705
706

Is Donald Trump a traitor? His path to the White House suggests a pattern of profound disloyalty There's a word for someone who colludes with a foreign power to subvert democracy and overthrow political norms (salon.com)

sugarfreeeyecandy が 投稿

上位 200 件のコメント全て表示する 312
並べ替え:
論争中
ベストトップ新着古い順Q&A

[–]AutoModerator[M] [スコア非表示] stickied comment (4子コメント)

As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.

  • Do not call other users trolls, morons, children, or anything else clever you may think of. Personal attacks, whether explicit or implicit, are not permitted.

  • Do not accuse other users of being shills. If you believe that a user is a shill, the proper conduct is to report the user or send us a modmail.

  • In general, don't be a jerk. Don't bait people, don't use hate speech, etc. Attack ideas, not users.

  • Do not downvote comments because you disagree with them, and be willing to upvote quality comments whether you agree with the opinions held or not.

Incivility will result in a permanent ban from the subreddit. If you see uncivil comments, please report them and do not reply with incivility of your own.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]TellMeLies [スコア非表示]  (29子コメント)

I like how quickly partisan democrats have forgotten the pivotal role the CIA played in convincing the country to go to war with Iraq now that they like the narrative they are pushing. The CIA is an agency that specializes in deception and the information we've been provided is a second hand account of a report that hasn't been released. Everyone here who is "sure" that Trump colluded with Putin is either a liar or an idiot.

Let's get the evidence before we start making up our minds.

[–]sugarfreeeyecandy[S] [スコア非表示]  (9子コメント)

I like how quickly partisan democrats have forgotten the pivotal role the CIA played in convincing the country to go to war with Iraq now that they like the narrative they are pushing.

No one has forgotten. Have you forgotten "the CIA's" successes? Keep sowing that doubt.

[–]TellMeLies [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

... he says as if I am a Trump supporter. You seem to be missing the real point I made which is that we should be waiting for actual evidence instead of second hand information that party officials won't verify when asked candidly.

[–]sugarfreeeyecandy[S] [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

It is an opinion article, not a jury trial. Yet. But the article does draw on facts to make it's case. See the difference?

[–]TellMeLies [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

See how I was making a comment about how people in the thread are discussing the piece and not commenting on the article content? See the difference?

[–]mindless_gibberish [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

You've pretty much described how "fake news" works.

コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

      [–]rareiamgery [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

      'His sons, Eric and Donald Jr., were involved in a scheme (since withdrawn) that looked a lot like an attempt to sell access to his administration through million-dollar “charity” donations.'

      This line is really great, an empty accusation at the Trump team, while we have irrefutable evidence of exactly that from the Clinton Foundation. Wonder how many times Salon reported on those facts, compared empty accusations of something that never happened.

      [–]Red_State_Lib [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

      You mean how the Bush administration ignored the CIA's intelligence reports and made up their own when they didn't fit the narrative.

      [–]TellMeLies [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

      That isn't exactly the true story is it? The Bush administration did obscure the true nature of the report but then again the CIA did not release the actual document until 2015. If you're trying to make it seem like the CIA is some benevolent organization with this comment then maybe we should talk about all the people they tortured. They have acknowledged that about 20% of their victims were innocent. Some read "good guys"!

      [–]riemannszeros [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

      I like how quickly Republicans, who spent 8 years defending Bush, have thrown him under the bus to defend the new liar they'll be throwing under the bus when the next liar comes along.

      コメントをもっと表示する (4 返事)

        [–]PlasticGio [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

        I'm looking forward to reading Salon's butthurt articles for the next 8 years. They're getting more and more desperate by the day.

        [–]TheOldGuy59 [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

        Trump supports sure have an anal fixation. I guess now that he's been elected it's ok for them to come out as gay.

        [–]tainted_waffles [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

        Hey Salon, there's also a law for unfounded claims meant to attack a person and I'd venture to say you're tiptoeing the libel line.

