Herochat

Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!

Philosophia

  • ***
  • 612
  • +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #30 on: October 12, 2016, 04:15:59 AM »

scourge

  • ********
  • 9237
  • +26/-9
  • Just be pleasant
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #31 on: October 12, 2016, 08:42:25 AM »
The sad part is, this was a rare opportunity for people to see what is going on behind the scenes, all of the corruption, lying, population manipulation, power plays etc. and act accordingly.

You can be sure that after all of this is done, they will assume full control so that nothing like it will ever happen again (it's already happening as we speak, with censorship on Twitter/Facebook and Google manipulating search results. The media is just the beginning). It's highly improbable that information leaks like these will ever take place in the future.

If people actually ignore this and allow themselves to be stepped on once again, well, they only have themselves to blame for whatever happens.

What are we suppose to do? You're right we did collectively raise enough money to give the elites a scare, and we had more volunteers than they could ever hope for in Bernie. We saw the corruption of the DNC and the media. But yet here we are the DNC and media won. And voter fraud, and now they spin it like "don't talk about voter fraud cause you don't want to sow unrest in the democracy"

Hillary is...I don't want to say evil, it's too strong, but certainly seems amoral. Talking to her supporters is tough because they always say "if only you knew what it was to be of this demographic you'd realize how important it is to elect her" and Trump is the perfect target to insight that, and in a way it's hard to explain the more nuanced fears when you have the other guy making anyone who's not a white male feel unsafe.

But then I'm at a loss. I can't talk to Hillary supporters, they all have their heads so focused on Trump that they get mad when you find out you don't support her and say it's just cause of your privilege etc. and I could never support Trump either cause his Hitler impression is a little too scary and his supporters, if they aren't racist, actively ignore that or make excuses for it.

So what are we suppose to do? Hillary unchecked is terrifying, but so is Tump. Either way we're fucked. And as she has the media on her side as she did in the primaries, they'll spin any crit (see above). How are people suppose to combat this--get involved in local politics? Bury our heads in the ground otherwise knowing we can't trust any source of information? How do we do anything, even when we try not to get stepped on and know it's coming they still seem able to do it.

Help

Philosophia

  • ***
  • 612
  • +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #32 on: October 12, 2016, 09:25:07 AM »
I don't have as bad of an opinion of Trump as many have (his main problem is that he doesn't have a filter for his redneckish talk, which is both good and bad in terms of voters) but, for the sake of the discussion let's say he's dangerous. In my opinion, beyond the 'who is worse' discussion is the part of 'who could do the most damage in the long haul' and that is definitely Clinton.

Generally, people don't really know the power the POTUS has, so the 'boogeyman Trump' narrative scares many of them, but he doesn't really have support to do anything worthwhile.  He needs to have an entire army of people behind him in all the proper places to change things massively (for better or worse) and he simply doesn't. Even within his own party, there's many that are either not supporting him at all or reluctantly doing so. If he tries to do stupid shit, he will be blocked.

Hillary, on the other hand, has that influence. She controls the narrative in terms of the information that goes around, in terms of telling you who is the bad guy, who is the good guy, what is best for everybody because she says it is. We're seeing a level of corruption that is unprecedented as far as 'in your face' goes, and she isn't even POTUS yet. We can see her strings, and they're not good (shady guys like Soros - who if you look at his agenda, it's terrifying, saudi arabia, quatar, wall street etc.). We also have her record, and she has left war and destruction everywhere she went with devastating result that will resonate for many generations henceforth (Middle East).

At worst, I think the system will be stagnant with Trump (I'd be hopeful about his tax, trade and immigration policy, though). With Clinton, it's actively giving the utmost power to somebody who already controls and destroys most everything she comes across. Like I said above, if she gets into power, the inner machinations of what's taking place behind the scenes will most likely never be seen again, and the brainwashing's dials will go up to eleven. She already controls the media and the justice system. Her open borders and immigration policies have been leaked recently etc. She's the Pablo Escobar of the US political system. Can you even imagine what she has to pay back, given the financial and mainstream support she has received? And this is not limited to the blatant pay-to-play she has, other countries like the aforementioned Saudi Arabia are her biggest contributors. Their interest is blatant.

As for what you were supposed to do - outvote her to a percentage that she simply couldn't have stolen the election, no matter what happened. But that depends on a large chunk of the population getting off the TV and searching the information for themselves, which was virtually impossible. Too much brainwashing, keeping people in the dark and feeding them shit. That might change in a few generations, but I think it will already be too late by then.

