what did the russians do to control the ballot box.... ?

[NYcarbineer]

I know what I posted. You should take an adult reader refresher.

Evidence that Russia was behind the hacking and subsequent release, dope.

If you had read a few prior posts, you would have seen that who I responded to denied that Russia was behind anything.

My question was, if it's not true, then how can Trump be under investigation for his connection to it?

It's pretty self evident. It's certainly not something you needed to chase me around over.

Until there is a link between Russia and Trump, you have nothing. There is no evidence, it is just an investigation. Like any investigation it will follow the leads. So far, like Benghazi, no link has been found. You got nothing but pure speculation and nothing else. I'm not seeing an issue here, dope.

I never said there was evidence, dumbfuck.

LOL!!!! You have been exposed for the little whiny ***** you are, you said it and now you cry. LOL!!!

Sure thing, dope.

You say that as if no one can read what's been posted.

Weak shit, dude.

Dumbass, you have posted the same shit over and over and over and no one understands your stupid ******* point. It is you that can't seem to communicate with others. Grow up!

Jesus, are there ANY RWnuts left on USMB who haven't gone over to the Russians?

 

[NYcarbineer]

The hacking was a crime.
It was perpetrated by a foreign govt with the intention of influencing our electoral process. It worked.

Why on Earth would you accept that type of attack on our system? Will an equivalent attack on a Republican candidate be required before you find fault with the tactic?

1) Hacking IS a crime, and as such, should be investigated. However, the information provided in the hack was still true, and any votes cast on the basis of that information are still valid, which means the election itself is still valid.

2) If you're going to take the position that the left seems to be taking, which is that any election where voters listen to information other than that put out directly by the campaigns themselves is invalidated and should be replaced by the will of the political left, you're going to have a very hard sell. You let us know how that works out for you.

3) If nothing else, the hacks definitely demolished every argument the left had been trying to make about how the lackadaisical attitude of Hillary and her cronies toward computer security was no big deal.

4) You can scream, "And a foreign government did it! We KNOW they did!" until your face turns blue, but the fact remains that the evidence so far still doesn't indicate exactly who was responsible. Hence the investigation.

5) Did you know that "investigation" does NOT mean "simply assuming the left's narrative is correct"?

Here comes PC's henchmen. I will do this once. I'm not answering spam posts. I will explain my position for those who need extra help.

It's a simple question meant to encourage PC to further explain her thinking.

We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking. There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community. It is accepted as fact. It is the basis of the counter intelligence investigation meant to suss out the players, methods and motives of the operation.

As part of that, members of the Trump campaign and the campaign it's self is also part of that investigation in an effort to understand the nature and motives of their known communications with Russian officials.

That is all fact.


Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack.
PC seemed to be taking a position that was not possible given that Trump was indeed under investigation. I wanted to know how she believes both could be true and how that would work.

In an attempt the get her to expand on her thinking so I could follow her logic, I asked a simple question. I asked, If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?
IOW, How is Trump under investigation for his connection to something that never happened?

PC chose to not address that question. Her choice.
Now her hit squad is descending on me.

1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

4. "Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack."
You're lying again.
What I have said....and proved....is that there never was, is, or will be any such proof.

I proved this with testimony from PBS:
“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public.

That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours.
But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab."
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats' emails?


5. "If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?"
There is no connection between the two.
All the farrago about Russia is to make dunces who voted for the career criminal feel better.
That's the only fact here.

So is the FBI lying or simply confused?

You can run, but you can't hide.
So saith the Brown Bomber

Let's try again:
I was very specific....called you out as a liar....and you tried to ignore what I wrote.

Either admit you're a brain-dead, lying, low-life Liberal drone or respond to the specifics I provided.



1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

4. "Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack."
You're lying again.
What I have said....and proved....is that there never was, is, or will be any such proof.

I proved this with testimony from PBS:
“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public.

That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours.
But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab."
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats' emails?


5. "If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?"
There is no connection between the two.
All the farrago about Russia is to make dunces who voted for the career criminal feel better.
That's the only fact here.

No evidence the 'state' did it, only 'private' hackers? lolol, the Russian government and private sector are the same thing.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The hacking was a crime.
It was perpetrated by a foreign govt with the intention of influencing our electoral process. It worked.

