BREAKING: U.S. Officials Have Declassified List Of Obama Officials Who Were Involved In ‘Unmasking’ General Flynn

[iceberg]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

The declassified documents will show that the Russians were trying to help Hillary not Trump.

That is just too funny Given that all the evidence to the contrary. But conspiracy theories usually ignore that.

What evidence? Every single obummer official testified under oath that there was zero evidence.

Zero evidence that the Russians were trying to interfere in the elections and they supported Trump?

There is zero evidence they were trying to help Trump. Shrilary was already bought so the evidence we do have is that pootin was trying to help her. It is not much, but it is there.

We have ZERO evidence he was trying to help Trump. That Russia has been interfering is without doubt. They have, and have been for a long time.

Hacking and releasing the DNC email server wasn’t trying to help Trump?

recent declassified documents indicate crowdstrike never said they found evidence russia did a thing.

Declassified transcripts: CrowdStrike couldn't say for sure Russians stole DNC emails

CrowdStrike's Shawn Henry was interviewed by House Intelligence Committee members in December 2017

justthenews.com

CrowdStrike Had No Evidence of Russians Stealing Emails From DNC, Declassified Transcript Shows

www.theepochtimes.com

not a whole lot of mainstream reporting on it but if crowdstrike never found evidence of russian hacking, wouldn't that put a pretty big hole in the theory?

Crowdstrike couldn't say for sure - that is not the same as saying "no evidence" of Russian Hacking.

In addition, here is what Crowdstrike has to say: Our Work with the DNC: Setting the record straight

June 15, 2016 UPDATE:
CrowdStrike stands fully by its analysis and findings identifying two separate Russian intelligence-affiliated adversaries present in the DNC network in May 2016. On June 15, 2016 a blog post to a WordPress site authored by an individual using the moniker Guccifer 2.0 claimed credit for breaching the Democratic National Committee. This blog post presents documents alleged to have originated from the DNC.

Whether or not this posting is part of a Russian Intelligence disinformation campaign, we are exploring the documents’ authenticity and origin. Regardless, these claims do nothing to lessen our findings relating to the Russian government’s involvement, portions of which we have documented for the public and the greater security community.

fine.

but if *I* can't be sure, you can't be either; correct?

and what you post is fine - but that isn't "hacked" and they also say they are exploring authenticity and origin.

now - if they are still exploring then by definition it can't be a given russia hacked the DNC. maybe they did. i don't know.

but in the absence of positive proof, i am also not going to claim they did it and get upset when someone challenges that statement.

It's at this point we choose who to trust and what experts to rely upon.

For example...I have no idea how to build a nuclear bomb with a long range guidance system. There are a lot of very complicated physics theories I struggle to grasp. There are people who know about this, I'll trust their take on it.

Why do I trust their take on it?

Russia has a reputation for doing this sort of stuff - it's just easier and more damaging due to our increased reliance on the internet, and so many more people around the world attached to it.

Intelligence experts from multiple agencies (and countries) are in agreement on Russia's activities.

Our own intelligence experts are in agreement that Russia hacked the DNC server.

Wikileaks has a known connection with Russia and a known antipathy towards western democracies.

There is no actual evidence supporting anyone else hacking it.

This is where terminology gets interesting. In your link from crowdstrike but no real details. This is 100% intentional by crowdstrike as would be anyone in their position to be fair.

Intentional in what way? They are combatting a lot of "conspiracy theory" crap thrown their way.

What actually happened and how I don't think has been fully determined or they'd not be so careful in their wording. So no I can't say these reports of NO PROOF OF hacking are correct, no.

Thank you.

They wrote the statement the way they did for a reason I am 100% sure. I'm also 100% sure I have no idea what that reason is.

I do.

It's the same reason scientists never say 100%. There is always room for doubt, for error. Or cover your ass.

you don't know what that reason is. you are guessing to suit your need.

cover your ass for what? what are they covering? i have to write things like this for where i work and there's a ton of reasons you'd write to be vaguely specific.

you guessing as to their motives doesn't make that what their motives. at least i'm honest in saying i don't know.

