Trump and Russia

[Tiberius]

 

Just a reminder (not aimed at anyone specifically):

 

This story, and all stories about Russian "fake news bots" is an attempt to shift the narrative to something wholly different than what was being claimed just several weeks ago. Russian authors, FSB proxies or whoever utilizing our own freedom of speech and press "against" us is nothing new and is NOT a threat to our democracy or our electoral process. To suggest otherwise is to side with those who wish to strip away our first amendment rights in order to "protect us". Don't fall for it.

 

The story pushed by the USIC at the outset had little, if anything, to do with Facebook and fake news stories. The claim was made that Russia "hacked" servers and election infrastructure and colluded directly with Trump to "fix" the election.

 

That narrative, of course, has been shown to be absolute bunk. Don't let them change the story. Shifting focus to fake-news bots is going to bite every left leaning person on this board (assuming they care about civil liberties) right in the ass when you're suddenly forced to contemplate restrictions in free speech and press in order to combat "fake news" - a scourge that's existed since Gutenberg first made his printing press.

It's been shown as bunk that Trump colluded with the Russians? Really? You mean how he said he had nothing at all to do with Russia, and then we found out he was deep in negotiations with the Russians and Putin to build a Trump Tower there. You have to be a real ding dong to say there is nothing there on this story. All the lies, all the money connections and the strange pro-Russian leans, buddying up to the murderous dictator, ya sure, fake news....but only if you are a sh it for brains

[Nanker]

From a Right Wing Rag...

 

"As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock."

Such a coincidence!

[Tiberius]

From a Right Wing Rag...

 

"As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock."

Such a coincidence!

Hey, maybe the Benghazi Investigation (Har har) can look into that!

 

What's that? The Benghazi Investigation has gone no where and is a nothing-burger that was fixed up for nothing but political reasons? Oh boo

[Deranged Rhino]

It's been shown as bunk that Trump colluded with the Russians? Really? You mean how he said he had nothing at all to do with Russia, and then we found out he was deep in negotiations with the Russians and Putin to build a Trump Tower there. You have to be a real ding dong to say there is nothing there on this story. All the lies, all the money connections and the strange pro-Russian leans, buddying up to the murderous dictator, ya sure, fake news....but only if you are a sh it for brains

 

Not a word about the lie being pushed on you by your own USIC.

 

Your lack of principles continues to astound.

[Tiberius]

Not a word about the lie being pushed on you by your own USIC.

 

Your lack of principles continues to astound.

No, just pointing out how you are wrong about the collusion angle.

 

I can't do the internet forensics and neither can you, so you can say all you want that they are lying without proof so there is no point arguing about it. I'll argue what can easily be proved and you still want to mix in with what cannot be proved to try and discredit the whole sordid affair.

[Gary M]

I'll argue what can easily be proved

 

Trump wanting to build a tower in russia is all you have proved, nothing but business. Not collusion, not hacking, not even a hint of treason.

 

[row_33]

treason.... that means you chose strawberry instead of vanilla ice cream these days?

[Tiberius]

 

Trump wanting to build a tower in russia is all you have proved, nothing but business. Not collusion, not hacking, not even a hint of treason.

 

Then why lie about it? And all the other lies?

 

We can also prove Manafort was a Putin employee. We know Flynn resigned about lies and Russia. We know Trump showed classified info to Russians he allowed into WH through back door. We know that Trump took on Russian talking points, we know Putin was trying to influence the election.

[DC Tom]

treason.... that means you chose strawberry instead of vanilla ice cream these days?

 

No, that's racism.

[Deranged Rhino]

No, just pointing out how you are wrong about the collusion angle.

 

I can't do the internet forensics and neither can you, so you can say all you want that they are lying without proof so there is no point arguing about it. I'll argue what can easily be proved and you still want to mix in with what cannot be proved to try and discredit the whole sordid affair.

 

Where's the proof of collusion? It's been over a year now - and if you haven't noticed, that narrative has fallen out of style even among democrats on the hill. Surely you have a link by now right? Oh... nope, you don't. Because there has been nothing but unnamed speculations. No hard evidence.

 

The only hard evidence presented so far is the evidence you're going out of your way to ignore because it's uncomfortable to you. You see it as defending Trump to call out the questionable reports and actions of men like Brenner and Clapper - I see it as defending our country. Your lack of principles, as I said, have never been more apparent than your reaction to this story over the past year.

 

As for the bolded, you're unsurprisingly incorrect: I can read, educate myself on the material, and determine if it has merit. You know, think for myself. The information is all sourced and referenced (more so than anything put forth by the USIC or the MSM regarding this issue), meaning you can double check the work with or without the technical skills. You should try it, don't take my word, read the material for itself.

 

But what's really funny is your last thought. Considering the DNI/ICA report itself says it was just presenting speculations from a select group of hand picked Intel officers (hand picked by Brennan and Clapper - a direct violation of policy changes made after the WMD debacle), it takes a lot of willful ignorance to say you're only going to argue what can be proven with evidence while dismissing literally the only real evidence offered by anyone on this matter and embracing a report which spells out clearly that it's presenting ZERO evidence of its claims.

 

Keep taking the word of known liars and perjurers, the same men who helped lie us into 17 years of non-stop war, the same men whose lies helped lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of civilians and soldiers from multiple nations. Keep on taking their word because today they're helping your partisan cause. Don't think about what positions they'll hold tomorrow... just focus on the lie they're spitting in your face and keep thanking them for it.

 

I'm sure it'll work out just fine for us all.