Why on Earth would you accept that type of attack on our system? Will an equivalent attack on a Republican candidate be required before you find fault with the tactic?

1) Hacking IS a crime, and as such, should be investigated. However, the information provided in the hack was still true, and any votes cast on the basis of that information are still valid, which means the election itself is still valid.

2) If you're going to take the position that the left seems to be taking, which is that any election where voters listen to information other than that put out directly by the campaigns themselves is invalidated and should be replaced by the will of the political left, you're going to have a very hard sell. You let us know how that works out for you.

3) If nothing else, the hacks definitely demolished every argument the left had been trying to make about how the lackadaisical attitude of Hillary and her cronies toward computer security was no big deal.

4) You can scream, "And a foreign government did it! We KNOW they did!" until your face turns blue, but the fact remains that the evidence so far still doesn't indicate exactly who was responsible. Hence the investigation.

5) Did you know that "investigation" does NOT mean "simply assuming the left's narrative is correct"?

Here comes PC's henchmen. I will do this once. I'm not answering spam posts. I will explain my position for those who need extra help.

It's a simple question meant to encourage PC to further explain her thinking.

We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking. There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community. It is accepted as fact. It is the basis of the counter intelligence investigation meant to suss out the players, methods and motives of the operation.

As part of that, members of the Trump campaign and the campaign it's self is also part of that investigation in an effort to understand the nature and motives of their known communications with Russian officials.

That is all fact.


Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack.
PC seemed to be taking a position that was not possible given that Trump was indeed under investigation. I wanted to know how she believes both could be true and how that would work.

In an attempt the get her to expand on her thinking so I could follow her logic, I asked a simple question. I asked, If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?
IOW, How is Trump under investigation for his connection to something that never happened?

PC chose to not address that question. Her choice.
Now her hit squad is descending on me.

1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

4. "Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack."
You're lying again.
What I have said....and proved....is that there never was, is, or will be any such proof.

I proved this with testimony from PBS:
“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public.

That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours.
But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab."
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats' emails?


5. "If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?"
There is no connection between the two.
All the farrago about Russia is to make dunces who voted for the career criminal feel better.
That's the only fact here.

So is the FBI lying or simply confused?

You can run, but you can't hide.
So saith the Brown Bomber

Let's try again:
I was very specific....called you out as a liar....and you tried to ignore what I wrote.

Either admit you're a brain-dead, lying, low-life Liberal drone or respond to the specifics I provided.



1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

4. "Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack."
You're lying again.
What I have said....and proved....is that there never was, is, or will be any such proof.

I proved this with testimony from PBS:
“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public.

That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours.
But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab."
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats' emails?


5. "If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?"
There is no connection between the two.
All the farrago about Russia is to make dunces who voted for the career criminal feel better.
That's the only fact here.

1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

I really don't understand how making yourself look foolish helps your case.

Report on Russian hacking released by intelligence community

"Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a campaign involving covert intelligence operations and overt propaganda to undermine faith in the U.S. election, disparage Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump’s election chances, the intelligence community concluded in a report released Friday afternoon.

“We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump,” the report said.

The report, prepared by the CIA, FBI and NSA and released as a 15-page declassified version, said that Russia’s activities during the 2016 election were part of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the U.S. democratic process, but their efforts were intensified this time.

“These activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity and scope of effort compared to previous operations,” said the report, which was presented to President Obama Thursday and on which Mr. Trump was briefed Friday.

Russia’s intelligence services, the report confirmed, conducted cyberattacks that targeted “both major U.S. political parties.” As previously reported, the assessment confirmed the intelligence agencies’ confidence that the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence service, used Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks.com to release U.S. victim data publicly, and it also relayed material it acquired from the DNC and senior Democratic officials to WikiLeaks."



In order to maintain your position, you must be hinting at some sort of conspiracy but just don't have the balls to present it.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1) Hacking IS a crime, and as such, should be investigated. However, the information provided in the hack was still true, and any votes cast on the basis of that information are still valid, which means the election itself is still valid.

2) If you're going to take the position that the left seems to be taking, which is that any election where voters listen to information other than that put out directly by the campaigns themselves is invalidated and should be replaced by the will of the political left, you're going to have a very hard sell. You let us know how that works out for you.

