Reply With Quote
Gonna be fun when Darrin self permaban s himself.
Aside from his IMPEACHMENT it never seemed to bother Bill Clinton.
Gonna be fun when Darrin self permaban s himself.
lol Darrin lol TSA.
"But but Hillary's emails"
stupid s
CROFL Trump. That was a of a segment just now
^^^POTUS says they're chock full of , dj:::
How Trump’s Apparatchiks Are Erasing Russia’s Role in the Election
Evasions, brushoffs, innuendos, contortions, rationalizations, and attacks.
out come the Trump minions to protect their boss. Here’s how they’re trying to shovel the story away.
1. Don’t believe it till the CIA shows you the evidence. “Where is the evidence?” demanded Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s campaign manager, in a Sunday interview on Face the Nation. Conway, who is expected to work for Trump inside or outside the White House, dared the CIA to go public: “If Director Brennan and others at the top are serious about turning over evidence to we, the American people, they should do that.” RNC chairman Reince Priebus, Trump’s incoming chief of staff, made the same argument on Fox News Sunday: “If there is this conclusive opinion among all of these intelligence agencies, then they should issue a report, or they should stand in front of a camera and make the case.” Priebus challenged the agencies to “be straight with the American people” about “their opinion as to who, what, where, and how this all happened.”
2. It would be treacherous of the CIA to show you the evidence. While demanding public revelation of the “who, what, where, and how,” Priebus rebuked intelligence agencies for talking to the press. To have these assessments “leaked by people within the intelligence community to these newspapers or through some third-party source is not appropriate,” he warned. Conway, in the midst of her plea for transparency, paused to scold the agencies: “They’re talking to the media. That undermines our national security, our intelligence operations.”
3. Trump might have secret evidence that Russia is innocent. On Face the Nation, John erson asked Conway whether Trump had evidence that Russia wasn’t behind the hack. She offered an ambiguous reply: “Well, the president-elect receives intelligence briefings that I am not privy to.”
4. Allegations against Russia are just a ploy by Democrats to change the subject. Speaking to Fox News on Friday, er was asked about President Obama’s discussion of the Russia hack in a news conference earlier that day. er said Democrats were trying to “deflect from what they brought to themselves.”
5. Let’s change the subject to Democrats losing. er’s “deflection” shtick is just one way to deflect questions about Russia. Another way is to pivot to “the real question.” On Fox News Sunday, Chris Wallace asked Priebus, “Does the president-elect accept the consensus of the intel community?” Priebus answered:
The real question is why the Democrats and why these electors and why MoveOn.org and all of these organizations are doing everything they can to delegitimize the outcome of the election. … They lost the election because they’re so completely out of touch with the American people that they’re so s -shocked and they can’t believe it. And what is their response? Recounts, Russians, leaked CIA reports …6. Obama’s call to punish Russia is just another Democratic stunt. erson asked Conway about Obama’s “decision to retaliate against the Russians for hacking into the election.” She replied: “It does seem to be a political response at this point, because it seems like the president is under pressure from Team Hillary, who can’t accept the election results.” erson, taken aback, asked her whether she was dismissing the retaliation as political. Conway implied that it was: “President Obama could have, quote, retaliated months ago if they were actually concerned about this and concerned about this, quote, affecting the election. Whatever his motives are, what his action is, we’ll respect it as Americans.”
7. Democrats are confusing distinct questions. “They’re conflating whether Russia hacked into the emails [with] how it affected the election,” Conway told erson. er, in several interviews, offered the same complaint: that Democrats and the media were “conflating” whether Russia and other en ies regularly probed for security flaws, whether Russia had found any in this case, and whether the hacks had affected the election.
8. Here, let me confuse you. While lecturing viewers about conflation, er uses it to muddy inconvenient questions. Presented with reports that Russia hacked Democrats, he says they’re bogus because there’s no proof that the election’s outcome was changed. Presented with intelligence agencies’ conclusions about the hacks, he dismisses them by saying the agencies claimed voting machines weren’t compromised. On Friday, er was asked about the agencies’ assessment that “Russia interfered in the election.” He brushed the story off: “This wouldn’t have happened if Hillary Clinton didn’t have a secret server.”
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a..._election.html
Secure email or not, this is pretty ing chilling.
lol Darrin lol TSA.
"But but Hillary's emails"
stupid s
and the collected voter data will be make public
What a sad state of the country that this story isn't the least bit surprising.
With Repugs (even withoug Trash, but with Pence) the descent will continue.
As with the Repug destabilization of the Middle East for BigOil, the damage the Repugs are and will be doing to the bottom 80%, to environment, and tpo America will continue for many years after 2020.
