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

Tue Jan 10 15:39:25 CST 2017

First-World Problems. We in the Third World had so many US-backed
dictatorships that killed and tortured thousands, and here you are, worried
about a Russian-backed crooner who will make none of your lives shitty. US
presidents mostly make no difference for nationals; it's always the rest of
the world that gets fucked.
This Russian hacker thing is just one more chapter of the soap opera called
media. Yesterday there was an article on Washington Post stating that CIA
or whatever intercepted Russian authorities celebrating after Trump
victory. Did anyone notice how ironic was this interception, after all the
fuzz with the hacking? Only hypocrites condemn the other and do exactly the
same thing.

2017-01-10 12:38 GMT-06:00 Jochen Stremmel <jstremmel at gmail.com>:

> 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/e4bc6460/attachment.html>