Russia Was Not a Democratic Hoax

[B-Man]

 

 

Thread title is false.

 

 

 

 

[Doc]

But George Santos...

[BillsFanNC]

Everything is projection with the commie left.

 

The Big Lie indeed.

[BillsFanNC]

 

[BillsFanNC]

 

[BillStime]

12 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

 

‘I don’t see any reason why’ Russia would have interfered with election…

 

[Westside]

👆🤡

[aristocrat]

2 hours ago, BillStime said:

‘I don’t see any reason why’ Russia would have interfered with election…

 

 

[BillStime]

11 minutes ago, aristocrat said:

 

[B-Man]

 

 

Russia Was Not a Democratic Hoax

 

We still need a title change,

 

because it is a proven hoax now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[B-Man]

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

27 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

Devastating to the national psyche, pitted citizens against one and other and really reflected the first “Stop the Steal” of the modern era.  

[BillStime]

 

 

 

 

 

[BillStime]

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

9 hours ago, BillStime said:

 

This is an interesting spin.  
 

Clinton violated the law with respect to safeguarding top secret/confidential material, to the extent that her biggest supporters described her as extremely reckless.  The DOJ allows her to scour tens of thousands of emails, make a subjective determination oh what should/should not be there and delete whatever she wanted to delete.  The Director of the FBI, with the benefit of hindsight clearly and unabashedly working to scuttle the Trump agenda and targeting individuals in the admin, acknowledges the illegal and reckless behavior but declares no prosecutor would pursue the case. 
 

The election comes and Clinton wins prom Queen pop vote, but gets steamrolled where it matters.  She and her supporters cry foul, suggest Trump stole the election, and the Mueller probe commences. 
 

Mueller launches an all-out scorched earth search for Russian collusion.  Doors are kicked in.  Non-related crimes are pursued.  Selective leaking occurs to tilt public opinion.  The media engages in circular reporting.  The probe ends with a dull thud, lots of hurt feelings and complaints he didn’t bow down and submit .
 

Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign was promoting stories that spread misinformation, conspiring with a disgraced foreign national to mislead the voter, and that’s treated as business as usual in American politics. 

 

The people listened, considered and voted.  
 

Turns out the Mueller team completely missed this gem of a human selling out, and FBI leadership under Comey and Wray missed the snake in the grass in their house, and this supposedly reflects the gold standard for leadership in Washington. 
 

That’s a whopper of a tale for sure.

[BillStime]

8 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

This is an interesting spin.  
 

Clinton violated the law with respect to safeguarding top secret/confidential material, to the extent that her biggest supporters described her as extremely reckless.  The DOJ allows her to scour tens of thousands of emails, make a subjective determination oh what should/should not be there and delete whatever she wanted to delete.  The Director of the FBI, with the benefit of hindsight clearly and unabashedly working to scuttle the Trump agenda and targeting individuals in the admin, acknowledges the illegal and reckless behavior but declares no prosecutor would pursue the case. 
 

The election comes and Clinton wins prom Queen pop vote, but gets steamrolled where it matters.  She and her supporters cry foul, suggest Trump stole the election, and the Mueller probe commences. 
 

Mueller launches an all-out scorched earth search for Russian collusion.  Doors are kicked in.  Non-related crimes are pursued.  Selective leaking occurs to tilt public opinion.  The media engages in circular reporting.  The probe ends with a dull thud, lots of hurt feelings and complaints he didn’t bow down and submit .
 

Meanwhile, the Clinton campaign was promoting stories that spread misinformation, conspiring with a disgraced foreign national to mislead the voter, and that’s treated as business as usual in American politics. 

 

The people listened, considered and voted.  
 

Turns out the Mueller team completely missed this gem of a human selling out, and FBI leadership under Comey and Wray missed the snake in the grass in their house, and this supposedly reflects the gold standard for leadership in Washington. 
 

That’s a whopper of a tale for sure.

Funny, you didn’t mind this

 

Colin Powell Told Hillary Clinton How He Bypassed State Dept. Servers, Newly Released Emails Reveal

 

 

SeLeCtIvE OuTrAGE

 

fn idiots 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

37 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Funny, you didn’t mind this

 

Colin Powell Told Hillary Clinton How He Bypassed State Dept. Servers, Newly Released Emails Reveal

 

 

SeLeCtIvE OuTrAGE

 

fn idiots 

I’m about to have a bagel and nice hot cup of coffee.  
 