Actually. There is no guesswork involved if you take the time to go to the page and read it. You will see a whole lot of links provided combatting conspiracy theories. No guesswork on my part. Just reading their site.

yes. but you don't know the reasons behind what they wrote. they also say they take no side and work for both and are working hard to avoid conspiracy theory talk you drag in yourself.

and since you're hellbent on telling me what i think, i'm out for tonight.

take care.

Oh cut the crap. In my post, I outlined what I think.

Not everything is about you.

ok

TY.

When you get a minute, I still want to know if we have more than potentially hacking the DNC and Facebook ads.

 

[Doc7505]

but that would pretty much be like every election before and what we do to others around the world on an all too regular basis

I always challenge this assertion. I don’t see this as a normal thing. Can you remember the last time Russia jacked with our election?

Russia (then USSR) has a long history of attempting to interfere with our democratic process (with the aim of showing that democracy is inherently inferior), but you are right - this level of interference, on a multinational platform, is unprecedented.

You're correct, it goes back one hundred years. Russian Communists began their infiltration and interference with American politics then and it hasn't stopped. As you claim they try to show that Democracy is inherently inferior... That is exactly what the Progressive Marxist Socialist/DSA Democrat Left is still attempting to do. They claim that the Constitution and Bill of rights are inferior. Recently Gov. Murphy of New Jersey abolished the first and 14th Amendments within the state.

Democrat New Jersey Governor Murphy admits ignoring U.S. Constitution

The Left is increasingly using the virus to to suppress liberties across the nation. Gun rights, freedom of assembly, and now freedom of faith are under assault in several states. These freedoms are enshrined in the Bill of Rights.

www.lifezette.com

L.A. Mayor: Trump’s Sanctuary City Crackdown Violates Constitution

Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti, chairman of the Latino Alliance of the United States Conference of

pjmedia.com

‘Gross Violation of the Constitution’: Bill de Blasio’s Warning to Houses of Worship Receives Heavy Criticism

Original interviews, commentary, in-depth coverage of stories that matter: Subscribe to our YouTube channel FREE As America attempts to stem […]

www.faithwire.com

Democrats all.....

 

[beautress]

ABC News first reported the news but initially said in the title that Grenell was in the process of trying to declassify the list of Obama officials.

A source with knowledge of the matter told The Daily Wire that the list has already been declassified and now it’s on Attorney General William Barr to release the list.

This is very, very nice news!

MAY 12TH, 2020

U.S. Officials Have Declassified List Of Obama Officials Who Were Involved In ‘Unmasking’ General Flynn | The Daily Wire

www.dailywire.com

Well done!
View attachment 335005

I read the link. Double talk and BS. Have fun with your list, honey.

White 6 sez:

Go ahead, make my day.

 

[eagle1462010]

He was never unmasked.

Time to Unmask the Unmaskers!

View attachment 335006

The bottom left guy should be hanged.

They should all be hung for treason.

 

[beautress]

He was never unmasked.

Time to Unmask the Unmaskers!

View attachment 335006

The bottom left guy should be hanged.

I'd settle for a little cruel and unusual punishment.

 

[eagle1462010]

The Uncovering – Mike Rogers’ Investigation, Section 702 FISA...

After submitting its 2016 Certifications in September 2016, the Department of Justice and ODNI learned, in October 2016, about additional information related to previously reported compliance incidents and reported that additional information to the FISC. The NSA also self-reported the...

themarketswork.com

The FBI’s Private Contractors – FISA Abuse, the Steele Dossier & A...

The FBI had disclosed raw FISA information, including but not limited to Section 702-acquired information, to a [Redacted]. [Redacted] is largely staffed by private contractors. Contractors had access to raw FISA information on FBI storage systems. Unrestricted access continued - after they...

themarketswork.com

This is nothing new..................known for quite some time..............Just the names being released..........

 

[the other mike]

He was never unmasked.

The dishonesty must be soul-draining for you.
And it's obviously dishonesty because I don't think you're stupid
enough to not see the light yet.