I'm sorry to say, but you're fucked. At best you can stall a bit (i.e. vote Trump) and hope the next generation will be awake ever since the primaries and vote the proper person en-masse.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2016, 09:34:39 AM by Philosophia »

scourge

  • ********
  • 9237
  • +26/-9
  • Just be pleasant
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #33 on: October 12, 2016, 09:40:11 AM »
I get what you're saying. Trump seems incompetent, and in a way an incompetent choice may be better. I couldn't bring myself to vote for him either though. I think it would embolden those who take the more repugnant aspects of his message and run with it. Or maybe not. And the media and powers that be would still be against him. Then again I wouldn't want him picking a Supreme Court justice or three. Not by a long shot. Overall, your assessment that we're fucked seems pretty spot on.

Necro

  • *******
  • 4124
  • +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #34 on: October 12, 2016, 10:06:26 AM »
"if only you knew what it was to be of this demographic you'd realize how important it is to elect her"

How exactly is that -not- a legitimate reason to be afraid of Trump getting to become POTUS?

Also, if you talk about "Who could do more harm".
Trump is the one who, repeatedly, asked why the US doesn't use their Nukes.
If that doesn't fucking TERRIFY you, then I don't know what to tell you.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2016, 10:08:25 AM by Necro »

Philosophia

  • ***
  • 612
  • +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #35 on: October 12, 2016, 10:18:40 AM »
"if only you knew what it was to be of this demographic you'd realize how important it is to elect her"

How exactly is that -not- a legitimate reason to be afraid of Trump getting to become POTUS?

Also, if you talk about "Who could do more harm".
Trump is the one who, repeatedly, asked why the US doesn't use their Nukes.
If that doesn't fucking TERRIFY you, then I don't know what to tell you.

The President can't unilaterally decide to use nukes. There's a chain of command that blocks him.

Glad to see the propaganda of "Trump wakes up one day and decides to nuke a random country" worked, though.

This is why Hillary will be president.
« Last Edit: October 12, 2016, 10:20:45 AM by Philosophia »

80sBaby

  • *******
  • 4966
  • +22/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #36 on: October 12, 2016, 10:22:37 AM »
I believe he only has to have the Secretary of Defense confirm his order. Since the President appoints the Secretary of Defense, I can still see it as a concern.

Philosophia

  • ***
  • 612
  • +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #37 on: October 12, 2016, 10:26:40 AM »
I believe he only has to have the Secretary of Defense confirm his order. Since the President appoints the Secretary of Defense, I can still see it as a concern.

You're wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Codes

Quote
Should the president decide to order the launch of nuclear weapons, they would be taken aside by the "carrier" of the nuclear football and the briefcase opened.[3] Once opened, the president would decide which "Attack Options", specific orders for attacks on specific targets, to use. The Attack Options are preset war plans developed under OPLAN 8010, and include Major Attack Options (MAOs), Selected Attack Options (SAOs), and Limited Attack Options (LAOs). The chosen attack option and the Gold Codes would then be transmitted to the NMCC via a special, secure channel. As commander-in-chief, the president is the only individual with the authority to order the use of nuclear weapons;[10] however, the two-man rule still applies. The National Command Authority comprising the president and Secretary of Defense must jointly authenticate the order to use nuclear weapons to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.[7] The order would then be transmitted over a tan-yellow phone, the Joint Chiefs of Staff Alerting Network, otherwise known as the "Gold Phone", that directly links the NMCC with United States Strategic Command Headquarters at Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.[citation needed] It is argued that the President has almost single authority to initiate a nuclear attack since the Secretary of Defense is required to verify the order, but cannot legally veto it.[11][12][13] However, Section 4 of the 25th Amendment of the Constitution allows for the vice president, together with a majority of cabinet heads or Congress, to declare the President disabled or unfit to execute the duties of the office.[14] If an order to launch is considered to be without merit, that would be grounds to invoke section 4 of the 25th Amendment. Government officials are required to not comply with an order that violates the law, even if that means defying a presidential order.[15]
« Last Edit: October 12, 2016, 10:28:34 AM by Philosophia »

80sBaby

  • *******
  • 4966
  • +22/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #38 on: October 12, 2016, 10:27:07 AM »
Also in reading up on it, nobody can actually veto the order to use nukes. There's a pretty lengthy process involved and it's not just him simply pushing a button. Unfortunately, the process is more about verifying the order than if the order should be carried out.

80sBaby

  • *******
  • 4966
  • +22/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #39 on: October 12, 2016, 10:27:53 AM »
I believe he only has to have the Secretary of Defense confirm his order. Since the President appoints the Secretary of Defense, I can still see it as a concern.