For the Repug s, it's "Oligarchy Over Country", they are all ING SADISTIC, MURDEROUS TRAITORS
Sad for many reasons, not the least of which is that a story in the National Enquirer still serves as a credible threat.
Making Mueller's job easier by the day.
This can be coupled with the obstruction of justice case. The blatant abuse of power this got is using is just crazy. Trump is literally too stupid to be a criminal.
I would be floored to hear of Mike Pence blackmailing the media. Or Ted Cruz. Or Paul Ryan. Or Jason Chaffetz. Or Mitch McConnell. Or Mike Lee.
Of the 4 agencies, how many were allowed to physically access the DNC servers to run their own forensics and how many were forced to use the DNC funded Crowdstrike report instead?yeah it's only the NSA, CIA, FBI, and the Directorate of National Intelligence. What do they know?
Do you have any US intelligence agency that disputes it? Forest, tree, that whole thing.
What never gets old for me is laughing at people that act like they have accomplished something over a point of fact that makes no substantive difference to the issue at hand. Even you boy Trump admits that it happened now. He just deflects to Obama. Try and keep up.
Trash's sick, insane, childish is repugnant, but mostly short-term, distracting.
The real damage and descent for America is from the Bannon/Miller/oligarchy dept heads selected in bad faith to destroy their depts, and then add up all the ty bills a Pres Pence would sign without a single veto (Trash will sign them all, too).
and 5-4 SCOTUS with extreme nutcase flame-thrower Gorsuch will make C-U, Hobby Lobby look trivial.
I expect by 2020, SCOTUS will be 6-3 or even 7-2, and the oligarchy will push their cases quickly up to SCOTUS.
I am very interested in what he will do. You may give it short shrift, but it is a testable theory, that can make a prediction.
The prediction is that he will do nothing, or as close to nothing as he can. He consistently deals harshly, especially rhetorically, with just about every country but Russia.
I think his past shady business dealings are becoming leverage against him because people with resources and motivation to dig, such as large nation states like China and Russia, are going to come up with things that he would prefer not to be known. This would also explains both his refusal to release his taxes, and his retention of control of his business enterprises. If he cedes too much operational control of those businesses, the possibility of some of those financial records getting out goes up.
Cue TSA "no evidence" meltdown in 3...2...1
To which I simply would ask the other question he keeps melting down about:
Is evidence more, or less likely to be discovered in the time period before an investigation has concluded?
Cue TSA saying something about Clinton in 3....2....1
Yay.
I wonder what the state-run media has to say about this?
I've answered this numerous times you were just too busy spamming the same post over and over to see it.
To answer your question once again, less likely to be discovered in the time period before an investigation has concluded. But, this investigation has been going on almost a year now with the Trump team under surveillance from a FISA warrant obtained using some very shady tactics. 1 year is a long time to find dirt with how advanced our intelligence community is, and not a single leak of evidence of collusion has come out, and there have been a ton of leaks.
Your turn.
Of the 4 agencies, how many were allowed to physically access the DNC servers to run their own forensics and how many were forced to use the DNC funded Crowdstrike report instead? Have you gone back and retracted all of your posts claiming "17 intelligence agencies agreed"?
TSA say he answer questions now?
Yay. So we can both agree that we should wait until the investigation has concluded before talking about evidence. If you answered that question, I did not see it, but I have now.
None. All of them. It seems not really all that important, so no.
Easy to answer questions.
Funny thing about searching for "DNC server" news.... so many right-wing websites are harping on this, it is hard to find objective information.
That echo-chamber would explain your obsession.
To which I say "So what?"
DHS offered help after the problem had been mitigated. Is it really surprising they were turned down?
Sure we can both agree on that.
Can we also agree there have been tons of leaks coming out of this year long investigation to damage Trump? And if we agree on that can we agree that it is strange that absolutely nothing has been leaked linking Trump to Russia collusion?
How is it not important for our own intelligence agencies to have had direct access to the DNC servers to run their own forensics?
Is it not important that Crowdstrike was hired by the DNC and it's founder has close ties to the DNC and sits on the Atlantic council?
Is it not important that Crowdstrike revised their report twice due to erroes after it was already submitted to the DNC/FBI/???
Is it not important that the DNC refused the help of the FBI during the actual breach and then later denied their request to access the server after the breach?
If you want to make an argument do so but this arguing from ignorance begging the question while expected from you is still insipid nonsense.
And you do realize that the probe extends farther than the DNC hack right? There was an article I posted that talked about states voting centers and a whole slew of other attacks than just the Podesta phishing. And of course they didn't need to look at the DNC servers to know the network that the attack came from. Your dumbing down wastes all our time.
Are going to answer the question or dodge again?
There are currently 7 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 7 guests)
Posting Permissions