        [–]Fun_For_Guill [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

        Libel is not for unfounded claims it's for untrue claims.

        [–]tainted_waffles [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

        How can they be sure their claim is true if it's unfounded? It's irresponsible journalism.

        [–]Fun_For_Guill [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        That's the point of libel law. If plaintiff wants to argue before a judge or jury that what someone said is untrue then they are free to do so. If trump thinks he has been libelled then let him bring a suit.

        [–]Nac_Lac [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        If you bring Alex Jones and Briebart to court with libel claims, then you can accuse Salon. As long as you let Jones spew "Pizzagate" as fact and truth, you have no legitimacy in your argument.

        [–]boredomreigns [スコア非表示]  (8子コメント)

        ....No?

        Has he levied war against the United States or given aid/comfort to a nation with which the United States has declared war on?

        [–]ThePulseHarmonic [スコア非表示]  (6子コメント)

        Interfering with the election presents an existential threat to our democracy, therefore it can be (and has been) called an act of war.

        [–]ROK247 [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

        so why aren't we going to war with Russia then?

        [–]ThePulseHarmonic [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

        The intelligence report isnt done yet, for one, so until then its still an open question whether what they did was heineous enough to fit the "act of war" definition. Nukes is another good reason not to escalate if another option is available

        [–]ROK247 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

        OR maybe the only thing the Russians may have done is just show the american people how corrupt the DNC is? and that would be the stupidest reason for going to war EVER?

        コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

          コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

            [–]ithoughtsobitch [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

            Salon. Really?

            They are upset at Trump for calling terrorist attacks..terrorist attacks.

            https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C0I3SoSXAAA7WE9.jpg:large

            Salon is fake news generating fake outrage.

            [–]si_sports [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

            Thank you. We should really stop posting Salon articles. They post pro-pedo pieces just to get people mad.

            コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

              [–]Aspid07 [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

              I'd like to congratulate /r/politics on exceeding the rhetoric exhibited by the Republicans in 2008 and 2012.

              [–]WasabiBomb [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

              I'd like to congratulate /u/Aspid07 for managing to sleep through the last 8 years of Republican obstructionism and conspiracy-mongering.

              [–]Aspid07 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

              The democrats will do the same obsrtuc... oh wait, they nuked the filibuster.

              [–]smilincriminal [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Yeah its called Hillary Clinton

              [–]Charfery [スコア非表示]  (7子コメント)

              People are mad because no matter what happens the DNC colluded and rigged the election. That we do know and is fact. Who ever exposed the DNC and exposed the truth we don't know.

              Regardless of who made the "hack" we all agree that the DNC should be held responsible for the truth that was released.

              [–]homer_3 [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

              the DNC colluded and rigged the election.

              This is misleading. The primaries are not "the election." Unless you're actually saying it is a fact that they rigged the actual election, in which case, they didn't do a very good job.

              [–]Charfery [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Well of course they didn't do a very good job. They took down the popular candidate that the PEOPLE wanted, who would of won the ELECTION.

              Saying that what they didn't effect the election is a stretch.

              I just don't get how people can accuse Russia of hacking but deny what the hacking shows..

              [–]sugarfreeeyecandy[S] [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

              Regardless of who made the "hack" we all agree that the DNC should be held responsible for the truth that was released.

              Nope, sorry, but the leaks were release by Wikileaks which has a faulty mode of operation that awards whoever has the best hacking ability and the worst intentions because they supposedly release as the leaks come in to them. Consider that.

              [–]Charfery [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              That doesn't change that we still don't know who made the "hack" and that the DNC rigged the primaries.

              [–]TheLadyEve [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

              rigged the election

              Please explain how they "rigged the election."

              [–]Charfery [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

              This wouldn't fall under rigging a primary?

              Rigging: the act of arranging dishonestly for the result of something.

              That should help clarify things for you.

              The DNC Is suppose to be there to represent the people, they clearly did not.