Pelosio.
If Pelosi was Pinocchio, her nose would be long enough to give Adam Schiff a colonoscopy with.

 

[the other mike]

Any day now

Is that what you wake up and say in the mirror every day, Lisa ?

Coyote unmasked

 

[beagle9]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

The declassified documents will show that the Russians were trying to help Hillary not Trump.

That is just too funny Given that all the evidence to the contrary. But conspiracy theories usually ignore that.

What evidence? Every single obummer official testified under oath that there was zero evidence.

Zero evidence that the Russians were trying to interfere in the elections and they supported Trump?

There is zero evidence they were trying to help Trump. Shrilary was already bought so the evidence we do have is that pootin was trying to help her. It is not much, but it is there.

We have ZERO evidence he was trying to help Trump. That Russia has been interfering is without doubt. They have, and have been for a long time.

Hacking and releasing the DNC email server wasn’t trying to help Trump?

recent declassified documents indicate crowdstrike never said they found evidence russia did a thing.

Declassified transcripts: CrowdStrike couldn't say for sure Russians stole DNC emails

CrowdStrike's Shawn Henry was interviewed by House Intelligence Committee members in December 2017

justthenews.com

CrowdStrike Had No Evidence of Russians Stealing Emails From DNC, Declassified Transcript Shows

www.theepochtimes.com

not a whole lot of mainstream reporting on it but if crowdstrike never found evidence of russian hacking, wouldn't that put a pretty big hole in the theory?

Crowdstrike couldn't say for sure - that is not the same as saying "no evidence" of Russian Hacking.

In addition, here is what Crowdstrike has to say: Our Work with the DNC: Setting the record straight

June 15, 2016 UPDATE:
CrowdStrike stands fully by its analysis and findings identifying two separate Russian intelligence-affiliated adversaries present in the DNC network in May 2016. On June 15, 2016 a blog post to a WordPress site authored by an individual using the moniker Guccifer 2.0 claimed credit for breaching the Democratic National Committee. This blog post presents documents alleged to have originated from the DNC.

Whether or not this posting is part of a Russian Intelligence disinformation campaign, we are exploring the documents’ authenticity and origin. Regardless, these claims do nothing to lessen our findings relating to the Russian government’s involvement, portions of which we have documented for the public and the greater security community.

fine.

but if *I* can't be sure, you can't be either; correct?

and what you post is fine - but that isn't "hacked" and they also say they are exploring authenticity and origin.

now - if they are still exploring then by definition it can't be a given russia hacked the DNC. maybe they did. i don't know.

but in the absence of positive proof, i am also not going to claim they did it and get upset when someone challenges that statement.

It's at this point we choose who to trust and what experts to rely upon.

For example...I have no idea how to build a nuclear bomb with a long range guidance system. There are a lot of very complicated physics theories I struggle to grasp. There are people who know about this, I'll trust their take on it.

Why do I trust their take on it?

Russia has a reputation for doing this sort of stuff - it's just easier and more damaging due to our increased reliance on the internet, and so many more people around the world attached to it.

Intelligence experts from multiple agencies (and countries) are in agreement on Russia's activities.

Our own intelligence experts are in agreement that Russia hacked the DNC server.

Wikileaks has a known connection with Russia and a known antipathy towards western democracies.

There is no actual evidence supporting anyone else hacking it.

This is where terminology gets interesting. In your link from crowdstrike but no real details. This is 100% intentional by crowdstrike as would be anyone in their position to be fair.

Intentional in what way? They are combatting a lot of "conspiracy theory" crap thrown their way.

What actually happened and how I don't think has been fully determined or they'd not be so careful in their wording. So no I can't say these reports of NO PROOF OF hacking are correct, no.

Thank you.

They wrote the statement the way they did for a reason I am 100% sure. I'm also 100% sure I have no idea what that reason is.

I do.

It's the same reason scientists never say 100%. There is always room for doubt, for error. Or cover your ass.

you don't know what that reason is. you are guessing to suit your need.

cover your ass for what? what are they covering? i have to write things like this for where i work and there's a ton of reasons you'd write to be vaguely specific.

you guessing as to their motives doesn't make that what their motives. at least i'm honest in saying i don't know.

