Hacker News Reader

Comment by lern_too_spel | Hacker News Reader

> People still believe this to this day.

Who? It is accepted that Trump got help from Russia and that he publicly asked for it. It is not accepted that he has strong ties with Russia, and unlike what the GGP has claimed, there is no "official" story saying that. The only person who did say that was private investigator Steele, in a dossier that Clinton didn't believe and discarded but that McCain did and leaked.

View on HN

As I understand it, the Wikileaks DNC email dump was just a front for Russia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Democratic_National_Commi...

more realistically, it was israel: https://www.thenation.com/article/world/trump-israel-collusi...

perhaps you recall trump’s first two acts in office — recognizing jerusalem as israel’s capital, and sanctioning russia. curious!

Ha! Makes sense.

I abhor partisan politics but there are things associated with (e.g., Trump) that call for scrutiny.

Trump is a fascinating character and has broken so many norms that it's been mind bending. It saddens me that HN has many of his rabid acolytes that make any such discussion a shit show.

The GP comment is not telling the whole story. Yes the first thing _congress_ did was pass additional sanctions on Russia but Trump delayed [1] them from going into affect for over a year allowing more than enough time for Russia to mitigate the impact significantly.

[1] https://abcnews.go.com/amp/Politics/timeline-trumps-delays-r...

There's so much more to explore, but not here.

It blows my mind that there are so many rabid supporters here on HN. There's no point in dialog there because there's no interest in that.

That said, we should be exploring how to hack society to "improve efficiency at scale", and that requires discussing policy and that is what politics is ostensibly all about. C'est la guerre.

Why wasn't there a discussion of the contents of the leaks, that the DNC did everything in their power to coronate Hillary, and only a discussion of the leak's provenance?

There was a ton of discussion about those claims but it largely stalked because the leaked emails didn’t show anything significant. You can still find Bernie die-hards claiming a conspiracy but they’re generally ignored because there’s no evidence that he did anything but lose fairly.

It was discussed at the time. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz resigned as DNC chair over what was in the emails.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jul/24/debbie-wasse...

There was plenty of discussion of the DNC crowning Hillary. I'm pissed about it to this day. What's your point?

There was. Only barely literate morons and Russian social media astroturfers interpreted the leaked documents that way.

which is often accused, although never proven.

when putin accuses media he doesnt like of being foreign agents without proof we can recognize how transparently self serving it is. wouldnt you agree?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com