(07-27-2018 03:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 03:30 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 02:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 02:13 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  So 82 contacts between the Russians and the trump campaign all lied about, a meeting between trump campaign and Russians for “dirt” on an opponent, 17 intel agencies/senate house committees/ even the White House says Russia hacked our election, 13 Russian nationals indicted, 12 GRU officials indicted, 4 campaign officials indicted and multiple guilty pleas; but the tweets so it’s a witch hunt.

Fake news which has repeatedly been debunked. Please disavow or provide a link.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...75797e3f93

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-blame...1531732220

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter...her-way-r/

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/0...ing-692616

Hasn’t been debunked unless you’re referring to how all 17 agencies fall under the umbrella of 4 overall agencies. Doesn’t change the conclusion

In other words, hasnt been debunked unless I'm talking about the sentence you posted and I highlighted.

Your links do not support your fake news which has been debunked. I read thru the first one, Im not reading through anymore. Provide the passages in each link that supports your statement that 17 intel agencies/senate house committees/ even the White House says Russia hacked our election. Its your statement. Back it up.

Its in the politifact article. You highlighted the whole statement. There are 17 intel agencies. They concluded it was Russia. The senate intel committee concluded it was Russia you can read the public report from Republican senator Burr here: https://www.burr.senate.gov/imo/media/do...LJULY3.pdf
Otherwise I’d suggest googling for yourself. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it’s not true.

(07-27-2018 04:14 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 03:54 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 03:30 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 02:33 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 02:13 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  So 82 contacts between the Russians and the trump campaign all lied about, a meeting between trump campaign and Russians for “dirt” on an opponent, 17 intel agencies/senate house committees/ even the White House says Russia hacked our election, 13 Russian nationals indicted, 12 GRU officials indicted, 4 campaign officials indicted and multiple guilty pleas; but the tweets so it’s a witch hunt.

Fake news which has repeatedly been debunked. Please disavow or provide a link.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/...75797e3f93

https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-blame...1531732220

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter...her-way-r/

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/07/0...ing-692616

Hasn’t been debunked unless you’re referring to how all 17 agencies fall under the umbrella of 4 overall agencies. Doesn’t change the conclusion

In other words, hasnt been debunked unless I'm talking about the sentence you posted and I highlighted.

Your links do not support your fake news which has been debunked. I read thru the first one, Im not reading through anymore. Provide the passages in each link that supports your statement that 17 intel agencies/senate house committees/ even the White House says Russia hacked our election. Its your statement. Back it up.

Its in the politifact article. You highlighted the whole statement. There are 17 intel agencies. They concluded it was Russia. The senate intel committee concluded it was Russia you can read the public report from Republican senator Burr here: https://www.burr.senate.gov/imo/media/do...LJULY3.pdf
Otherwise I’d suggest googling for yourself. Just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it’s not true.

Again, your own articles states it was not 17 agencies, and nowhere in your articles does it say Russia hacked the election. Please disavow.

Clearly you didn’t read any of these not even the senate intel report. So:

“The ICA states that:
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the U.S.-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations1.
• The Committee found that this judgment was supported by the evidence presented in the ICA. Since its publication, further details have come to light that bolster the assessment.
• The ICA pointed to initial evidence of Russian activities against multiple U.S. state or local electoral boards. Since the ICA was published, the Committee has learned more about Russian attempts to infiltrate state election infrastructure, as outlined in the findings and recommendations the Committee issued in March 2018.
• While the ICA briefly discussed the activities of the Internet Research Agency, the Committee's investigation has exposed a far more extensive Russian effort to manipulate social media outlets to sow discord and to interfere in the 2016 election and American society.”

“The ICA states that:
We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S . presidential election. Russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump2.”

(07-27-2018 04:43 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  Clearly you didn’t read any of these not even the senate intel report. So:

“The ICA states that:
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the U.S.-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations1.
• The Committee found that this judgment was supported by the evidence presented in the ICA. Since its publication, further details have come to light that bolster the assessment.
• The ICA pointed to initial evidence of Russian activities against multiple U.S. state or local electoral boards. Since the ICA was published, the Committee has learned more about Russian attempts to infiltrate state election infrastructure, as outlined in the findings and recommendations the Committee issued in March 2018.
• While the ICA briefly discussed the activities of the Internet Research Agency, the Committee's investigation has exposed a far more extensive Russian effort to manipulate social media outlets to sow discord and to interfere in the 2016 election and American society.”