Actually. There is no guesswork involved if you take the time to go to the page and read it. You will see a whole lot of links provided combatting conspiracy theories. No guesswork on my part. Just reading their site.

Combatting or hoping to change the meanings of or to throw those getting close off of the trails ?? Combatting is also used for those reasons as well. You know the old CYA back up plan that is used for back up when the plan goes arry.

 

[Marion Morrison]

Wat

 

[iceberg]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

The declassified documents will show that the Russians were trying to help Hillary not Trump.

That is just too funny Given that all the evidence to the contrary. But conspiracy theories usually ignore that.

What evidence? Every single obummer official testified under oath that there was zero evidence.

Zero evidence that the Russians were trying to interfere in the elections and they supported Trump?

There is zero evidence they were trying to help Trump. Shrilary was already bought so the evidence we do have is that pootin was trying to help her. It is not much, but it is there.

We have ZERO evidence he was trying to help Trump. That Russia has been interfering is without doubt. They have, and have been for a long time.

Hacking and releasing the DNC email server wasn’t trying to help Trump?

recent declassified documents indicate crowdstrike never said they found evidence russia did a thing.

Declassified transcripts: CrowdStrike couldn't say for sure Russians stole DNC emails

CrowdStrike's Shawn Henry was interviewed by House Intelligence Committee members in December 2017

justthenews.com

CrowdStrike Had No Evidence of Russians Stealing Emails From DNC, Declassified Transcript Shows

www.theepochtimes.com

not a whole lot of mainstream reporting on it but if crowdstrike never found evidence of russian hacking, wouldn't that put a pretty big hole in the theory?

Crowdstrike couldn't say for sure - that is not the same as saying "no evidence" of Russian Hacking.

In addition, here is what Crowdstrike has to say: Our Work with the DNC: Setting the record straight

June 15, 2016 UPDATE:
CrowdStrike stands fully by its analysis and findings identifying two separate Russian intelligence-affiliated adversaries present in the DNC network in May 2016. On June 15, 2016 a blog post to a WordPress site authored by an individual using the moniker Guccifer 2.0 claimed credit for breaching the Democratic National Committee. This blog post presents documents alleged to have originated from the DNC.

Whether or not this posting is part of a Russian Intelligence disinformation campaign, we are exploring the documents’ authenticity and origin. Regardless, these claims do nothing to lessen our findings relating to the Russian government’s involvement, portions of which we have documented for the public and the greater security community.

fine.

but if *I* can't be sure, you can't be either; correct?

and what you post is fine - but that isn't "hacked" and they also say they are exploring authenticity and origin.

now - if they are still exploring then by definition it can't be a given russia hacked the DNC. maybe they did. i don't know.

but in the absence of positive proof, i am also not going to claim they did it and get upset when someone challenges that statement.

It's at this point we choose who to trust and what experts to rely upon.

For example...I have no idea how to build a nuclear bomb with a long range guidance system. There are a lot of very complicated physics theories I struggle to grasp. There are people who know about this, I'll trust their take on it.

Why do I trust their take on it?

Russia has a reputation for doing this sort of stuff - it's just easier and more damaging due to our increased reliance on the internet, and so many more people around the world attached to it.

Intelligence experts from multiple agencies (and countries) are in agreement on Russia's activities.

Our own intelligence experts are in agreement that Russia hacked the DNC server.

Wikileaks has a known connection with Russia and a known antipathy towards western democracies.

There is no actual evidence supporting anyone else hacking it.

This is where terminology gets interesting. In your link from crowdstrike but no real details. This is 100% intentional by crowdstrike as would be anyone in their position to be fair.

Intentional in what way? They are combatting a lot of "conspiracy theory" crap thrown their way.

What actually happened and how I don't think has been fully determined or they'd not be so careful in their wording. So no I can't say these reports of NO PROOF OF hacking are correct, no.

Thank you.