Edited September 18, 2017 by Deranged Rhino

[grinreaper]

Where's the proof of collusion? It's been over a year now - and if you haven't noticed, that narrative has fallen out of style even among democrats on the hill. Surely you have a link by now right? Oh... nope, you don't. Because there has been nothing but unnamed speculations. No hard evidence.

 

The only hard evidence presented so far is the evidence you're going out of your way to ignore because it's uncomfortable to you. You see it as defending Trump to call out the questionable reports and actions of men like Brenner and Clapper - I see it as defending our country. Your lack of principles, as I said, have never been more apparent than your reaction to this story over the past year.

 

As for the bolded, you're unsurprisingly incorrect: I can read, educate myself on the material, and determine if it has merit. You know, think for myself. The information is all sourced and referenced (more so than anything put forth by the USIC or the MSM regarding this issue), meaning you can double check the work with or without the technical skills. You should try it, don't take my word, read the material for itself.

 

But what's really funny is your last thought. Considering the DNI/ICA report itself says it was just presenting speculations from a select group of hand picked Intel officers (hand picked by Brennan and Clapper - a direct violation of policy changes made after the WMD debacle), it takes a lot of willful ignorance to say you're only going to argue what can be proven with evidence while dismissing literally the only real evidence offered by anyone on this matter and embracing a report which spells out clearly that it's presenting ZERO evidence of its claims.

 

Keep taking the word of known liars and perjurers, the same men who helped lie us into 17 years of non-stop war, the same men whose lies helped lead to the deaths of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of civilians and soldiers from multiple nations. Keep on taking their word because today they're helping your partisan cause. Don't think about what positions they'll hold tomorrow... just focus on the lie they're spitting in your face and keep thanking them for it.

 

I'm sure it'll work out just fine for us all.

Gator is probably bent over with laughter over that.

[Tiberius]

 

Where's the proof of collusion?

Trump towers meeting was proof of collusion.

 

You can point out that no crime was committed there, but that was collusion. And that's what we know of so far.

[/dev/null]

treason.... that means you chose strawberry instead of vanilla ice cream these days?

#chocolatestripeinneopolitanmatters

[Tiberius]

 

The only hard evidence presented so far is the evidence you're going out of your way to ignore because it's uncomfortable to you. You see it as defending Trump to call out the questionable reports and actions of men like Brenner and Clapper - I see it as defending our country. Your lack of principles, as I said, have never been more apparent than your reaction to this story over the past year.

 

Right, it is what the intelligence services said. Fine, you do not believe it. I tend to trust them. The other evidence lends it credibility, Monafort, the lies, the use of Russian talking points, Flynn's business deals and resignation etc.

 

Also, before the intelligence services came to their conclusions, a private reached that same conclusion.

 

And why would the intelligence services hide the fact--which they did--that Russians attempted to hack voting machine companies and prospecute the person that leaked that intelligence?

[Nanker]

Stop colluding with gatorgal. The IC could target you and label you as idiots.

And the MSM would run with the story for months. There could be investigations, and it could get nasty for you and everyone that you know and knows you and has ever laid fingertips to a keyboard too!

[grinreaper]

Right, it is what the intelligence services said. Fine, you do not believe it. I tend to trust them. The other evidence lends it credibility, Monafort, the lies, the use of Russian talking points, Flynn's business deals and resignation etc.

 

Also, before the intelligence services came to their conclusions, a private reached that same conclusion.

 

And why would the intelligence services hide the fact--which they did--that Russians attempted to hack voting machine companies and prospecute the person that leaked that intelligence?

Why should anyone believe a lowly private? I'm telling you, this is just one big fat nothing burger.

[Koko78]

#chocolatestripeinneopolitanmatters

 

No, it doesn't.

[Deranged Rhino]

Right, it is what the intelligence services said. Fine, you do not believe it. I tend to trust them.

 

Why? They have no track record worthy of trust. Both Clapper and Brennan have lied to congress several times, they both were directly culpable in the WMD fiasco that lead to hundreds of thousands of death and tremendous national debt, and they have shown time and time again that they believe the laws of the land do not apply to them nor their agencies.

 

You only trust them now because you're a partisan and they're feeding you a narrative that makes the administration look bad - facts be damned.

 

That's why I keep telling you that if you don't stand for anything, you'll fall for everything.

 

The other evidence lends it credibility, Monafort, the lies, the use of Russian talking points, Flynn's business deals and resignation etc.

 

Also, before the intelligence services came to their conclusions, a private reached that same conclusion.

 

What other evidence? None of what you wrote here is relevant to the DNI/ICA or to whether or not the USIC knowingly pushed falsified evidence to make their case. None of this applies.

 

But you knew that. You just have the backbone of a snail.

 

As for your second paragraph: The USIC's own documents admit they are speculating. NSA puts it at less than 50% that the Russians hacked the DNC servers - less than 50% and this is the agency that would have the evidence if any evidence actually existed. The DNI/ICA was rubbish, based on a limited investigation which violated USIC protocols and relied upon what's now been proven forensically to have been tampered evidence.

 

The "Private" investigation you're referring to is paid opposition research that has yet to have a single claim proven. Not a single one. That's not evidence of anything.

 

 

And why would the intelligence services hide the fact--which they did--that Russians attempted to hack voting machine companies and prospecute the person that leaked that intelligence?

 

I've covered the motivation numerous times in numerous threads.

[DC Tom]

I've covered the motivation numerous times in numerous threads.

 

Like he reads.

[Azalin]

 

I've covered the motivation numerous times in numerous threads.

 

It's almost enough to make a person wonder why you even bother.