3) If nothing else, the hacks definitely demolished every argument the left had been trying to make about how the lackadaisical attitude of Hillary and her cronies toward computer security was no big deal.

4) You can scream, "And a foreign government did it! We KNOW they did!" until your face turns blue, but the fact remains that the evidence so far still doesn't indicate exactly who was responsible. Hence the investigation.

5) Did you know that "investigation" does NOT mean "simply assuming the left's narrative is correct"?

Here comes PC's henchmen. I will do this once. I'm not answering spam posts. I will explain my position for those who need extra help.

It's a simple question meant to encourage PC to further explain her thinking.

We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking. There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community. It is accepted as fact. It is the basis of the counter intelligence investigation meant to suss out the players, methods and motives of the operation.

As part of that, members of the Trump campaign and the campaign it's self is also part of that investigation in an effort to understand the nature and motives of their known communications with Russian officials.

That is all fact.


Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack.
PC seemed to be taking a position that was not possible given that Trump was indeed under investigation. I wanted to know how she believes both could be true and how that would work.

In an attempt the get her to expand on her thinking so I could follow her logic, I asked a simple question. I asked, If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?
IOW, How is Trump under investigation for his connection to something that never happened?

PC chose to not address that question. Her choice.
Now her hit squad is descending on me.

1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

4. "Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack."
You're lying again.
What I have said....and proved....is that there never was, is, or will be any such proof.

I proved this with testimony from PBS:
“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public.

That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours.
But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab."
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats' emails?


5. "If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?"
There is no connection between the two.
All the farrago about Russia is to make dunces who voted for the career criminal feel better.
That's the only fact here.

So is the FBI lying or simply confused?

You can run, but you can't hide.
So saith the Brown Bomber

Let's try again:
I was very specific....called you out as a liar....and you tried to ignore what I wrote.

Either admit you're a brain-dead, lying, low-life Liberal drone or respond to the specifics I provided.



1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

4. "Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack."
You're lying again.
What I have said....and proved....is that there never was, is, or will be any such proof.

I proved this with testimony from PBS:
“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public.

That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours.
But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab."
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats' emails?


5. "If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?"
There is no connection between the two.
All the farrago about Russia is to make dunces who voted for the career criminal feel better.
That's the only fact here.

1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

I really don't understand how making yourself look foolish helps your case.

Report on Russian hacking released by intelligence community

"Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a campaign involving covert intelligence operations and overt propaganda to undermine faith in the U.S. election, disparage Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump’s election chances, the intelligence community concluded in a report released Friday afternoon.

“We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump,” the report said.

The report, prepared by the CIA, FBI and NSA and released as a 15-page declassified version, said that Russia’s activities during the 2016 election were part of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the U.S. democratic process, but their efforts were intensified this time.

“These activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity and scope of effort compared to previous operations,” said the report, which was presented to President Obama Thursday and on which Mr. Trump was briefed Friday.

Russia’s intelligence services, the report confirmed, conducted cyberattacks that targeted “both major U.S. political parties.” As previously reported, the assessment confirmed the intelligence agencies’ confidence that the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence service, used Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks.com to release U.S. victim data publicly, and it also relayed material it acquired from the DNC and senior Democratic officials to WikiLeaks."



In order to maintain your position, you must be hinting at some sort of conspiracy but just don't have the balls to present it.

Gee....government school trains you to be morons, huh?


Here is the money quote from your link:

“We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election."
Report on Russian hacking released by intelligence community


as·sess
əˈses/
verb

1. evaluate or estimate the nature, ability, or quality of.

Get it, you imbecile??????


NO PROOF!!!!!

NO EVIDENCE!!!!


JUST A GUESS!!!!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Here comes PC's henchmen. I will do this once. I'm not answering spam posts. I will explain my position for those who need extra help.

It's a simple question meant to encourage PC to further explain her thinking.

We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking. There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community. It is accepted as fact. It is the basis of the counter intelligence investigation meant to suss out the players, methods and motives of the operation.

As part of that, members of the Trump campaign and the campaign it's self is also part of that investigation in an effort to understand the nature and motives of their known communications with Russian officials.

That is all fact.


Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack.
PC seemed to be taking a position that was not possible given that Trump was indeed under investigation. I wanted to know how she believes both could be true and how that would work.

