Grenell Makes Shocking Announcement

Grenell is a political hack. His purpose as DNI was to turn the US intelligence agencies into a political propaganda organ to elect Trump, not provide information to maintain safety and security if Americans.

He’s fulfilling that purpose here. Just look at how the party faithful lap it up.





And all the Dems are political hacks, or worse. One thing we know for sure, a vote for a Democrat is a vote for Iranian terrorism, chinese undermining of our manufacturing base, and the end of the American middle class.
A vote for Trump is unchecked Russian aggression. No plan for Chinese expansionism. No global leadership to combat Iranian nuclear ambitions. The death of Medicare and Social Security. Enrichment of the elites and fewer benefits for everyone else.

Vote for someone who actually knows what they’re doing, not Trump.
Fascinating. Show me the bipartisan intelligence report showing that Russia wasn’t behind the DNC attack.

Fascinating, yes.

Crowdstrike President Shawn Henry ( under oath)
-No concrete evidence that Russian hackers stole emails -
Henry personally led the remediation and forensics analysis
Swing and a miss.


Did CrowdStrike have proof that Russia hacked the DNC?

Yes, and this is also supported by the U.S. Intelligence community and independent Congressional reports.

Following a comprehensive investigation that CrowdStrike detailed publicly, the company concluded in May 2016 that two separate Russian intelligence-affiliated adversaries breached the DNC network.

To reference, CrowdStrike’s account of their DNC investigation, published on June 14, 2016, “CrowdStrike Services Inc., our Incident Response group, was called bythe Democratic National Committee (DNC), the formal governing body for the US Democratic Party, to respond to a suspected breach. We deployed our IR team and technology and immediately identified two sophisticated adversaries on the network – COZY BEAR and FANCY BEAR…. At DNC, COZY BEAR intrusion has been identified going back to summer of 2015, while FANCY BEAR separately breached the network in April 2016.”

This conclusion has most recently been supported by the Senate Intelligence Committee in April 2020 issuing a report [intelligence.senate.gov] validating the previous conclusions of the Intelligence community, published on January 6, 2017, that Russia was behind the DNC data breach.

The Senate report states on page 48:

“The Committee found that specific intelligence as well as open source assessments support the assessment that President Putin approved and directed aspects of this influence campaign.”

Furthermore, in his testimony in front of the House Intelligence Committee, Shawn Henry stated the following with regards to CrowdStrike’s degree of confidence that the intrusion activity can be attributed to Russia, cited from page 24:

  1. HENRY: We said that we had a high degree of confidence it was the Russian Government. And our analysts that looked at it and that had looked at these types of attacks before, many different types of attacks similar to this in different environments, certain tools that were used, certain methods by which they were moving in the environment,and looking at the types of data that was being targeted, that it was consistent with a nation-state adversary and associated with Russian intelligence.
"We have a high degree of confidence it was the Russian Government."

TRANSLATION----they have no proof.

Richard Grenell is about the closest thing the United States has to James Bond. The greatest part is that he’s not a fictional character but a real life patriot. Not only did he serve as U.S. Ambassador to Germany, he put on a second hat as acting Director of National Intelligence, where he acted like he had quite a bit of intelligence. The shocking announcement he made at the Republican Convention Wednesday night is the kind that makes E.F. Hutton listen.

Richard Grenell didn’t pull any punches and used every moment of his time on stage to promote Donald Trump because what he already knows about the Democrats makes him sick to his stomach. “I saw the Democrats’ entire case for Russian collusion and what I saw made me sick to my stomach. The Obama-Biden administration secretly launched a surveillance operation on the Trump campaign and silenced the many brave intelligence officials who spoke up against it.”


Not only that, Grenell informs, Deep State Democrats in Barack Obama’s Federal Bureau of Instigation and Department of Injustice “presented bogus information as facts. They lied to judges. Then they classified anything that undermined their case.” That’s just for starters. “After Donald Trump won the election, when they should have continued the American tradition of helping the president-elect transition into the White House, they tried instead to undercut him even more.”

Joe Biden personally “asked intelligence officials to uncover the hidden information on President Trump’s incoming national security advisor three weeks before the Inauguration.” As Grenell snipes, “that’s the Democrats. Between surveillance, classifications, leaks, and puppet candidates, they never want the American people to know who’s actually calling the shots.” Then there’s President Donald Trump.