They wrote the statement the way they did for a reason I am 100% sure. I'm also 100% sure I have no idea what that reason is.

I do.

It's the same reason scientists never say 100%. There is always room for doubt, for error. Or cover your ass.

you don't know what that reason is. you are guessing to suit your need.

cover your ass for what? what are they covering? i have to write things like this for where i work and there's a ton of reasons you'd write to be vaguely specific.

you guessing as to their motives doesn't make that what their motives. at least i'm honest in saying i don't know.

Actually. There is no guesswork involved if you take the time to go to the page and read it. You will see a whole lot of links provided combatting conspiracy theories. No guesswork on my part. Just reading their site.

Combatting or hoping to change the meanings of or to throw those getting close off of the trails ?? Combatting is also used for those reasons as well. You know the old CYA back up plan that is used for back up when the plan goes arry.

the problem with these conversations is that they invariably have every benefit of doubt go their way for it to be true. this is not pinning the notion on 1 side, both do it. it's annoying as ****.

 

[Doc7505]

The Uncovering – Mike Rogers’ Investigation, Section 702 FISA...

After submitting its 2016 Certifications in September 2016, the Department of Justice and ODNI learned, in October 2016, about additional information related to previously reported compliance incidents and reported that additional information to the FISC. The NSA also self-reported the...

themarketswork.com

The FBI’s Private Contractors – FISA Abuse, the Steele Dossier & A...

The FBI had disclosed raw FISA information, including but not limited to Section 702-acquired information, to a [Redacted]. [Redacted] is largely staffed by private contractors. Contractors had access to raw FISA information on FBI storage systems. Unrestricted access continued - after they...

themarketswork.com

This is nothing new..................known for quite some time..............Just the names being released..........

Now there is factual evidence that the PMS/DSA Left cannot deny....

 

[colfax_m]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

The declassified documents will show that the Russians were trying to help Hillary not Trump.

That is just too funny Given that all the evidence to the contrary. But conspiracy theories usually ignore that.

What evidence? Every single obummer official testified under oath that there was zero evidence.

Zero evidence that the Russians were trying to interfere in the elections and they supported Trump?

There is zero evidence they were trying to help Trump. Shrilary was already bought so the evidence we do have is that pootin was trying to help her. It is not much, but it is there.

We have ZERO evidence he was trying to help Trump. That Russia has been interfering is without doubt. They have, and have been for a long time.

Hacking and releasing the DNC email server wasn’t trying to help Trump?

recent declassified documents indicate crowdstrike never said they found evidence russia did a thing.

Declassified transcripts: CrowdStrike couldn't say for sure Russians stole DNC emails

CrowdStrike's Shawn Henry was interviewed by House Intelligence Committee members in December 2017

justthenews.com

CrowdStrike Had No Evidence of Russians Stealing Emails From DNC, Declassified Transcript Shows

www.theepochtimes.com

not a whole lot of mainstream reporting on it but if crowdstrike never found evidence of russian hacking, wouldn't that put a pretty big hole in the theory?

Crowdstrike couldn't say for sure - that is not the same as saying "no evidence" of Russian Hacking.

In addition, here is what Crowdstrike has to say: Our Work with the DNC: Setting the record straight

June 15, 2016 UPDATE:
CrowdStrike stands fully by its analysis and findings identifying two separate Russian intelligence-affiliated adversaries present in the DNC network in May 2016. On June 15, 2016 a blog post to a WordPress site authored by an individual using the moniker Guccifer 2.0 claimed credit for breaching the Democratic National Committee. This blog post presents documents alleged to have originated from the DNC.

Whether or not this posting is part of a Russian Intelligence disinformation campaign, we are exploring the documents’ authenticity and origin. Regardless, these claims do nothing to lessen our findings relating to the Russian government’s involvement, portions of which we have documented for the public and the greater security community.

In the IT world you either DO know. Or you don't. There is no "maybe".

Cmon man, that sounds like a tag line for a commercial. It's not like they caught three Russians sneaking in the DNC headquarters. This is done remotely, through VPNs and intermediary nodes. Attribution is hard, but it definitely was the Russians.

