin Swing the Election to Trump? Of Course He
>>> Did.
>>> > >
>>> > > Thomas Eckhardt was oh so concerned about the Ukraine.  Not that it
>>> was being annexed by Russia, but that some of those wanting freedom from
>>> Russia were nazis.  Now the US is being annexed by nazis with the help of
>>> Russia.  Where is his concern now?
>>> > >
>>> > > David Morris
>>> > >
>>> > > http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2017/01/did-putin-swin
>>> g-election-trump-course-he-did
>>> > >
>>> > > Given how close the election was, there's a pretty good chance that
>>> Putin's campaign of cyber-chaos had enough oomph to swing things all by
>>> itself.
>>> > >
>>> > > I'm a little surprised this hasn't produced more panic. In the
>>> United States I understand why it hasn't: Democrats don't want to sound
>>> like sore losers and Republicans don't care as long as their guy won. But
>>> what about the rest of the world?
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>> > -
>>> > Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>>> >
>>>
>>> -
>>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>>>
>>
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20170110/cf751d2c/attachment.html>