What we learn from this story is that people are corruptible, that money can make people do things they never would consider doing in the absence of the money, and that power corrupts.   I learned that in elementary school. 

 

I couldn’t be less fake selectively outraged if I fake tried.   
 

You sent the tweet over, presumably for consideration and to add value to the dialogue.  Maybe you agree with it, maybe you don’t. 
 

I just pointed out that the premise makes very little sense given what is widely known.    
 

What are your thoughts on the author’s thoughts? 
 

 

[BillStime]

15 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

I’m about to have a bagel and nice hot cup of coffee.  
 

What we learn from this story is that people are corruptible, that money can make people do things they never would consider doing in the absence of the money, and that power corrupts.   I learned that in elementary school. 

 

I couldn’t be less fake selectively outraged if I fake tried.   
 

You sent the tweet over, presumably for consideration and to add value to the dialogue.  Maybe you agree with it, maybe you don’t. 
 

I just pointed out that the premise makes very little sense given what is widely known.    
 

What are your thoughts on the author’s thoughts? 
 

 

Powell had his way of doing things and Hillary had hers; both avoiding “State Department servers.”

 

I thought for sure Hillary would be locked up by now, right?

[Tiberius]

 

And that investigation into Hillary right before the election? Ya, I'm sure Russian money had nothing to do with that. 

[BillStime]

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

 

And that investigation into Hillary right before the election? Ya, I'm sure Russian money had nothing to do with that. 

And Chuck hired Rudy’s former law firm to represent him lol

 

Follow the money 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

48 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Powell had his way of doing things and Hillary had hers; both avoiding “State Department servers.”

 

I thought for sure Hillary would be locked up by now, right?

You’re losing track of your commentary, Powell wasn’t mentioned in the article you shared.  
 

What are your thoughts about the opinion piece you shared originally?  
 

 

[BillStime]

10 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

You’re losing track of your commentary, Powell wasn’t mentioned in the article you shared.  
 

What are your thoughts about the opinion piece you shared originally?  
 

 

 

You were not clear on what you want feedback on...

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, Tiberius said:

 

And that investigation into Hillary right before the election? Ya, I'm sure Russian money had nothing to do with that. 

So, you’re a supporter of the BillSy published Huff Po theory as outline in the link?  
 

Trump co-opted Comey, etc etc?  

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

So, you’re a supporter of the BillSy published Huff Po theory as outline in the link?  
 

Trump co-opted Comey, etc etc?  

@B-Man  I’m looking for some quick feedback from a reliable source.  Upthread, BillSy posted a link to a story that suggests that the FBI was co-opted by the Trump team, that the recently arrested FBI agent was somehow in cahoots with the Russians and Trump to overthrow or “steal” if you will, the 2016 election.  
 

I think the story is rubbish for reasons outlined above.  I asked BillSy to share his thoughts on the article, pro, con, whatever.  I only asked him because he posted it, and figured it was something worth discussing. 
 

He replied with something about Hillary Clinton going to jail, and about someone named Powell, who I assume is Colin Powell.  
 

When I inquired a second time, he indicated my question about the post he shared lacked clarity. 
 

As an objective poster with no skin in the game, can you share your thoughts with me on the following:

 

1. Do you feel my initial query was confusing, at least to the levels it would trip up a person of average intellect?  
 

2.  Do you feel that I inadvertently requested  Billsy to offer an opinion on Hillary Clinton going to jail, or on Colin Powell in general?  Worse yet, did I somehow trick BillSy into offering an opinion on Mssrs. Powell and Clinton?  
 

Thank you.  I was going to ask @Irv but he’s ever a mod I don’t want any appearance of impropriety. 

[Tiberius]

2 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

So, you’re a supporter of the BillSy published Huff Po theory as outline in the link?  
 

Trump co-opted Comey, etc etc?  

I never said that, or denied it. 

 

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

19 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

I never said that, or denied it. 

 

 

Thank you for clarifying.  
 