It is a fact. There is no "maybe" in IT. Either the hackers left a trace, or they didn't. There is no maybe. Real good hackers can get in and out with no evidence.

They did leave traces. For crying out loud, their malware was discovered and analyzed at length.

 

[colfax_m]

but that would pretty much be like every election before and what we do to others around the world on an all too regular basis

I always challenge this assertion. I don’t see this as a normal thing. Can you remember the last time Russia jacked with our election?

Russia (then USSR) has a long history of attempting to interfere with our democratic process (with the aim of showing that democracy is inherently inferior), but you are right - this level of interference, on a multinational platform, is unprecedented.

and other than hacking the DNC, just what did they do?

i know of facebook ads. what else?

Is hacking the DNC and Podesta, with the subsequent release of the info, not significant enough? It was a major event during the campaign.

 

[iceberg]

but that would pretty much be like every election before and what we do to others around the world on an all too regular basis

I always challenge this assertion. I don’t see this as a normal thing. Can you remember the last time Russia jacked with our election?

Russia (then USSR) has a long history of attempting to interfere with our democratic process (with the aim of showing that democracy is inherently inferior), but you are right - this level of interference, on a multinational platform, is unprecedented.

and other than hacking the DNC, just what did they do?

i know of facebook ads. what else?

Is hacking the DNC and Podesta, with the subsequent release of the info, not significant enough? It was a major event during the campaign.

How was related to trump? Other then loose speculation.

And since this is an unprecedented escalation, what would they do previously?

 

[Doc7505]

but that would pretty much be like every election before and what we do to others around the world on an all too regular basis

I always challenge this assertion. I don’t see this as a normal thing. Can you remember the last time Russia jacked with our election?

Russia (then USSR) has a long history of attempting to interfere with our democratic process (with the aim of showing that democracy is inherently inferior), but you are right - this level of interference, on a multinational platform, is unprecedented.

and other than hacking the DNC, just what did they do?

i know of facebook ads. what else?

