Russians accused of interfering in election to get Trump elected

[Omni]

22 hours ago, GostHacked said:

Can you show me where Putin admitted to the hacks??

To clarify, he claimed Russian "patriots" may have been behind the hacks but claims they were not state backed. 

[Michael Hardner]

44 minutes ago, sharkman said:

I read your link.  In it, no actual proof of Russian government involvement is given.  The article mentions 3 unnamed people that contend that the meeting was part of a Russian government effort to aid Trump's campaign.  They all claim to have knowledge of the email, again no proof is given that they do.  Their names don't appear.  No proof is given that the Russian lawyer is connected to the Kremlin.  It reads like the National Enquirer, and this conspiracy theory is what blue chip news organizations are running with today.  What a joke.

 

Yes, you are right.  As I mentioned above there is no proof, but as Don Jr.'s own emails show they were told that they were being helped with dirt on Hillary by the Russian government.  The only out at this point is that the people involved may not have been with the Russian government.  Not much of an out, though.

It's kind of a big deal, given that Don's emails show that his brother in law and the campaign manager went and seem to know what it was for.

 

Quote

1) Tell me how this is any worse than the Clinton campaign trying to gather dirt on Trump or Sanders.  
2) How is it any worse than Obama famously telling the Russian president in 2012 that he would be freer to negotiate with Russia after his election? 

1) I don't know about that, but certainly the Clinton campaign putting down Sanders was a big deal though not illegal.

2) I don't know what's bad about that one.  I'm open to talking about other things, but the news of the day is... you know... the Trump family's clown-like dirty tricks brigade.   

 

 

[Wilber]

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

See, the left doesn't actually need proof.  They just repeat it enough times in their echo chamber until, as Dan Rather famously said, it has the ring of truth!.  Of course, Rather lost his job after that fiasco, but the point is, the facts don't matter.

Squirm, squirm.

[Wilber]

1 hour ago, sharkman said:

I read your link.  In it, no actual proof of Russian government involvement is given.  The article mentions 3 unnamed people that contend that the meeting was part of a Russian government effort to aid Trump's campaign.  They all claim to have knowledge of the email, again no proof is given that they do.  Their names don't appear.  No proof is given that the Russian lawyer is connected to the Kremlin.  It reads like the National Enquirer, and this conspiracy theory is what blue chip news organizations are running with today.  What a joke.

 

Tell me how this is any worse than the Clinton campaign trying to gather dirt on Trump or Sanders.  How is it any worse than Obama famously telling the Russian president in 2012 that he would be freer to negotiate with Russia after his election? 

 

 

What about this bit.

 

 

Quote

 

Emin just called and asked me to contact you with something very interesting.

The Crown prosecutor of Russia met with his father Aras this morning and in their meeting offered to provide the Trump campaign with some official documents and information that would incriminate Hillary and her dealings with Russia and would be very useful to your father.

This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government's support for Mr. Trump - helped along by Aras and Emin.

 

This isn't an unnamed source, it is from the email that Goldstone sent to Junior which Junior himself released. Whether the source was actually the Russian government or not, he was clearly informed that it was and didn't care.

[Topaz]

THERE is NO proof that anyone hacked the DNC and if there was, why haven't they come out with it and the point these agencies  says there is is bull, until they proof it. Today, grapevine told me, that Putin is really peeved off with all of this, especially with the Dems and he's supposedly going to kick out ALL Americans and  freeze some finances. IF Russia did  anything it was to help Clinton because she was going to sell more uranium to the Russians and her campaign manager had business dealings with the Russian, but u don't hear about that because the Dems and Clintons and Sorsos are keeping  things going in one directions BUT Meuller is looking into the Clintons and their Foundation which has gotten money from foreign countries and they used that money in the elections and other illegal things.

[Topaz]

Obama KNEW about the Russians, he also knew of the Russian Ambassador and this lawyer being a spy so why did he not kick them out....could be he used them to setup Trump....no that was probably the Clintons..or Sorsos probably ALL them and maybe Russia since they wanted more unranuim.

[GostHacked]

1 hour ago, Omni said:

To clarify, he claimed Russian "patriots" may have been behind the hacks but claims they were not state backed. 

MAY have been behind .. May does not equal a YES.  And come on, don't tell me entities like the CIA are not screwing with other nations elections then.

[Omni]

9 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

And come on, don't tell me entities like the CIA are not screwing with other nations elections then.