              [–]TheLadyEve [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Yes. Under the way our system works and has worked for decades, the committees of either party can favor and promote anyone they choose. If you object to that, lobby for a change in the system, but don't call it "rigging."

              [–]AugustosHeliTours [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              subvert democracy

              Only Democrats could have their corruption be exposed to the public, and then refer to it as "subverting democracy."

              Bunch of whiny little bitches.

              [–]ChillAllWhiteMales [スコア非表示]  (10子コメント)

              Yes, yes he is. And every night we go to bed hoping to wake up to this announcement from Obama:

              "An investigation into the election has revealed a direct link between Vladimir Putin and the Republican Party in a collaborative effort to rule up civil unrest in order to influence the election. Donald Trump and Mike Pence were directly involved. As a result, they have been disqualified from the presidency, and will be charged with treason against the United States of America. In the meantime, it is my duty to select an interim president. On January 20th, Bernie Sanders will assume the responsibilities of the Presidency of the United States."

              (Credit to /u/101c for this)

              [–]Manafort [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              If this article didn't quite hit the spot, you can find plenty others by the same author here: https://www.salon.com/writer/chauncey_de_vega/

              [–]aledlewis [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              'Clinton'?

              [–]madflavr [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Well thats a pretty provocative headline. Let's check out this arti--wait it's Salon. Disregard lol

              [–]emerek85 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              This is officially my favorite conspiracy theory sub on reddit. I am getting so much enjoyment watching the left destroy themselves.

              [–]Tcampd12 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              It's called TREASON

              [–]GreatNorthWeb [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

              Exactly. His campaign should never have accepted millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia.

              [–]miltedmalkball [スコア非表示]  (32子コメント)

              ITT: t_d has been instructed to engage in ad hominem

              [–]Bronafide [スコア非表示]  (5子コメント)

              Suggest someone is a traitor with no actual evidence, then complain about ad hominem attacks??

              [–]miltedmalkball [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

              Where did I suggest that and where did I complain? Was the strawman also part of the instruction?

              コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                [–]FatOrangeSackOfShit [スコア非表示]  (25子コメント)

                they're triggered so easily, just like their 2nd favorite despot

                コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                  [–]ItsNotThad [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  Another salon article. Good to see we have completely abandoned actual journalism at this point.

                  [–]Charfery [スコア非表示]  (2子コメント)

                  They RIGGED the primary against Bernie

                  Stop being so biased and admit a lot of what they did is wrong.

                  And the GOP Didn't rig their primaries when they didn't want there candidate.

                  I didn't vote for trump and don't support him. Both sides play dirty and cheap. It's wrong and it shouldn't be accepted as apart of they system.

                  [–]Sephran [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                  links and proof? Haven't seen any and am interested in exploring this claim because it looked to me like he just lost the vote..

                  [–]Charfery [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  Because the DNC colluded with the media against him.

                  [–]vgm5 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  Colluded with foreign powers? Pretty sure Trump isn't the one who accepted money from foreign governments for their campaigns.

                  [–]Mr_Thunders [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  My god has this sub reached peak salt levels yet? Forecast says no.

                  [–]dvfernandes [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  Traitor to who or to whom? The more than 60 million Americans that voted Trump don't want anything to do with this America; they want a different one, their America. So there is no treason, just different conceptions of what the country should be.

                  [–]theiamsamurai [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  Like Hillary meeting with foreign bankers? Oh wait, that's the "political norm". "Subvert democracy" is a pretty accurate way to describe what the DNC did to sanders in the primary election.

                  [–]roboboogienights [スコア非表示]  (44子コメント)

                  No doubt in my mind there was collusion. I agree with Trump fans though, We should wait for hard evidence to accuse. I doubt if a Democrat in the same position would get the same regard.

                  [–]AnyManWith2Hands [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  If you admit there is no evidence, then why do you have no doubt? Seems like something most people here would criticize the other side for...