You're wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Codes

Quote
Should the president decide to order the launch of nuclear weapons, they would be taken aside by the "carrier" of the nuclear football and the briefcase opened.[3] Once opened, the president would decide which "Attack Options", specific orders for attacks on specific targets, to use. The Attack Options are preset war plans developed under OPLAN 8010, and include Major Attack Options (MAOs), Selected Attack Options (SAOs), and Limited Attack Options (LAOs). The chosen attack option and the Gold Codes would then be transmitted to the NMCC via a special, secure channel. As commander-in-chief, the president is the only individual with the authority to order the use of nuclear weapons;[10] however, the two-man rule still applies. The National Command Authority comprising the president and Secretary of Defense must jointly authenticate the order to use nuclear weapons to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.[7] The order would then be transmitted over a tan-yellow phone, the Joint Chiefs of Staff Alerting Network, otherwise known as the "Gold Phone", that directly links the NMCC with United States Strategic Command Headquarters at Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.[citation needed] It is argued that the President has almost single authority to initiate a nuclear attack since the Secretary of Defense is required to verify the order, but cannot legally veto it.[11][12][13] However, Section 4 of the 25th Amendment of the Constitution allows for the vice president, together with a majority of cabinet heads or Congress, to declare the President disabled or unfit to execute the duties of the office.[14] If an order to launch is considered to be without merit, that would be grounds to invoke section 4 of the 25th Amendment. Government officials are required to not comply with an order that violates the law, even if that means defying a presidential order.[15]

No, I was right actually. Read above.

Philosophia

  • ***
  • 612
  • +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #40 on: October 12, 2016, 10:30:03 AM »
I believe he only has to have the Secretary of Defense confirm his order. Since the President appoints the Secretary of Defense, I can still see it as a concern.

You're wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gold_Codes

Quote
Should the president decide to order the launch of nuclear weapons, they would be taken aside by the "carrier" of the nuclear football and the briefcase opened.[3] Once opened, the president would decide which "Attack Options", specific orders for attacks on specific targets, to use. The Attack Options are preset war plans developed under OPLAN 8010, and include Major Attack Options (MAOs), Selected Attack Options (SAOs), and Limited Attack Options (LAOs). The chosen attack option and the Gold Codes would then be transmitted to the NMCC via a special, secure channel. As commander-in-chief, the president is the only individual with the authority to order the use of nuclear weapons;[10] however, the two-man rule still applies. The National Command Authority comprising the president and Secretary of Defense must jointly authenticate the order to use nuclear weapons to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.[7] The order would then be transmitted over a tan-yellow phone, the Joint Chiefs of Staff Alerting Network, otherwise known as the "Gold Phone", that directly links the NMCC with United States Strategic Command Headquarters at Offutt Air Force Base in Nebraska.[citation needed] It is argued that the President has almost single authority to initiate a nuclear attack since the Secretary of Defense is required to verify the order, but cannot legally veto it.[11][12][13] However, Section 4 of the 25th Amendment of the Constitution allows for the vice president, together with a majority of cabinet heads or Congress, to declare the President disabled or unfit to execute the duties of the office.[14] If an order to launch is considered to be without merit, that would be grounds to invoke section 4 of the 25th Amendment. Government officials are required to not comply with an order that violates the law, even if that means defying a presidential order.[15]

No, I was right actually. Read above.

No, you were wrong.

The President and Secretary of State can be overuled and the presidential order defied.

I bolded and increased the size of that part, in case you miss it.

Philosophia

  • ***
  • 612
  • +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #41 on: October 12, 2016, 10:31:15 AM »
the process is more about verifying the order than if the order should be carried out.

That's blatantly wrong.

If an order to launch is considered to be without merit, that would be grounds to invoke section 4 of the 25th Amendment. Government officials are required to not comply with an order that violates the law, even if that means defying a presidential order.

« Last Edit: October 12, 2016, 10:33:53 AM by Philosophia »

80sBaby

  • *******
  • 4966
  • +22/-6
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #42 on: October 12, 2016, 10:32:37 AM »
Ah I did miss the Amendment. Gracias, mi malo.

Philosophia

  • ***
  • 612
  • +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #43 on: October 12, 2016, 10:33:12 AM »
Ah I did miss the Amendment. Gracias, mi malo.
No prob.

Sorry for the aggression.

scourge

  • ********
  • 9237
  • +26/-9
  • Just be pleasant
    • View Profile
Re: Can the DNC get more corrupt? You bet it can!
« Reply #44 on: October 12, 2016, 10:34:08 AM »
"if only you knew what it was to be of this demographic you'd realize how important it is to elect her"

How exactly is that -not- a legitimate reason to be afraid of Trump getting to become POTUS?


Because though his words are terrifying in that regard, without the support of even his own party, he's going to be incredibly restricted. Plus our society is at a point where it hopefully would not fly. Fortunately on social issues, we generally move forward, not backwards, and I don't see a president capable of sending us in the opposite direction.