They may be, but that doesn't stop the US from protecting it's own interests.

The point is you have to have evidence, and the US does, and the emails coming to light now enforce it.

Edited July 11, 2017 by Omni

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Topaz said:

1) THERE is NO proof that anyone hacked the DNC and if there was, why haven't they come out with it and the point these agencies  says there is is bull, until they proof it.  

2) Today, grapevine told me, that Putin is really peeved off with all of this, especially with the Dems and he's supposedly going to kick out ALL Americans and  freeze some finances.  

1) You are right.  It is also difficult to prove who is behind hacking and they may never be able to do that.  What is certain though - from Don Jr.'s own emails that HE released - was that he willingly accepted a meeting to get dirt on Clinton, which is a violation of federal election law and also reveals the denials and calls of 'fake news' to be lies.

2) Your grapevine is highly suspect.  Putin is going to freeze ie. steal American funds ?  That would not go well for him either.

We can stop talking about Clinton now.  She lost and is a marginal figure in American politics from this point on.  We're not talking about Bob Dole or Mitt Romney either.

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Topaz said:

Obama KNEW about the Russians, he also knew of the Russian Ambassador and this lawyer being a spy so why did he not kick them out....could be he used them to setup Trump....no that was probably the Clintons..or Sorsos probably ALL them and maybe Russia since they wanted more unranuim.

Spying is a constant.  If Obama had implicated the Russian link to Trump during the election without proof it would have been highly dangerous for American democracy.  Plus, I am sure he never thought Trump would win.  He was wrong.

Soros is the right-wing bogeyman behind everything kind of like Koch brothers are for the left.  

[Wilber]

15 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Spying is a constant.  If Obama had implicated the Russian link to Trump during the election without proof it would have been highly dangerous for American democracy.  Plus, I am sure he never thought Trump would win.  He was wrong.

Soros is the right-wing bogeyman behind everything kind of like Koch brothers are for the left.  

Implicating without proof is Trump's shtick. At least half of the Russian delegation are spies of some sort and the same probably goes for the US embassy in Moscow. At least Obama wasn't dumb enough to meet with them privately and hand them intelligence provided by a trusting ally.

This thread got very quiet all of a sudden.

[sharkman]

No, Obama was just dumb enough to give Iran nukes. 

[Wilber]

2 minutes ago, sharkman said:

No, Obama was just dumb enough to give Iran nukes. 

Really, when did Iran get nukes?

 

 

[Argus]

21 hours ago, sharkman said:

Could you start by naming these 17 organizations?  And how each of them independently came to this conclusion that the official Russian government was involved? 

What difference does it make? Clearly you'll always believe whatever Russia says.

[sharkman]

22 minutes ago, Argus said:

What difference does it make? Clearly you'll always believe whatever Russia says.

Uh, Russia is a country.  It's a thing that doesn't actually speak at all.  I don't support Putin.  I think he's eventually going to ally with Iran against Israel and start a war.  Did he try to get a win for warmonger Trump, when Hilary the peacenik would let Russia do anything?  Get real.  I do believe he could be leaking all kinds of fake news to the US media now though, to damage the administration and distract the media.  

Seriously though, there's obviously no point in talking to any Trump basher on this forum.  Facts don't matter.  Critical thinking doesn't apply.  It's kind of sad.

[sharkman]

1 hour ago, Wilber said:

Really, when did Iran get nukes?

 

 

Do some reading, they'll have them shortly.  They'd have them already but for Israel's efforts.  

Edited July 12, 2017 by sharkman

[Wilber]

6 minutes ago, sharkman said:

Do some reading, they'll have them shortly.  They'd have them already but for Israel's efforts.  

Good idea if you did do some reading. The agreement was not Obama's alone, it is an international agreement reached by all the permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany and the EU. In April, the Trump administration certified that Iran was continuing to comply with the nuclear agreement.

[Hal 9000]

It's more "much adoo about nothing".  You get a message, you check it out - every one of us would do the same.  You can't tell me that someone on the left wouldn't check it out and the press would be clawing all over each other if they thought Russia would give them dirt on Trump.  They went, realized it was a rouse and didn't bother with it again - nothing to see here.  If they did get info and depending on what it was didn't report it, then we might have something.

I'm embarrassed for the seemingly intelligent adults screaming "treason".

[Wilber]

Good try at deflection though. Want to get back to Trump and the Russians? Probably not.