In an attempt the get her to expand on her thinking so I could follow her logic, I asked a simple question. I asked, If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?
IOW, How is Trump under investigation for his connection to something that never happened?

PC chose to not address that question. Her choice.
Now her hit squad is descending on me.

1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

4. "Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack."
You're lying again.
What I have said....and proved....is that there never was, is, or will be any such proof.

I proved this with testimony from PBS:
“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public.

That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours.
But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab."
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats' emails?


5. "If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?"
There is no connection between the two.
All the farrago about Russia is to make dunces who voted for the career criminal feel better.
That's the only fact here.

So is the FBI lying or simply confused?

You can run, but you can't hide.
So saith the Brown Bomber

Let's try again:
I was very specific....called you out as a liar....and you tried to ignore what I wrote.

Either admit you're a brain-dead, lying, low-life Liberal drone or respond to the specifics I provided.



1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

4. "Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack."
You're lying again.
What I have said....and proved....is that there never was, is, or will be any such proof.

I proved this with testimony from PBS:
“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public.

That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours.
But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab."
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats' emails?


5. "If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?"
There is no connection between the two.
All the farrago about Russia is to make dunces who voted for the career criminal feel better.
That's the only fact here.

1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

I really don't understand how making yourself look foolish helps your case.

Report on Russian hacking released by intelligence community

"Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a campaign involving covert intelligence operations and overt propaganda to undermine faith in the U.S. election, disparage Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump’s election chances, the intelligence community concluded in a report released Friday afternoon.

“We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump,” the report said.

The report, prepared by the CIA, FBI and NSA and released as a 15-page declassified version, said that Russia’s activities during the 2016 election were part of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the U.S. democratic process, but their efforts were intensified this time.

“These activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity and scope of effort compared to previous operations,” said the report, which was presented to President Obama Thursday and on which Mr. Trump was briefed Friday.

Russia’s intelligence services, the report confirmed, conducted cyberattacks that targeted “both major U.S. political parties.” As previously reported, the assessment confirmed the intelligence agencies’ confidence that the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence service, used Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks.com to release U.S. victim data publicly, and it also relayed material it acquired from the DNC and senior Democratic officials to WikiLeaks."



In order to maintain your position, you must be hinting at some sort of conspiracy but just don't have the balls to present it.

Gee....government school trains you to be morons, huh?


Here is the money quote from your link:

“We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election."
Report on Russian hacking released by intelligence community


as·sess
əˈses/
verb

1. evaluate or estimate the nature, ability, or quality of.

Get it, you imbecile??????


NO PROOF!!!!!

NO EVIDENCE!!!!


JUST A GUESS!!!!

NO PROOF!!!!!

NO EVIDENCE!!!!


JUST A GUESS!!!!

Just a fool.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

4. "Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack."
You're lying again.
What I have said....and proved....is that there never was, is, or will be any such proof.

I proved this with testimony from PBS:
“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public.

That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours.
But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab."
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats' emails?


5. "If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?"
There is no connection between the two.
All the farrago about Russia is to make dunces who voted for the career criminal feel better.
That's the only fact here.

So is the FBI lying or simply confused?

You can run, but you can't hide.
So saith the Brown Bomber

Let's try again:
I was very specific....called you out as a liar....and you tried to ignore what I wrote.

Either admit you're a brain-dead, lying, low-life Liberal drone or respond to the specifics I provided.



1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

4. "Now, PC was asserting repeatedly that Russia was not behind the hack."
You're lying again.
What I have said....and proved....is that there never was, is, or will be any such proof.

I proved this with testimony from PBS:
“There’s no evidence that this was done by the state itself, only evidence it was done by non-state actors that might be Russian-speaking,” said Jeffrey Carr, CEO of the cyber security consultancy firm Taia Global, referring to the evidence available to the public.

That evidence, which was released by private threat assessment companies rather than official channels, indicates hackers used Cyrillic keyboards and operated during Moscow working hours.
But indicators of identity like timestamps, language preferences and IP addresses “can be manipulated or faked rather easily,” said Juan Andres Guerrero-Saade, a senior security researcher at Kaspersky Lab."
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats' emails?


5. "If Russia wasn't behind the hacking, then how is Trump under investigation for his connection to it?"
There is no connection between the two.
All the farrago about Russia is to make dunces who voted for the career criminal feel better.
That's the only fact here.