BJ's Pull quote:

Richard Grenell is firmly convinced that the decision on who to vote for as president isn’t even close to a hard choice. With President Donald Trump, he declares, “you always know exactly who is in charge because the answer is you. You’re in charge. Not lobbyists. Not special interests. Not warmongers, or China sympathizers, or globalization fanatics.”

Grenell is a kook. A typical Trump supporter. He has absolutely no credibility. I hope ordinary voters hear what he says. That will doom Republicans at the polls. Americans are actually sane and don't buy into these conspiracy theories.
One thing is clear, the LAST person Putin wanted to be President was TRUMP.

Russia's chief form of income is OIL, so it follows that Bernie Sanders and Green deal supporters would be the ideal partners, reducing US competition, not TRUMP.

TRUMP created a new branch of the US Armed Services called Space Force.

TRUMP sent Real lethal weapons to UKRAINE unlike Obama/Biden.

The Russian Dossier was a hit job by Russia against TRUMP, etc.

As always facts have no affect on them.

Putin wanted Trump
Everything Trump has done is bad for Putin.
Putin wants Trump
Everything that Trump will do will be bad for Putin.
Putin wants Trump.

It's amazing,
Ridiculous but amazing.
I really don't know if Putin wanted TRUMP or Hillary...BUT is is very clear that Russia would have declared a National Holiday if Bernie Sanders won. TRUMP, on the other hand was a question mark, so it is hard to say if he wanted either of the two candidates.

That is not true. They had a very good handle on Trump. At the least they knew he would divide the country at the very least.
Putin has trump eating out of his hand.

 
Richard Grenell is about the closest thing the United States has to James Bond. The greatest part is that he’s not a fictional character but a real life patriot. Not only did he serve as U.S. Ambassador to Germany, he put on a second hat as acting Director of National Intelligence, where he acted like he had quite a bit of intelligence. The shocking announcement he made at the Republican Convention Wednesday night is the kind that makes E.F. Hutton listen.

Richard Grenell didn’t pull any punches and used every moment of his time on stage to promote Donald Trump because what he already knows about the Democrats makes him sick to his stomach. “I saw the Democrats’ entire case for Russian collusion and what I saw made me sick to my stomach. The Obama-Biden administration secretly launched a surveillance operation on the Trump campaign and silenced the many brave intelligence officials who spoke up against it.”


Not only that, Grenell informs, Deep State Democrats in Barack Obama’s Federal Bureau of Instigation and Department of Injustice “presented bogus information as facts. They lied to judges. Then they classified anything that undermined their case.” That’s just for starters. “After Donald Trump won the election, when they should have continued the American tradition of helping the president-elect transition into the White House, they tried instead to undercut him even more.”

Joe Biden personally “asked intelligence officials to uncover the hidden information on President Trump’s incoming national security advisor three weeks before the Inauguration.” As Grenell snipes, “that’s the Democrats. Between surveillance, classifications, leaks, and puppet candidates, they never want the American people to know who’s actually calling the shots.” Then there’s President Donald Trump.


BJ's Pull quote:

Richard Grenell is firmly convinced that the decision on who to vote for as president isn’t even close to a hard choice. With President Donald Trump, he declares, “you always know exactly who is in charge because the answer is you. You’re in charge. Not lobbyists. Not special interests. Not warmongers, or China sympathizers, or globalization fanatics.”
Thanks for pointing that out. The RNC had so many good speakers and high water marks, it is hard to remember them all.
 
Obama was a political hack. His purpose as outgoing Resident was to turn the US intelligence agencies into a political propaganda organ to damage Trump, not provide information to maintain safety and security for Americans.

Ha! Obama’s intelligence agencies were criticized for that reason after they put out intelligence indicating Russia was behind DNC hacks and election interference. Four years later and numerous intelligence reports from Republicans verifying that result and the Trump faithful still can’t bring themselves to admit they were wrong.