“The ICA states that:
We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S . presidential election. Russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump2.”

And "17 intelligence agencies" and "hacked" dont appear in that as well. Keep trying. Or disavow.

(07-27-2018 01:59 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 01:12 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  How is it a witch hunt?

Pile driver.

(07-27-2018 04:43 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  Clearly you didn’t read any of these not even the senate intel report. So:

“The ICA states that:
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the U.S.-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations1.
• The Committee found that this judgment was supported by the evidence presented in the ICA. Since its publication, further details have come to light that bolster the assessment.
• The ICA pointed to initial evidence of Russian activities against multiple U.S. state or local electoral boards. Since the ICA was published, the Committee has learned more about Russian attempts to infiltrate state election infrastructure, as outlined in the findings and recommendations the Committee issued in March 2018.
• While the ICA briefly discussed the activities of the Internet Research Agency, the Committee's investigation has exposed a far more extensive Russian effort to manipulate social media outlets to sow discord and to interfere in the 2016 election and American society.”

“The ICA states that:
We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S . presidential election. Russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump2.”

Your vote is deemed an acceptable loss. Collect your pink hat and scream at the sky.

Thanks for playing.

I often wonder how these wingnuts can post breathlessly about the Russians "hacking" and trying to influence the election and Trump wanting to meet with Russians to get dirt on his opponent when the candidate they likely supported tried to hide the flow of money used to buy dirt from Russian sources to use against her opponent and then used her contacts within the State Department and CIA to funnel said dirt to the press and the FBI so that they could influence the outcome of an election.

It's as though they live in a parallel universe. It's baffling that they post this shyte with a straight face.

FFS, the head of all 17 agencies admitted under oath that the 17 agencies statement was false.


https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/...false.html
During congressional testimony Wednesday, former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper confirmed that the story originally reported by the New York Times that "17 intelligence agencies" confirmed Russia attempted to interfere in the 2016 election has been false all along.

(07-27-2018 06:01 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  I often wonder how these wingnuts can post breathlessly about the Russians "hacking" and trying to influence the election and Trump wanting to meet with Russians to get dirt on his opponent when the candidate they likely supported tried to hide the flow of money used to buy dirt from Russian sources to use against her opponent and then used her contacts within the State Department and CIA to funnel said dirt to the press and the FBI so that they could influence the outcome of an election.

It's as though they live in a parallel universe. It's baffling that they post this shyte with a straight face.

I didn’t support HC and still don’t. Personally, I understand completely why people voted for trump.

(07-27-2018 05:25 PM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 04:43 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  Clearly you didn’t read any of these not even the senate intel report. So:

“The ICA states that:
Russian efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election represent the most recent expression of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the U.S.-led liberal democratic order, but these activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity, and scope of effort compared to previous operations1.
• The Committee found that this judgment was supported by the evidence presented in the ICA. Since its publication, further details have come to light that bolster the assessment.
• The ICA pointed to initial evidence of Russian activities against multiple U.S. state or local electoral boards. Since the ICA was published, the Committee has learned more about Russian attempts to infiltrate state election infrastructure, as outlined in the findings and recommendations the Committee issued in March 2018.
• While the ICA briefly discussed the activities of the Internet Research Agency, the Committee's investigation has exposed a far more extensive Russian effort to manipulate social media outlets to sow discord and to interfere in the 2016 election and American society.”

“The ICA states that:
We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the U.S . presidential election. Russia's goals were to undermine public faith in the U.S. democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump2.”

And "17 intelligence agencies" and "hacked" dont appear in that as well. Keep trying. Or disavow.

So what do you think it means? You know what happens if the investigation into trump is wrong? Nothing. Trump is vindicated and likely wins re-election in a landslide. What happens if you’re wrong? You’ve been blindly supporting a traitor. Trump goes down as the worst president in history as a Russian plant.

(07-27-2018 06:18 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 06:01 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  I often wonder how these wingnuts can post breathlessly about the Russians "hacking" and trying to influence the election and Trump wanting to meet with Russians to get dirt on his opponent when the candidate they likely supported tried to hide the flow of money used to buy dirt from Russian sources to use against her opponent and then used her contacts within the State Department and CIA to funnel said dirt to the press and the FBI so that they could influence the outcome of an election.