1."We had very public testimony that clearly said that Russia was indeed behind the hacking."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.

2. "There is complete agreement of this within the Intel community."
No intell agency has claimed any such evidence.
That's why you have been unable to provide such a statement about evidence....that should be evident even to a dunce like you.

3. "It is accepted as fact."
No it isn't.
It has never been advanced as anything but conjecture.
It is designed to give marching orders to dunces....you.

I really don't understand how making yourself look foolish helps your case.

Report on Russian hacking released by intelligence community

"Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered a campaign involving covert intelligence operations and overt propaganda to undermine faith in the U.S. election, disparage Hillary Clinton and help Donald Trump’s election chances, the intelligence community concluded in a report released Friday afternoon.

“We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump,” the report said.

The report, prepared by the CIA, FBI and NSA and released as a 15-page declassified version, said that Russia’s activities during the 2016 election were part of Moscow’s longstanding desire to undermine the U.S. democratic process, but their efforts were intensified this time.

“These activities demonstrated a significant escalation in directness, level of activity and scope of effort compared to previous operations,” said the report, which was presented to President Obama Thursday and on which Mr. Trump was briefed Friday.

Russia’s intelligence services, the report confirmed, conducted cyberattacks that targeted “both major U.S. political parties.” As previously reported, the assessment confirmed the intelligence agencies’ confidence that the GRU, Russia’s military intelligence service, used Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks.com to release U.S. victim data publicly, and it also relayed material it acquired from the DNC and senior Democratic officials to WikiLeaks."



In order to maintain your position, you must be hinting at some sort of conspiracy but just don't have the balls to present it.

Gee....government school trains you to be morons, huh?


Here is the money quote from your link:

“We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election."
Report on Russian hacking released by intelligence community


as·sess
əˈses/
verb

1. evaluate or estimate the nature, ability, or quality of.

Get it, you imbecile??????


NO PROOF!!!!!

NO EVIDENCE!!!!


JUST A GUESS!!!!

NO PROOF!!!!!

NO EVIDENCE!!!!


JUST A GUESS!!!!

Just a fool.

'Estimate' is an admission that there is no proof, no evidence.


No proof.....except that you are a moron.

Plenty of proof of that.

 

[postman]

as·sess
əˈses/
verb

1. evaluate or estimate the nature, ability, or quality of.

Get it, you imbecile??????


NO PROOF!!!!!

NO EVIDENCE!!!!


JUST A GUESS!!!!

Other assessments the intelligence community made:
Osama BinLaden attacked the USA on 9-11. No actual evidence either. Right?

 

[postman]

'Estimate' is an admission that there is no proof, no evidence.


No proof.....except that you are a moron.

Plenty of proof of that.

Intelligence assessment:
AlQaeda attacked the USS Cole, No actual evidence, Right?

 

[PoliticalChic]

as·sess
əˈses/
verb

1. evaluate or estimate the nature, ability, or quality of.

Get it, you imbecile??????


NO PROOF!!!!!

NO EVIDENCE!!!!


JUST A GUESS!!!!

Other assessments the intelligence community made:
Osama BinLaden attacked the USA on 9-11. No actual evidence either. Right?

What's your point, aside from the one under your hat, you dunce???

If there was proof....state it.

If you're ready to claim you live by the Democrat/Liberal mantra:

What was new with the Thomas nomination was the accusation of criminal wrongdoing on his part, namely the unproved sexual harassment claims of one Anita Hill.

Even though Ms. Hill couldn't prove her accusation, that didn't matter.

Thus, a new mantra for the Left was born:
“The nature of the evidence is irrelevant; it’s the seriousness of the charge that matters.”
Tom Foley, Democrat, Former Speaker of the House.


...if that's your claim...excellent....just what I've been saying.

 

[PoliticalChic]

as·sess
əˈses/
verb

1. evaluate or estimate the nature, ability, or quality of.

Get it, you imbecile??????


NO PROOF!!!!!

NO EVIDENCE!!!!


JUST A GUESS!!!!

Other assessments the intelligence community made:
Osama BinLaden attacked the USA on 9-11. No actual evidence either. Right?