It's absolutely amazing to me that you people can so willingly spew this kind of garbage, without any concern for your credibility. You guys seem to believe that you can change history by ignoring evidence of your blatant hypocrisy when it's presented and claiming it never happened, or by preemtively accusing your political opponents of doing what your side's political leaders did and then decrying the actual evidence that is uncovered of your side's misdeeds as retaliatory "fake news"

Behold, the actual words of Obama, less than 3 weeks before the 2016 election, when Hillary's victory was a veritable certainty:

"If whenever things are going badly for you and you lose, you start blaming somebody else, then you don't have what it takes to be in this job "(pointing towards the White House)



"There is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even rig America's elections, in part because they are so decentralized, and the numbers of votes involved. There's no evidence that has happened in the past, or that there are instances in which that will happen this time."

 
Last edited:
Obama was a political hack. His purpose as outgoing Resident was to turn the US intelligence agencies into a political propaganda organ to damage Trump, not provide information to maintain safety and security for Americans.

Ha! Obama’s intelligence agencies were criticized for that reason after they put out intelligence indicating Russia was behind DNC hacks and election interference. Four years later and numerous intelligence reports from Republicans verifying that result and the Trump faithful still can’t bring themselves to admit they were wrong.

It's absolutely amazing to me that you people can so willingly spew this kind of garbage, without any concern for your credibility. You guys seem to believe that you can change history by ignoring evidence of your blatant hypocrisy when it's presented and claiming it never happened, or by preemtively accusing your political opponents of doing what your side's political leaders did and then decrying the actual evidence that is uncovered of your side's misdeeds as retaliatory "fake news"

Behold, the actual words of Obama, less than 3 weeks before the 2016 election, when Hillary's victory was a veritable certainty:

"If whenever things are going badly for you and you lose, you start blaming somebody else, then you don't have what it takes to be in this job "(pointing towards the White House)



"There is no serious person out there who would suggest somehow that you could even rig America's elections, in part because they are so decentralized, and the numbers of votes involved. There's no evidence that has happened in the past, or that there are instances in which that will happen this time."



Huh. Credibility, huh. So you post some quotes from Obama taken out of context and think that makes you credible? Obama was discussing falsifying votes in an election, something which is and will be unlikely to occur because the nature of our electoral system and something which Trump was and is still trying to convince us is happening or will happen.

Russian hacking and dumping of emails from the DNC and involvement in online trolling were indeed interference of the election, but had little to do with what your quotes from Obama were referencing.
 
Ha! Obama’s intelligence agencies were criticized for that reason after they put out intelligence indicating Russia was behind DNC hacks and election interference because those things were not true.
Four years later and numerous intelligence reports from Republicans and Democrats verifying that result and the Dem faithful still can’t bring themselves to admit they were wrong
Fascinating. Show me the bipartisan intelligence report showing that Russia wasn’t behind the DNC attack.

You won’t because it doesn’t exist.


Show what federal agency examined the DNC servers and came to that conclusion.

.
 
Richard Grenell is about the closest thing the United States has to James Bond. The greatest part is that he’s not a fictional character but a real life patriot. Not only did he serve as U.S. Ambassador to Germany, he put on a second hat as acting Director of National Intelligence, where he acted like he had quite a bit of intelligence. The shocking announcement he made at the Republican Convention Wednesday night is the kind that makes E.F. Hutton listen.

Richard Grenell didn’t pull any punches and used every moment of his time on stage to promote Donald Trump because what he already knows about the Democrats makes him sick to his stomach. “I saw the Democrats’ entire case for Russian collusion and what I saw made me sick to my stomach. The Obama-Biden administration secretly launched a surveillance operation on the Trump campaign and silenced the many brave intelligence officials who spoke up against it.”


Not only that, Grenell informs, Deep State Democrats in Barack Obama’s Federal Bureau of Instigation and Department of Injustice “presented bogus information as facts. They lied to judges. Then they classified anything that undermined their case.” That’s just for starters. “After Donald Trump won the election, when they should have continued the American tradition of helping the president-elect transition into the White House, they tried instead to undercut him even more.”

Joe Biden personally “asked intelligence officials to uncover the hidden information on President Trump’s incoming national security advisor three weeks before the Inauguration.” As Grenell snipes, “that’s the Democrats. Between surveillance, classifications, leaks, and puppet candidates, they never want the American people to know who’s actually calling the shots.” Then there’s President Donald Trump.


