- Joined
- Feb 25, 2019
- Messages
- 51,640
- Reaction score
- 24,770
- Location
- Devonshire, England
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Fake evidence to get warrants is a piece of cake - and what they did was successful - not as much as they wanted but absolutely so. How? In addition to succeeding in their goal of trashing the reputation of the USA on behalf of Russia, China, N. Korea and Iran, trashing Trump's reputation, they correctly relied that millions of extremely stupid or gullible people would believe it - and once committed to that belief would continue to believe it even if proven 100% false by DEMOCRAT investigators - as it was. Basically, that is the majority of Democrats. They will believe ANY lie told by their partisan masters - no exceptions - like Jim Jone;s Kool Aid drinkers.
The hate-Trump attack investigators on Mueller's team failed to find anything to charge Trump with in spite of wasting years of time and tens of millions of dollars in the witch hunt. No, they did not find an innocent man innocent in spite of their efforts to find him guilty.
The investigation did not find Trump innocent. Mueller specifically pointed that ou as far as obstruction.
The Russian hacking lie was invented by democrats desperate to minimize the damage done to them by the exposure of their dirty dealings by the release of the emails Seth Rich gave to Assange.But you have claimed that Russia never hacked the DNC and never tried to help the Trump campaign. If “they” made up those stories, why not make up enough to have enough to charge him with?
And since a sitting President cannot be indicted, no matter how guilty, lack of charges doesn’t mean innocence.
The fact is that there were enough red flags to justify an investigation as whether anyone in the Trump campaign actively conspired with Russia. No useable evidence was found. That’s how investigations go. Personally, I didn’t think they would find enough evidence for active cooperation.
The Russian hacking lie was invented by democrats desperate to minimize the damage done to them by the exposure of their dirty dealings by the release of the emails Seth Rich gave to Assange.
It's different because you are lying.
It's different because you are lying.
It would appear that on this point at least, reality has diverged and two different ones exist.
How do you recombine two opposing realities?
Except the only source claiming Seth Rich downloaded the emails recanted that claim. And the only one claiming evidence of an inside job is an anonymous person basing his/her claim on the slowness of household internet upload speeds. Corporate acccounts, cloud based, or air gapping between computers on different networks easily account for the upload speed.
The entire IC, plus every cyber security company that’s looked into it agrees it was Russian hacking. There is zero evidence to support an inside job.
I’m sorry, but your claim is that no one at any intel agency had any information about the hacks and just took the DNC’s word without any investigation?After much debate most heads of intelligence agencies accepted the DNC claim that it was the Russians who fed Assange the dirty DNC emails.
How do you know that? You have read the classified reports?No US governmental intelligence agency has proven that the Russians hacked the DNC server and that Seth Rich did not download the material someone gave to Assange.
I have not heard this. Do you have a citation for that?Even Mueller admitted some vaguely referenced American may have delivered Assange the DNC emails by hand.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?