Let's see what other mistakes by the "intelligence community" you're ready to embrace:

1. "The C.I.A.’s conclusion does not appear to be the product of specific new intelligence obtained since the election, several American officials, including some who had read the agency’s briefing, said on Sunday. Rather, it was an analysis of what many believe is overwhelming circumstantial evidence — evidence that others feel does not support firm judgments — that the Russians put a thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump, and got their desired outcome."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/11/us/politics/cia-judgment-intelligence-russia-hacking-evidence.html


2. "U.S. Agencies See No Move by Iran to Build a Bomb" U.S. Agencies See No Move by Iran to Build a Bomb U.S. Agencies See No Move by Iran to Build a Bomb


3. "...the FBI dropped the ball yet again. After all these fumbles, the FBI should change its name from the Federal Bureau of Investigation to the Forever Bunch of Idiots. The latest misstep has generated the death of five innocent people at the Ft. Lauderdale airport.

Now maybe Esteban Santiago isn’t an agent for ISIS or Al-Qaeda — and maybe he isn’t even a jihadist terrorist — but he did have a history of erratic behavior and he was complaining of hearing voices. And although he was investigated several times, he was let go, allowed to keep a weapon, and no one thought at the bureau that this person should be on a watch list. Wow.

What did the FBI need to consider him credible? An engraved invitation with a time, place, and an RSVP?

Why was this man allowed to roam free? He obviously needed psychiatric help. He obviously had issues. He was a time bomb just waiting to go off, and the system failed again — not only in failing to help Santiago, but also in preventing the deaths of innocent victims.

How many more times does the bureau need to bungle in the jungle before there is one big shake-up where procedure is re-evaluated and drastic changes are made?" FBI bungled Ft. Lauderdale shooter

4. In May 1998, the CIA didn’t get wind of India’s intention to set off several underground nuclear blasts, in what Richard Shelby, then chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, called a “colossal failure of our nation’s intelligence gathering.” The intelligence agency saved some face a couple weeks later when it warned that Pakistan was preparing to conduct its own nuclear tests, which it did on May 28, 1998. The Ten Biggest American Intelligence Failures


5. In its report on the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the 9/11 Commission noted that the intelligence community, assailed by “an overwhelming number of priorities, flat budgets, an outmoded structure, and bureaucratic rivalries,” had failed to pin down the big-picture threat posed by “transnational terrorism” throughout the 1990s and up to 9/11. In response to the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations, Congress created a national intelligence director and the National Counterterrorism Center to pool intelligence. The Ten Biggest American Intelligence Failures


6. In a February 2003 appearance before the U.N. Security Council to make the case for confronting Iraq, Secretary of State Colin Powell declared that his accusations about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were based on “solid intelligence.” Indeed, an October 2002 intelligence estimate had concluded that Iraq was continuing its WMD program and could make a nuclear weapon “within several months to a year” if it acquired sufficient fissile material. But the United States never found evidence for such programs after its invasion of Iraq — an intelligence failure that President George W. Bush called his “biggest regret.” http://foreignpolicy.com/2012/01/03/the-ten-biggest-american-intelligence-failures/


7. When President George W. Bush left office, the U.S. had faced 28 Islamist plots after 9/11, only one of which was successful. Now there have been 93 Islamist plots since 9/11, and 14 successful attacks.

.... the vast majority of the terror plots and all of the successful attacks since 9/11 have involved homegrown terrorists—that is, terrorists who radicalized and plotted here in the U.S.
The threat has morphed and the U.S. must now do more to counter homegrown and lone wolf Islamist terrorists.


Obama’s comment obscures the truth that in his eight years in office, as shown by the sharp increase in the number of Islamist plots and successful attacks, the homeland has been less safe.
Claiming victory while the U.S. is in the most active period of terrorist activity since 9/11 is not only pushing a false narrative, but it risks diverting our attention from what needs to be done to defend the U.S. homeland."
Obama’s Terrorism Claim Hides an Inconvenient Truth


8. "... the CIA failed to see the coming collapse of the shah’s government in Iran as well as the fall of the Soviet Union—not to mention the entry of Pakistan and India into the nuclear club. Then came 9/11.

In the wake of that failure, Congress and the Bush administration reorganized the 16 different agencies of the intelligence community (known in the trade as the IC). Among the changes was the effective demotion of the CIA director, long considered the head of the IC, and the creation of a new top job, the director of national intelligence.