BJ's Pull quote:

Richard Grenell is firmly convinced that the decision on who to vote for as president isn’t even close to a hard choice. With President Donald Trump, he declares, “you always know exactly who is in charge because the answer is you. You’re in charge. Not lobbyists. Not special interests. Not warmongers, or China sympathizers, or globalization fanatics.”

Richard Grenell is a Repubican with no experience at running one large government agency, much less the 17 which now report to him. What he says or thinks is irrelevant, as it is with all Trump appointees. They'll say what they're told to say or they're out of work.


Poor little canadian commie, Grenell is no longer DNI. Do try to keep up. LMAO

.
 
I laugh -

A commercial written by crowdstrike on their website describing their testimony

versus

Testimony under oath.

Fascinating.

I guess you didn’t read it because the “commercial” included their testimony under oath that you ignored.

Furthermore, it doesn’t even prove your point. We aren’t relying solely on Crowdstrike to attribute the source of the hack. There was no bipartisan intelligence report which contradicted Obama.


RCP is hardly a right wing rag so may I present:

!

.
 
Obama was a political hack. His purpose as outgoing Resident was to turn the US intelligence agencies into a political propaganda organ to damage Trump, not provide information to maintain safety and security for Americans.
A little off-topic, but Obama politicized NASA, even! Wtf?!
He weaponized all the government agencies.
He couldn't get "National Police", so he tried to turn DHS and all the bureaus into it.

Trump has politicized the Post Office, CDC and our Intelligence agencies.


ROFLMFAO, you swallowed all that, didn't ya? Fucking amazing.

.
 
I laugh -

A commercial written by crowdstrike on their website describing their testimony

versus

Testimony under oath.

Fascinating.

I guess you didn’t read it because the “commercial” included their testimony under oath that you ignored.

Furthermore, it doesn’t even prove your point. We aren’t relying solely on Crowdstrike to attribute the source of the hack. There was no bipartisan intelligence report which contradicted Obama.


RCP is hardly a right wing rag so may I present:

!

.

He has been shown that previously
Literally no affect.
 
Ha! Obama’s intelligence agencies were criticized for that reason after they put out intelligence indicating Russia was behind DNC hacks and election interference because those things were not true.
Four years later and numerous intelligence reports from Republicans and Democrats verifying that result and the Dem faithful still can’t bring themselves to admit they were wrong
Fascinating. Show me the bipartisan intelligence report showing that Russia wasn’t behind the DNC attack.

You won’t because it doesn’t exist.


Show what federal agency examined the DNC servers and came to that conclusion.

.
First show me why that was necessary to reach that conclusion.
 
I laugh -

A commercial written by crowdstrike on their website describing their testimony

versus

Testimony under oath.

Fascinating.

I guess you didn’t read it because the “commercial” included their testimony under oath that you ignored.

Furthermore, it doesn’t even prove your point. We aren’t relying solely on Crowdstrike to attribute the source of the hack. There was no bipartisan intelligence report which contradicted Obama.


RCP is hardly a right wing rag so may I present:

!

.
Mmm, beg to differ. I’ve seen some very shoddy work come out of RCP.

Picking one sentence out an entire investigation without any additional context in order to reach a conclusion. is about as intellectually dishonest as one could be.

That testimony was given before the Republican controlled HPSCI. Even the Republicans on that committee agreed it was Russia.
 
I laugh -

A commercial written by crowdstrike on their website describing their testimony

versus

Testimony under oath.

Fascinating.

I guess you didn’t read it because the “commercial” included their testimony under oath that you ignored.

Furthermore, it doesn’t even prove your point. We aren’t relying solely on Crowdstrike to attribute the source of the hack. There was no bipartisan intelligence report which contradicted Obama.


RCP is hardly a right wing rag so may I present:

!

.

He has been shown that previously
Literally no affect.

Because it’s a false narrative.
 
Ha! Obama’s intelligence agencies were criticized for that reason after they put out intelligence indicating Russia was behind DNC hacks and election interference because those things were not true.
Four years later and numerous intelligence reports from Republicans and Democrats verifying that result and the Dem faithful still can’t bring themselves to admit they were wrong
Fascinating. Show me the bipartisan intelligence report showing that Russia wasn’t behind the DNC attack.

You won’t because it doesn’t exist.


Show what federal agency examined the DNC servers and came to that conclusion.

.
First show me why that was necessary to reach that conclusion.


