Comments by "DynamicWorlds" (@dynamicworlds1) on "WikiLeaks Worked With The Trump Campaign. This Is Why." video.

  1. Kal Phil supposing the analysis of wikileaks' motivations presented in the video are accurate, the most likely motivation for telling Trump not to accept the election results if he lost would be to try and trigger a big fight over US election integrity and blow open our rigged system. Trump would be someone loud and bullheaded enough to actually force the issue to not be swept under the rug. That could have been the trigger needed to get real election reform in the US even if Trump was just a tool to do it. The ideal situation would mean that the results of the election would have to be thrown out and the whole thing done over since the way our electronic voting machines work, the actual results would be unable to be determined. Then, it might be possible to get both election reform and another election with Hillary deemed ineligible by popular oppinion, so Trump vs someone like Bernie or Stein. If you take wikileaks's MO as a series of calculated risks to eventually dismantle the current establishment, it's a plausible plan for them to at least try.
    2
  2. Kal Phil I was trying to simply answer your question, but yes, if Trump lost and it could be proven that the vote was seriously tampered with and it was  pressed seriously, yes, we could have had a redo.  Other countries run them all the time even if there's just suspicion of something being afoul...and if the public believed that Hillary has rigged both the primary and general elections, yes, there's a serious chance it would be Trump vs either Bernie (the democratic runner up) or Stein (on a green ticket). Is it a bit of a longshot? Obviously, but the payoff would be high. As for our election system, it's total shit. You really need to look a bit more broadly if you think otherwise. I suggest starting here C.G.P. Grey Explains Elections: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEcHCTVM79BMISVn4AV5EXSglGDzRgwgG And https://youtu.be/w3_0x6oaDmI And then consider that we have essentially legalized bribery
    2
  3. Zachary CHERIF do you not understand the concept of a calculated risk or do you disagree with the assessment of wikileak's intentions presented in the video? I respect that you're angry, but your position is unclear.
    2
  4. Unclear that they had those emails at that time or that Russia wouldn't be satisfied with lessened western imperialism toward their borders. You're both thinking overly simplistically about this whole situation. Just because Putin is a bad person doesn't mean everything he does is evil. For example, even if we accept your notion that wikileaks was working on behalf of Russia to undermine the Iraq war by exposing US war crimes, doesn't mean that releasing such wasn't the right thing to do. The notion that we should support any of our government's actions if they're opposed by some foreign power we don't like is incredibly dangerous.
    1