It's as though they live in a parallel universe. It's baffling that they post this shyte with a straight face.

I didn’t support HC and still don’t. Personally, I understand completely why people voted for trump.

So would it be accurate to say that you believe that Cankles, and her Obama administration contacts, were as guilty as, if not more so, than Trump ever thought to be about influencing the outcome of the election in some under-handed way?

(07-27-2018 06:31 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 06:18 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  

(07-27-2018 06:01 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  I often wonder how these wingnuts can post breathlessly about the Russians "hacking" and trying to influence the election and Trump wanting to meet with Russians to get dirt on his opponent when the candidate they likely supported tried to hide the flow of money used to buy dirt from Russian sources to use against her opponent and then used her contacts within the State Department and CIA to funnel said dirt to the press and the FBI so that they could influence the outcome of an election.

It's as though they live in a parallel universe. It's baffling that they post this shyte with a straight face.

I didn’t support HC and still don’t. Personally, I understand completely why people voted for trump.

So would it be accurate to say that you believe that Cankles, and her Obama administration contacts, were as guilty as, if not more so, than Trump ever thought to be about influencing the outcome of the election in some under-handed way?

I believe that Hillary and the dnc to conspired to steal the primary. I believe that she was a pos candidate and as corrupt as they come. Idk about the general election I feel like she lost it out of pure incompetence.

(07-27-2018 06:23 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  So what do you think it means? You know what happens if the investigation into trump is wrong? Nothing.

THIS logic, is flat wrong.

You say you certainly understand how people voted for Trump. If that's the case, you'll also understand why most Trump supporters think this has been a witch hunt.

Guys like Carter Page, Michael Flynn and numerous others have had their careers ruined, some bankrupted, because of an investigation that most of us believe should never have been.

This witch hunt has also set us up for the next time someone loses an election they shouldn't have lost. Don't like the results? No problem, just dream up some tale of crime and corruption and then investigate the poor bastard or bastardess until they quit, or if they don't quit, then keep investigating them to hamstring their ability to perform the job they were elected to do.

(07-27-2018 06:23 PM)jaredf29 Wrote:  Trump is vindicated and likely wins re-election in a landslide. What happens if you’re wrong? You’ve been blindly supporting a traitor. Trump goes down as the worst president in history as a Russian plant.

Trump has already been vindicated of colluding with the Russians and the stupid assertion by some that he's a Russian plant. I'll guarantee you right now that the best Bueller can come up with at this point is some contorted obstruction of justice charge or allegation that dims can use to try to impeach the man.

Unless the economy crashes and burns, Trump will win a second term and do so by a landslide DESPITE the best efforts of the witch hunt and willing MSM who looks the other way when "their guy" holds office.

IMHO, the Obama Administration used the resources of our intelligence services to do everything possible to influence the outcome of the election, colluding with Cankles and the Russians she ultimately paid to generate dirt, any dirt, on Donald Trump.

Phuck the whole phucking bunch of traitors.

(07-27-2018 06:01 PM)TechRocks Wrote:  I often wonder how these wingnuts can post breathlessly about the Russians "hacking" and trying to influence the election and Trump wanting to meet with Russians to get dirt on his opponent when the candidate they likely supported tried to hide the flow of money used to buy dirt from Russian sources to use against her opponent and then used her contacts within the State Department and CIA to funnel said dirt to the press and the FBI so that they could influence the outcome of an election.
It's as though they live in a parallel universe. It's baffling that they post this shyte with a straight face.

I have read several statements to the effect that, "We have proof that Hillary's team did everything that the Trump team is accused of doing."

Maybe the accusations of Russian "collusion" arose because of a feeling that, "We cheated and still lost. They must have cheated more effectively to beat us."

Here's what I expect. Either the Mueller investigation will come up with something on Trump or it won't. If it does, then Trump is in trouble. If it doesn't, then I would expect a major backlash against democrats. The only uncertainties are which one, and when.

At this point, I think there is more evidence that the Obama administration, the FBI and intel services, and Hillary's team attempted to influence the election unfairly and illegally than there is that Trump did. But Mueller isn't through.