Independent eyes, the DNC had a vested interest in making the claim.

.
 
I laugh -

A commercial written by crowdstrike on their website describing their testimony

versus

Testimony under oath.

Fascinating.

I guess you didn’t read it because the “commercial” included their testimony under oath that you ignored.

Furthermore, it doesn’t even prove your point. We aren’t relying solely on Crowdstrike to attribute the source of the hack. There was no bipartisan intelligence report which contradicted Obama.


RCP is hardly a right wing rag so may I present:

!

.
Mmm, beg to differ. I’ve seen some very shoddy work come out of RCP.

Picking one sentence out an entire investigation without any additional context in order to reach a conclusion. is about as intellectually dishonest as one could be.

That testimony was given before the Republican controlled HPSCI. Even the Republicans on that committee agreed it was Russia.


Flawed source information leads to flawed conclusions.

.
 
Ha! Obama’s intelligence agencies were criticized for that reason after they put out intelligence indicating Russia was behind DNC hacks and election interference because those things were not true.
Four years later and numerous intelligence reports from Republicans and Democrats verifying that result and the Dem faithful still can’t bring themselves to admit they were wrong
Fascinating. Show me the bipartisan intelligence report showing that Russia wasn’t behind the DNC attack.

You won’t because it doesn’t exist.


Show what federal agency examined the DNC servers and came to that conclusion.

.
First show me why that was necessary to reach that conclusion.


Independent eyes, the DNC had a vested interest in making the claim.

.

Crowdstrike doesn’t have a vested interest. And the US law enforcement and intelligence community provided plenty of independent eyes to the hack.

So I still haven’t heard why it was necessary to have the physical hardware to reach a conclusion.
 
I laugh -

A commercial written by crowdstrike on their website describing their testimony

versus

Testimony under oath.

Fascinating.

I guess you didn’t read it because the “commercial” included their testimony under oath that you ignored.

Furthermore, it doesn’t even prove your point. We aren’t relying solely on Crowdstrike to attribute the source of the hack. There was no bipartisan intelligence report which contradicted Obama.


RCP is hardly a right wing rag so may I present:

!

.
Mmm, beg to differ. I’ve seen some very shoddy work come out of RCP.

Picking one sentence out an entire investigation without any additional context in order to reach a conclusion. is about as intellectually dishonest as one could be.

That testimony was given before the Republican controlled HPSCI. Even the Republicans on that committee agreed it was Russia.


Flawed source information leads to flawed conclusions.

.
What source was flawed?
 
Ha! Obama’s intelligence agencies were criticized for that reason after they put out intelligence indicating Russia was behind DNC hacks and election interference because those things were not true.
Four years later and numerous intelligence reports from Republicans and Democrats verifying that result and the Dem faithful still can’t bring themselves to admit they were wrong
Fascinating. Show me the bipartisan intelligence report showing that Russia wasn’t behind the DNC attack.

You won’t because it doesn’t exist.


Show what federal agency examined the DNC servers and came to that conclusion.

.
First show me why that was necessary to reach that conclusion.


Independent eyes, the DNC had a vested interest in making the claim.

.

Crowdstrike doesn’t have a vested interest. And the US law enforcement and intelligence community provided plenty of independent eyes to the hack.

So I still haven’t heard why it was necessary to have the physical hardware to reach a conclusion.


Who employed Crowdstrike?

.
 
I laugh -

A commercial written by crowdstrike on their website describing their testimony

versus

Testimony under oath.

Fascinating.

I guess you didn’t read it because the “commercial” included their testimony under oath that you ignored.

Furthermore, it doesn’t even prove your point. We aren’t relying solely on Crowdstrike to attribute the source of the hack. There was no bipartisan intelligence report which contradicted Obama.


RCP is hardly a right wing rag so may I present:

!

.
Mmm, beg to differ. I’ve seen some very shoddy work come out of RCP.

Picking one sentence out an entire investigation without any additional context in order to reach a conclusion. is about as intellectually dishonest as one could be.

That testimony was given before the Republican controlled HPSCI. Even the Republicans on that committee agreed it was Russia.


Flawed source information leads to flawed conclusions.

.
What source was flawed?


From what I've seen all 4 of them.

.
 
I thought this thread was about Beowulf.

1598663862244.png
 

Forum List

Back
Top