Is hacking the DNC and Podesta, with the subsequent release of the info, not significant enough? It was a major event during the campaign.

~~~~~~~
What has the hacking to do about the illegal unmasking of Flynn, journalists, and thousands of Americans? Foreign entities have been hacking into each others communications since it was made possible. The use of the Steele Dossier paid for by the DNC as part of fact to get FISA warrants was illegal.

 

[westwall]

Any day now

normally i agree. but the charges on flynn bring dropped started dominos. it does sound like barr reached way back and anyone going outside of process for the purpose of inflating this "problem" is going to be held responsible.

good.

until people are held accountable, and in this case kicking and screaming NO I AM RIGHT I AM RIGHT (like children do) this will only get worse. if you're upset that people who did in fact do improper / illegal things are getting punished, that's on you. trying to say BUT THE OTHER GUY DID IT when nothing was found in years of looking is simply deflection to the core.

Why would you care about accountability when Trump got away with obstruction and attempting to coerce a foreign leader for political dirt on his private rival went uncontested? This desire for "accountability" is partisan driven

The declassified documents will show that the Russians were trying to help Hillary not Trump.

That is just too funny Given that all the evidence to the contrary. But conspiracy theories usually ignore that.

What evidence? Every single obummer official testified under oath that there was zero evidence.

Zero evidence that the Russians were trying to interfere in the elections and they supported Trump?

There is zero evidence they were trying to help Trump. Shrilary was already bought so the evidence we do have is that pootin was trying to help her. It is not much, but it is there.

We have ZERO evidence he was trying to help Trump. That Russia has been interfering is without doubt. They have, and have been for a long time.

Hacking and releasing the DNC email server wasn’t trying to help Trump?

recent declassified documents indicate crowdstrike never said they found evidence russia did a thing.

Declassified transcripts: CrowdStrike couldn't say for sure Russians stole DNC emails

CrowdStrike's Shawn Henry was interviewed by House Intelligence Committee members in December 2017

justthenews.com

CrowdStrike Had No Evidence of Russians Stealing Emails From DNC, Declassified Transcript Shows

www.theepochtimes.com

not a whole lot of mainstream reporting on it but if crowdstrike never found evidence of russian hacking, wouldn't that put a pretty big hole in the theory?

Crowdstrike couldn't say for sure - that is not the same as saying "no evidence" of Russian Hacking.

In addition, here is what Crowdstrike has to say: Our Work with the DNC: Setting the record straight

June 15, 2016 UPDATE:
CrowdStrike stands fully by its analysis and findings identifying two separate Russian intelligence-affiliated adversaries present in the DNC network in May 2016. On June 15, 2016 a blog post to a WordPress site authored by an individual using the moniker Guccifer 2.0 claimed credit for breaching the Democratic National Committee. This blog post presents documents alleged to have originated from the DNC.

Whether or not this posting is part of a Russian Intelligence disinformation campaign, we are exploring the documents’ authenticity and origin. Regardless, these claims do nothing to lessen our findings relating to the Russian government’s involvement, portions of which we have documented for the public and the greater security community.

In the IT world you either DO know. Or you don't. There is no "maybe".

Cmon man, that sounds like a tag line for a commercial. It's not like they caught three Russians sneaking in the DNC headquarters. This is done remotely, through VPNs and intermediary nodes. Attribution is hard, but it definitely was the Russians.

It is a fact. There is no "maybe" in IT. Either the hackers left a trace, or they didn't. There is no maybe. Real good hackers can get in and out with no evidence.

They did leave traces. For crying out loud, their malware was discovered and analyzed at length.

That's not what was reported. What was reported was "maybe".

 

[eagle1462010]

but that would pretty much be like every election before and what we do to others around the world on an all too regular basis

I always challenge this assertion. I don’t see this as a normal thing. Can you remember the last time Russia jacked with our election?

Russia (then USSR) has a long history of attempting to interfere with our democratic process (with the aim of showing that democracy is inherently inferior), but you are right - this level of interference, on a multinational platform, is unprecedented.

and other than hacking the DNC, just what did they do?

i know of facebook ads. what else?

Is hacking the DNC and Podesta, with the subsequent release of the info, not significant enough? It was a major event during the campaign.

It was soooo important that the DNC refused to let the FBI and NSA get the evidence themselves........a private contractor did the gathering.........LOL

A company that works for the DNC ...........and has VOTE FOR HILLARY TATTOOED ON THEIR BUTTS.

 

[beagle9]

but that would pretty much be like every election before and what we do to others around the world on an all too regular basis

I always challenge this assertion. I don’t see this as a normal thing. Can you remember the last time Russia jacked with our election?

Russia (then USSR) has a long history of attempting to interfere with our democratic process (with the aim of showing that democracy is inherently inferior), but you are right - this level of interference, on a multinational platform, is unprecedented.

and other than hacking the DNC, just what did they do?

i know of facebook ads. what else?

Is hacking the DNC and Podesta, with the subsequent release of the info, not significant enough? It was a major event during the campaign.

1. Who hacked the DNC and Podesta ?

2. Who released the info or how was it released ?

3. Was the info released steeped in lies or truth ?

4. What was the response by the DNC and Podesta for it's info being hacked, and subsequently that information being released ?

5. How did the hackers or anyone know of such information ?

6. Was the information first obtained by insiders who had an ax to grind, and it's information location then given over to the hackers ?

Where is all this information or the answers to it all now ? Is there so much information out there, that the scene has been flooded, and the DNC has been enjoying the chaos in it all by assigning blame or using it politically in order to regain power somehow ?

The DNC blaming Trump for everything because they hate him, and hate him for spurious reasons unrelated, seems to be grounded in what should be called "operation political chaos" by them, where as you gather up negative information in what ever form it takes or it comes in, and then attempt to apply it politically for nefarious reasons, and/or for other reasons not pertaining to the need to get to the bottom of anything, but just use it for future outcomes in hopes to sway future elections.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

The Press is working very hard to suppress the ObamaGate scandal