Do you have an opinion on the article BillSy linked, suggesting the Trump team cuckholded Comey and the FBI and in doing so,  illegitimately seized the election in “plain sight”? 

[B-Man]

26 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

@B-Man  I’m looking for some quick feedback from a reliable source.  Upthread, BillSy posted a link to a story that suggests that the FBI was co-opted by the Trump team, that the recently arrested FBI agent was somehow in cahoots with the Russians and Trump to overthrow or “steal” if you will, the 2016 election.  
When I inquired a second time, he indicated my question about the post he shared lacked clarity. 
 

As an objective poster with no skin in the game, can you share your thoughts with me on the following:

 

1. Do you feel my initial query was confusing, at least to the levels it would trip up a person of average intellect?  
 

2.  Do you feel that I inadvertently requested  Billsy to offer an opinion on Hillary Clinton going to jail, or on Colin Powell in general?  Worse yet, did I somehow trick BillSy into offering an opinion on Mssrs. Powell and Clinton?  
 

Thank you.  I was going to ask @Irv but he’s ever a mod I don’t want any appearance of impropriety. 

 

Well @leh-nerd skin-erd, I was tempted to answer with some quip about B.S., but there's no need. 

 

The vast majority of the board, including those on the Left know the answer to your inquiry.  Your request for explanation of @BillStime random post was as clear as could be.

 

Unfortunately, It is his S.O.P. to avoid the question and reply with a tenuously connected response to the original posts.

 

He continues this until the poster gets frustrated and quits, or when he himself decides to just spout some childish insult.

 

 

No, your response certainly didn't include room for BillSy's "whatabout"  reply bringing up Hillary and Powell, but as I mentioned above, he always reacts poorly to direct questioning about his take and poor sources.

 

If you (or anyone is going to engage him, you really should expect what you get.

 

 

 

 

ADDED:  I half to laugh how @Tiberius has upped the ante, by quoting Harry Reid in 2016 as some type of evidence.

 

One would think that he would know how hilarious that is, but  sadly no.

 

 

 

 

ADDED Again:  I think that I might comment, for the rest of the board (not you) who often have , hilariously, compared Billstime and myself.

 

They seem to think that having the same Volume  = Quality.  

 

Thats okay, they couldn't be farther off, but occasionally someone does read an article that they wouldn't have seen otherwise, and that always makes me 'feel' better

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 24, 2023 by B-Man

[Tiberius]

2 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Thank you for clarifying.  
 

Do you have an opinion on the article BillSy linked, suggesting the Trump team cuckholded Comey and the FBI and in doing so,  illegitimately seized the election in “plain sight”? 

Not sure. I do know that the same guy who Manaford (Trump's campaign manager) asked if he was "Whole with" was also the guy the FBI big wig is now caught up with. Not sure if that was all in plain sight or not, but ya, it's beyond very suspicious 

 

And I know, you don't believe Trump did anything to steal an election. And never can. 

Oh ya, forgot how closely allied Manafort was with Putin in all this

 

June 2005. According to the Associated Press, Manafort develops a strategic plan aimed at promoting the interests of the Russian government and President Vladimir Putin.

“We are now of the belief that this model can greatly benefit the Putin Government if employed at the correct levels with the appropriate commitment to success,” Manafort wrote in the document.

2006. Manafort signs a $10 million-a-year agreement with the Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska apparently based on that plan. The work is not conducted through Davis Manafort but through a separate corporation called LOAV Ltd. Deripaska is identified in a 2006 diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks as being “among the 2-3 oligarchs Putin turns to on a regular basis.”

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/03/22/timeline-paul-manaforts-long-murky-history-of-political-interventions/

 

Same Deripaska that had the FBI guy under his thumb. Nothing to see there! 

[BillStime]

7 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

Well @leh-nerd skin-erd, I was tempted to answer with some quip about B.S., but there's no need. 

 

The vast majority of the board, including those on the Left know the answer to your inquiry.  Your request for explanation of @BillStime random post was as clear as could be.

 

Unfortunately, It is his S.O.P. to avoid the question and reply with a tenuously connected response to the original posts.

 

He continues this until the poster gets frustrated and quits, or when he himself decides to just spout some childish insult.

