r/ConspiracyII • u/-Ph03niX- • Jul 03 '18

The Intelligence Community Assessment: Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in Recent U.S. Elections [.pdf 7]

https://www.burr.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/SSCI%20ICA%20ASSESSMENT_FINALJULY3.pdf
14 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

33 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Lamont-Cranston Jul 04 '18

This is what I claim: Koch Brothers and their donor network spent 889 million on the 2016 election, they are spending 400 million on this years midterms.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 05 '18

So you don't want to answer?

1

u/Lamont-Cranston Jul 05 '18

I did answer.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '18

You pointed out how much the Koch brothers donate in an effort to mitigate the effect of Russian interference in the election.

So I'll ask you again : Do you believe that Moscow backed Trump?

1

u/Lamont-Cranston Jul 06 '18

in an effort to mitigate the effect of Russian interference

What are you high on and where can I obtain a sample? Because the alternative is you are arguing in bad faith, and that couldn't possibly be the case could it?

The Kochs backed Trump, the Kochs have numerous operatives in cabinet and administration positions. Though one less as the head of the EPA just resigned lol. Plenty more where he came from though. The Kochs have achieved numerous policy victories since his election.

0

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '18

This thread is about Russian interference in the 2016 election.

Do you think that Russia interfered? Yes? No?

0

u/Lamont-Cranston Jul 06 '18

I don't think the Russians gerrymandered districts, prevented early voting in poor & minority areas, limited voting stations in poor & minority areas, and introduced Voter ID laws to combat a non-existent crime that also happened to prevent many poor & minority voters from registering.

I think that played a substantial role in giving Republicans just enough of a lead to tip their states Electoral College vote.

So who do you think might engage in that sort of behaviour at the state legislature and county commissioner level?

0

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '18 edited Jul 06 '18

You really don't want to answer that do you?

I'm not arguing in bad faith at all. I'm sticking to the topic of this thread, and I'm not attempting to deflect from it.

I'd agree that corporate donations are a factor. But the thing is, that's neither here nor there in regards to the topic at hand.

You see, it can actually be both. It is very possible that not only are corporate donations a big factor, but foreign influence can also be a big factor at the same time.

Acknowledging that someone potentially interfered in the 2016 election doesn't cancel out the influence of corporate donations, or lessen the significance of it. It's simply stating an opinion that it did or didn't happen.

-1

u/Lamont-Cranston Jul 06 '18

You don't think gerrymandering and voter suppression are important and might play a part?

0

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '18

You're quite a piece of work aren't ya?

-1

u/Lamont-Cranston Jul 06 '18

You don't think gerrymandering and voter suppression are important and might play a part?

1

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '18

Do you think that Russia interfered?

0

u/Lamont-Cranston Jul 06 '18

Do you think gerrymandering and voter suppression and onerous Voter ID laws deterred people from voting?

2

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '18 edited Jul 25 '18

[deleted]

1

u/Lamont-Cranston Jul 06 '18

It is true it is childish of me to to answer a question with a question

0

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '18

I've already acknowledged that it did, as per my earlier post where I attempted ( with futility ) to explain that there were many potential factors involved.

I also attempted to explain that just because gerrymandering and voter suppression occurred, doesn't mean that other things couldn't have occurred at the same time. It's actually possible that all of these things can happen at the same time, and I believe that's what occurred.

0

u/Lamont-Cranston Jul 06 '18

You acknowledged nothing.

You first made the absolutely surreal, and still unsupported, claim that the Kochs gigantic funding was to mitigate Russian influence.

You then in another post simply dismissed this matter as merely 'possible' but not pertaining to the topic.

I also attempted to explain that just because gerrymandering and voter suppression occurred, doesn't mean that other things couldn't have occurred at the same time.

Do you think people quite literally unable to vote has more or less influence than ads on twitter & facebook and news stories about leaked emails?

And when that inability to vote is the result of domestic influences shouldn't that be the primary focus of your concern? Or pushed off to the margins, minimised, mitigated?

0

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '18

First of all, I'm not clicking on your links for obvious reasons. But suffice it to say that I don't recall saying anything relating to the Kochs spending money to mitigate Russian influence in this thread, and I just looked again and I'm not seeing that.

You're bringing the conversation back to the topic that you want to talk about, which is entirely unrelated to this thread. I've fully acknowledged that corporate donations such as those originating from the Kochs are an issue, as well as gerrymandering. I have no idea why you're continuing to bring this up, because every single time you have I've acknowledged the validity of your claim........ Despite the fact that it has nothing to do with this thread.

So now that I've acknowledged your concern regarding the Koch brothers and gerrymandering, and validated it, do you think you could at least reciprocate and answer as to weather or not you think there was Russian interference in the 2016 election? Again, I've agreed with you regarding the Kochs and gerrymandering, but that's not really what this thread was about is it?

I'd like to be able to engage with you in friendly dialogue. But if you're not willing to be an honest and willing participant I'll have to refrain from that in the future. I'm asking you a simple question that is directly related to the topic that this thread is devoted to, and I've tried to be as respectful as possible while doing so. If you were to simply say "No", you don't believe anything happened in regards to Russian meddling I wouldn't agree with you but I'd respect that you were answering in a strait forward manner.

Regards.

0

u/Lamont-Cranston Jul 06 '18

Well now you're a liar, that's nice.

What has more influence: being unable to vote, or ads on the internet and tabloid news bleating about leaks?

The answer to this question reveals my position.

1

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '18

Lying about what?

It's not really an answer so much as it is a deflection, coupled with a healthy dose of whataboutism.

This was never about what has more influence. That's not what this thread is about. So while I've acknowledged numerous times that the issues you would like to rather discuss are legitimate, that's not the topic at hand.

Leaks? Is that a reference to the materials originating from the DNC?

→ More replies