In theory, this was supposed to streamline the chain of command and get the IC’s disparate factions—including the vast new Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, the FBI, the National Security Agency, the various military intelligence services and others—to pull together under a leader with direct access to the president.

In practice, it hasn’t worked out that way, with the DNI’s authority more theoretical than practical. In less than six years, we’ve already had five DNIs. In that time, we’ve also seen the Fort Hood massacre, the attempted bombing of an airliner over Detroit, the deaths of seven CIA agents and contractors in Afghanistan in a security-lapse suicide bombing, and the Times Square near-miss." http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/018661.html

9. "A series of stumbles over the past seven years have given credence to the red flags raised by these experts. In quick succession, the IC failed to predict the so-called Arab Spring, the resurgence of al-Qaeda,[1] the adventurism of Putin, the aggressiveness of China,[2] and a number of terrorist attacks on the U.S., from the Detroit “underwear bomber” to the San Bernardino massacre.[3] The intelligence failures surrounding the Arab Spring were especially important, since the IC had not understood the implications of an entire series of seismic shifts in the strategic landscape, suggesting that there are serious problems with the analytical side of the community. It is noteworthy that the community’s intelligence collection—clandestine and open source—appears not to have focused on the deeper questions of regime stability and the underlying causes for the Arab Spring. In this Backgrounder, the focus will remain on analysis and improvements to the analytic aspects of the IC." http://www.heritage.org/research/re...intelligence-community-and-improving-analysis

10. "The tactical blame falls on the U.S. government, which has grievously failed in its topmost duty to protect American citizens from harm. Specialists on terrorism have been aware for years of this dereliction of duty; now the whole world knows it. Despite a steady beat of major, organized terrorist incidents over 18 years (since the car bombing of the U.S. embassy in Beirut in 1983), Washington has not taken the issue seriously. … American officials have consistently held the view that terrorism is a form of criminal activity. Consequently, they have made their goal the arrest and trying of perpetrators who carry out violent acts. That's all fine and good as far as it goes, but it does not go far enough. This legalistic mindset allows the funders, planners, organizers, and commanders of terrorism to continue their work untouched, ready to carry out more attacks. The better approach is to see terrorism as a form of warfare and to target not just those foot soldiers who actually carry out the violence but the organizations and governments who stand behind them. … Many indications point to the development of a large Islamist terror network within the United States, one visible to anyone who cared to see it. … The information was out there but law enforcement and politicians did not want to see it." http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2003/07/us-intelligence-mistakes-pre-911

11. "...other surveillance activities were used against President's Trump and his associates."

Soooo.....Trump was correct....and every Liberal site, and outlet was lying.
Like this:

FBI Director James Comey testified Monday before the US House Intelligence Committeethat “I have no information that supports those tweets, and we have looked carefully inside the FBI.” “The Department of Justice has asked me to share with you that the answer is the same for the Department of Justice and all its components. The department has no information that supports those tweets,” Comey added." FBI bugged Trump Tower while probing Russian gambling ring | New York Post

Get that????
"...we have looked carefully inside the FBI.” “The Department of Justice has asked me to share with you that the answer is the same for the Department of Justice and all its components."



And now they all have to eat their words.



Soooo.....ready to admit that you're a moron????

 

[postman]

What's your point, aside from the one under your hat, you dunce???

If there was proof....state it..

The proof, as you call it, is classified top secret, so there will be no posting of it here. But the assessments of the intelligence community is not classified, and that has been posted here.

 

[postman]

Soooo.....ready to admit that you're a moron????

NOPE, You left out that the intelligence community predicted 9-11, and briefed Bush that BinLaden was determined to strike inside the USA on August 6th 2001

 

[Meane]

as·sess
əˈses/
verb

1. evaluate or estimate the nature, ability, or quality of.

Get it, you imbecile??????


NO PROOF!!!!!

NO EVIDENCE!!!!


JUST A GUESS!!!!

Other assessments the intelligence community made:
Osama BinLaden attacked the USA on 9-11. No actual evidence either. Right?