                  [–]bargaincowboy [スコア非表示]  (25子コメント)

                  I'm not a huge trump fan but I am a huge due process fan. I also believe we need hard proof before deciding our new president is a traitor secretly working with Russia. Jesus. Everyone needs to take a deep breath and see reality.

                  [–]Chinchill-allfather [スコア非表示]  (19子コメント)

                  I mean, so far 18 agencies have reached that conclusion though: what is the bar for "Hard evidence"?

                  [–]DirkDeadeye [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

                  We aren't really in love with those agencies though aren't we? I thought they were spying on us and drone bombing innocent people.

                  [–]peeja [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

                  That's the thing: they haven't. They've reached the conclusion that Russia interfered with our elections to put Trump in power. That doesn't mean Trump colluded with them.

                  [–]lisavark [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

                  Except we ALL heard him INVITE Russia to do it. It doesn't matter if he was actually secretly emailing with Putin to make a plan for it or not. He OPENLY INVITED IT.

                  [–]shitlurd [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                  If there's one thing I've learned from comments by Trump supporters it's that you should not take what Trump says literally or figuratively.

                  コメントをもっと表示する (2 返事)

                    [–]bargaincowboy [スコア非表示]  (4子コメント)

                    The bar for "hard evidence" is more than unverifiable anonymous sources. The CIA itself says their conclusion is based on circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence doesn't hold up in civilian court and it shouldn't hold up on the world's stage.

                    [–]Mr_Thunders [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                    The CIA and other agencies also reached a conclusion about weapons of mass destruction and how did that turn out? Also not all of those agencies actually agree.

                    what is the bar for "Hard evidence"?

                    Hard evidence is the bar for hard evidence, how is this even a question? So far literally no evidence has been presented.

                    [–]buttaholic [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                    The 17 agencies from the election was a statement made by one guy who's the head of the collection of agencies. So he made the statement representing those 17 agencies, as opposed to them individually making this statement.

                    Also, some of those agencies include things like the drug enforcement agency or the treasury department.

                    http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/oct/19/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-blames-russia-putin-wikileaks-rele/

                    コメントをもっと表示する (1 返事)

                      [–]Doctor_Karma_Farmer [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                      Can't we just skip the middleman, just this one time?

                      コメントをもっと表示する (3 返事)

                        [–]Mr_Thunders [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                        I agree with Trump fans though, We should wait for hard evidence to accuse.

                        You don't have to be a Trump fan but a logical thinking person to hold this belief.

                        [–]Lyndell [スコア非表示]  (11子コメント)

                        This is Dems problem, the Republican Party gets pissed and stays pissed. And they bitch moan and fight until there is evidence, if it turns out to be nothing radio silence. We know his pro Russian policies and connections within his own cabinet. We know he outright spoke on it. We can't even get them to agree to an investigation. This is could be akin to using another country to do Watergate to keep your hands clean. Only again, he said specifically to do it. I'm not sitting back and letting everyone forget, because that's all that will happen.

                        EDIT: missed some letters.

                        [–]holierthanthee [スコア非表示]  (10子コメント)

                        This is Dems problem, the Republican Party gets pissed and stays pissed. And they bitch moan and fight until there is evidence, if it turns out to be nothing radio silence.

                        That's the problem with the good guys - they actually make an effort to live out the philosophy they preach

                        コメントをもっと表示する (6 返事)

                          [–]THWG247 [スコア非表示]  (0子コメント)

                          I agree, Trump's actions and words regarding Russia and Putin put out a lot of smoke. I think that at some point a leak will reveal the collusion between Trump and Putin

                          [–]danimir [スコア非表示]  (3子コメント)

                          Is the opposition supposed to be loyal to the government? Is the US a plutocracy masquerading as a democracy?

                          [–]DubsLA [スコア非表示]  (1子コメント)

                          I would've called it treason when he got up on stage and encouraged a foreign power to hack the opposite political party.

                          Yes, he was "joking". Wonder what the reaction would've been if Clinton had said the same thing.

                          コメントをもっと表示する (14 返事)