[Wilber]

22 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

It's more "much adoo about nothing".  You get a message, you check it out - every one of us would do the same.  You can't tell me that someone on the left wouldn't check it out and the press would be clawing all over each other if they thought Russia would give them dirt on Trump.  They went, realized it was a rouse and didn't bother with it again - nothing to see here.  If they did get info and depending on what it was didn't report it, then we might have something.

I'm embarrassed for the seemingly intelligent adults screaming "treason".

Really

 

 

Quote

 

The FBI has launched a full criminal investigation as it seeks to find out how GOP presidential candidate George W. Bush’s secret debate prep material ended up in the hands of an adviser to his Democratic rival, Al Gore.

The FBI inquiry has already zeroed in on one suspect, Yvette Lozano, an employee of a media consulting firm that does work for the Bush campaign, to a package containing Bush campaign documents and a videotape of Bush practicing for the upcoming presidential debates.

“We are pleased the FBI is digging, and digging deep,” Bush campaign spokesman Ari Fleischer told reporters this afternoon. “We want them to get to the bottom of it.”

The package containing the sensitive material arrived Sept. 13 in the Washington offices of Tom Downey, an adviser to Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore. Downey turned the material over to the FBI.

 

Ah, the old, "I tried to rob that bank but there was nothing in the safe, so I really didn't do anything", defence.

 

Of course we just have to take Junior and the lady lawyer's word as to what was really discussed. Don't we.

Edited July 12, 2017 by Wilber

[Hal 9000]

4 minutes ago, Wilber said:

Really

 

 

Ah, the old, "I tried to rob that bank but there was nothing in the safe, so I really didn't do anything", defence.

I Keep hearing this Al Gore thing.  The obvious difference is that in that case, there was actual information.  

Junior is guilty of being naive - nothing more.  He never tried to collude, he was never treasonous.  Yeah, he should've sent a flunky to feel her out - would that make things easier to swallow?  Let's get real here, every single person would've checked out the source.  If you think Hillary or Maddow would get that email and immediatley forward it to the FBI, then maybe you are naive too.  

A year ago, they were probably getting numerous claims about dirt on Hillary, this one is no different except they tried name dropping "Russia" as a way to get through the door.  

BTW - A year ago, not one lefty on here had a Russia problem.  Russia became "the problem" on Nov.9TH.

[Wilber]

9 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

I Keep hearing this Al Gore thing.  The obvious difference is that in that case, there was actual information.  

Junior is guilty of being naive - nothing more.  He never tried to collude, he was never treasonous.  Yeah, he should've sent a flunky to feel her out - would that make things easier to swallow?  Let's get real here, every single person would've checked out the source.  If you think Hillary or Maddow would get that email and immediatley forward it to the FBI, then maybe you are naive too.  

A year ago, they were probably getting numerous claims about dirt on Hillary, this one is no different except they tried name dropping "Russia" as a way to get through the door.  

BTW - A year ago, not one lefty on here had a Russia problem.  Russia became "the problem" on Nov.9TH.

I don't know if it was treason but he never tried to collude? What the hell does it take with you people? Nothing I guess.

You have a very selective memory. Russia and Wikileaks was a very big deal during the campaign.

Edited July 12, 2017 by Wilber

[Hal 9000]

9 minutes ago, Wilber said:

I don't know if it was treason but he never tried to collude? What the hell does it take with you people? Nothing I guess.

You have a very selective memory. Russia and Wikileaks was a very big deal during the campaign.

Well, I guess it would require...collusion!  He didn't attempt to collude, he attempted to hear info.  If he got info and then said "I love it, lets do it", then we probably have something - even if that info went nowhere.

[Wilber]

16 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Well, I guess it would require...collusion!  He didn't attempt to collude, he attempted to hear info.  If he got info and then said "I love it, lets do it", then we probably have something - even if that info went nowhere.

Forget it man, you will justify any behaviour from this bunch.

Quote

 

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

 

 

 

Hence "FAKE NEWS"

Edited July 12, 2017 by Wilber

[Omni]

13 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Well, I guess it would require...collusion!  He didn't attempt to collude, he attempted to hear info.  If he got info and then said "I love it, lets do it", then we probably have something - even if that info went nowhere.

We have a lot of something with Jr's emails. He is showing desperation to hide something that he only a few weeks ago said didn't happen. There is a lot of "red meat" in those emails