 

 

No, your response certainly didn't include room for BillSy's "whatabout"  reply bringing up Hillary and Powell, but as I mentioned above, he always reacts poorly to direct questioning about his take and poor sources.

 

If you (or anyone is going to engage him, you really should expect what you get.

 

 

 

 

ADDED:  I half to laugh how @Tiberius has upped the ante, by quoting Harry Reid in 2016 as some type of evidence.

 

One would think that he would know how hilarious that is, but  sadly no.

 

 

 

 

ADDED Again:  I think that I might comment, for the rest of the board (not you) who often have , hilariously, compared Billstime and myself.

 

They seem to think that having the same Volume  = Quality.  

 

Thats okay, they couldn't be farther off, but occasionally someone does read an article that they wouldn't have seen otherwise, and that always makes me 'feel' better

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are a joke. You don't answer questions here ever.

[AlBUNDY4TDS]

17 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

 

You are a joke. You don't answer questions here ever.

This is rich, i needed a good laugh today!

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

37 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

Well @leh-nerd skin-erd, I was tempted to answer with some quip about B.S., but there's no need. 

 

The vast majority of the board, including those on the Left know the answer to your inquiry.  Your request for explanation of @BillStime random post was as clear as could be.

 

Unfortunately, It is his S.O.P. to avoid the question and reply with a tenuously connected response to the original posts.

 

He continues this until the poster gets frustrated and quits, or when he himself decides to just spout some childish insult.

 

 

No, your response certainly didn't include room for BillSy's "whatabout"  reply bringing up Hillary and Powell, but as I mentioned above, he always reacts poorly to direct questioning about his take and poor sources.

 

If you (or anyone is going to engage him, you really should expect what you get.

 

 

 

 

ADDED:  I half to laugh how @Tiberius has upped the ante, by quoting Harry Reid in 2016 as some type of evidence.

 

One would think that he would know how hilarious that is, but  sadly no.

 

 

 

 

ADDED Again:  I think that I might comment, for the rest of the board (not you) who often have , hilariously, compared Billstime and myself.

 

They seem to think that having the same Volume  = Quality.  

 

Thats okay, they couldn't be farther off, but occasionally someone does read an article that they wouldn't have seen otherwise, and that always makes me 'feel' better

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

Thank you, your objectivity and thoughtful reply was exactly what we needed to hear at this time.  
 

For the record, those who compare you to BillSy are silly.  

 

In this case, I quite literally asked @BillStime for his thoughts.  I see three reasonable answers:

 

1. I offer no opinion, submitted for discussion only;

 

2. I believe the author is onto something here;

 

3.  I thought it was kind of funny in a crazy conspiracy way;

 

 

You are correct in the assessment that I had a pretty good inkling that BillSy would chucklef&ck around, send a meme, send a Trump photo etc.  In that regard, it’s on me for trying. 

 

I also know that means that the scope of the inquiry or subject is beyond his ability to converse on, or he knew he pitched garbage on the board and was called out on it.   Both are sad. 
 

Thank you again for offering a little sanity here today.  
 

 

[BillStime]

2 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Thank you, your objectivity and thoughtful reply was exactly what we needed to hear at this time.  
 

For the record, those who compare you to BillSy are silly.  

 

In this case, I quite literally asked @BillStime for his thoughts.  I see three reasonable answers:

 

1. I offer no opinion, submitted for discussion only;

 

2. I believe the author is onto something here;

 

3.  I thought it was kind of funny in a crazy conspiracy way;

 

 

You are correct in the assessment that I had a pretty good inkling that BillSy would chucklef&ck around, send a meme, send a Trump photo etc.  In that regard, it’s on me for trying. 

 

I also know that means that the scope of the inquiry or subject is beyond his ability to converse on, or he knew he pitched garbage on the board and was called out on it.   Both are sad. 
 

Thank you again for offering a little sanity here today.  
 

 

 

Dude, you were NOT specific about which article even after I addressed you with my feedback.

 

Keep up the good work man...

 

#winning

 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

46 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Not sure. I do know that the same guy who Manaford (Trump's campaign manager) asked if he was "Whole with" was also the guy the FBI big wig is now caught up with. Not sure if that was all in plain sight or not, but ya, it's beyond very suspicious 

 

And I know, you don't believe Trump did anything to steal an election. And never can. 

Oh ya, forgot how closely allied Manafort was with Putin in all this

 

June 2005. According to the Associated Press, Manafort develops a strategic plan aimed at promoting the interests of the Russian government and President Vladimir Putin.

“We are now of the belief that this model can greatly benefit the Putin Government if employed at the correct levels with the appropriate commitment to success,” Manafort wrote in the document.

2006. Manafort signs a $10 million-a-year agreement with the Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska apparently based on that plan. The work is not conducted through Davis Manafort but through a separate corporation called LOAV Ltd. Deripaska is identified in a 2006 diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks as being “among the 2-3 oligarchs Putin turns to on a regular basis.”

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/03/22/timeline-paul-manaforts-long-murky-history-of-political-interventions/

 

Same Deripaska that had the FBI guy under his thumb. Nothing to see there! 

My perspective hasn’t changed because the facts are clear. 

 

The Dems alleged the election was rigged in 2015.  They did that many, many times up to and including statements that evidence existed to support that claim.  
 

Trump and certain Rs alleged the election was stolen in 2019.  He did that many, many times up to and including statements the evidence existed to support that claim.  
 

I wish you didn’t have blinders on as you worship your false idol, but that’s not my problem.  

[BillStime]

 

 

[Orlando Tim]

7 hours ago, BillStime said:

Funny, you didn’t mind this

 

Colin Powell Told Hillary Clinton How He Bypassed State Dept. Servers, Newly Released Emails Reveal

 

 

SeLeCtIvE OuTrAGE

 

fn idiots 

I am shocked that Powell was so stupid that he admitted in an email that he was keeping classified documents on a computer that was not cleared by the Stat Department. I am also surprised that Dems did not bring ng this up in 2016 with more force. 

[BillStime]

3 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

I am shocked that Powell was so stupid that he admitted in an email that he was keeping classified documents on a computer that was not cleared by the Stat Department. I am also surprised that Dems did not bring ng this up in 2016 with more force. 

They did - but facts don’t matter to the cult.

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

55 minutes ago, BillStime said:

 

Dude, you were NOT specific about which article even after I addressed you with my feedback.

 

Keep up the good work man...

 

#winning

 

I considered that, Dude, that’s why I sought out an unvarnished opinion.  I was disappointed you used that as an opportunity to lash out at B, comments I found quite scandalous.  
 

In retrospect I feel horrible for exposing him to that vitriol. He was just trying to provide a public service.  It’s like watching the guy ringing the Salvation Army bell getting swung at by a chubby guy in pajamas outside the Walmarts.  

[Orlando Tim]

5 minutes ago, BillStime said:

They did - but facts don’t matter to the cult.

I just looked more into it and realized two major differences: the State department was aware he did it and according to the same email thread he warned her "Be very careful. I got around it all by not saying much" which means he did not admit to any classified Intel being discussed 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

14 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

I am shocked that Powell was so stupid that he admitted in an email that he was keeping classified documents on a computer that was not cleared by the Stat Department. I am also surprised that Dems did not bring ng this up in 2016 with more force. 

I don’t think it’s surprising at all, really. I think it’s business as usual in Washington, with high profile characters from all parties doing the same thing.   They have the rules established, the rules are onerous at times so they work around them.  
 

In fact, I’d bet if you looked, most major players from both parties would be caught up in this sort of thing.  
 

Trump used it politically, and it was an effective strategy.  Certainly no major political player was going to declare that it’s pretty common.  Certainly, Joe Biden could have stated emphatically that he had lots of material from his days in the senate and that as VP, he removed and stored Top Secret documents in quite a few places, including in an old file box on the floor of his garage.  That would have gone a long way to normalizing the action, everybody does it etc etc.  

 

Now, we’ve got this scandal where folks have to come up with explanations like as @ChiGoose says, there can be “slippage”, and sometimes that slippage results in documents slippaging off to 5 or 6 different places over 10 -15 years.  

[BillStime]

15 minutes ago, Orlando Tim said:

I just looked more into it and realized two major differences: the State department was aware he did it and according to the same email thread he warned her "Be very careful. I got around it all by not saying much" which means he did not admit to any classified Intel being discussed 

 

Both avoided State Department servers.