Let's see what other mistakes by the "intelligence community" you're ready to embrace:

1. "The C.I.A.’s conclusion does not appear to be the product of specific new intelligence obtained since the election, several American officials, including some who had read the agency’s briefing, said on Sunday. Rather, it was an analysis of what many believe is overwhelming circumstantial evidence — evidence that others feel does not support firm judgments — that the Russians put a thumb on the scale for Mr. Trump, and got their desired outcome."
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/11/us/politics/cia-judgment-intelligence-russia-hacking-evidence.html


2. "U.S. Agencies See No Move by Iran to Build a Bomb" U.S. Agencies See No Move by Iran to Build a Bomb U.S. Agencies See No Move by Iran to Build a Bomb


3. "...the FBI dropped the ball yet again. After all these fumbles, the FBI should change its name from the Federal Bureau of Investigation to the Forever Bunch of Idiots. The latest misstep has generated the death of five innocent people at the Ft. Lauderdale airport.

Now maybe Esteban Santiago isn’t an agent for ISIS or Al-Qaeda — and maybe he isn’t even a jihadist terrorist — but he did have a history of erratic behavior and he was complaining of hearing voices. And although he was investigated several times, he was let go, allowed to keep a weapon, and no one thought at the bureau that this person should be on a watch list. Wow.

What did the FBI need to consider him credible? An engraved invitation with a time, place, and an RSVP?

Why was this man allowed to roam free? He obviously needed psychiatric help. He obviously had issues. He was a time bomb just waiting to go off, and the system failed again — not only in failing to help Santiago, but also in preventing the deaths of innocent victims.

How many more times does the bureau need to bungle in the jungle before there is one big shake-up where procedure is re-evaluated and drastic changes are made?" FBI bungled Ft. Lauderdale shooter

4. In May 1998, the CIA didn’t get wind of India’s intention to set off several underground nuclear blasts, in what Richard Shelby, then chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, called a “colossal failure of our nation’s intelligence gathering.” The intelligence agency saved some face a couple weeks later when it warned that Pakistan was preparing to conduct its own nuclear tests, which it did on May 28, 1998. The Ten Biggest American Intelligence Failures


5. In its report on the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the 9/11 Commission noted that the intelligence community, assailed by “an overwhelming number of priorities, flat budgets, an outmoded structure, and bureaucratic rivalries,” had failed to pin down the big-picture threat posed by “transnational terrorism” throughout the 1990s and up to 9/11. In response to the 9/11 Commission’s recommendations, Congress created a national intelligence director and the National Counterterrorism Center to pool intelligence. The Ten Biggest American Intelligence Failures


6. In a February 2003 appearance before the U.N. Security Council to make the case for confronting Iraq, Secretary of State Colin Powell declared that his accusations about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were based on “solid intelligence.” Indeed, an October 2002 intelligence estimate had concluded that Iraq was continuing its WMD program and could make a nuclear weapon “within several months to a year” if it acquired sufficient fissile material. But the United States never found evidence for such programs after its invasion of Iraq — an intelligence failure that President George W. Bush called his “biggest regret.” The Ten Biggest American Intelligence Failures


7. When President George W. Bush left office, the U.S. had faced 28 Islamist plots after 9/11, only one of which was successful. Now there have been 93 Islamist plots since 9/11, and 14 successful attacks.

.... the vast majority of the terror plots and all of the successful attacks since 9/11 have involved homegrown terrorists—that is, terrorists who radicalized and plotted here in the U.S.
The threat has morphed and the U.S. must now do more to counter homegrown and lone wolf Islamist terrorists.


Obama’s comment obscures the truth that in his eight years in office, as shown by the sharp increase in the number of Islamist plots and successful attacks, the homeland has been less safe.
Claiming victory while the U.S. is in the most active period of terrorist activity since 9/11 is not only pushing a false narrative, but it risks diverting our attention from what needs to be done to defend the U.S. homeland."
Obama’s Terrorism Claim Hides an Inconvenient Truth


8. "... the CIA failed to see the coming collapse of the shah’s government in Iran as well as the fall of the Soviet Union—not to mention the entry of Pakistan and India into the nuclear club. Then came 9/11.

In the wake of that failure, Congress and the Bush administration reorganized the 16 different agencies of the intelligence community (known in the trade as the IC). Among the changes was the effective demotion of the CIA director, long considered the head of the IC, and the creation of a new top job, the director of national intelligence.

In theory, this was supposed to streamline the chain of command and get the IC’s disparate factions—including the vast new Department of Homeland Security, the CIA, the FBI, the National Security Agency, the various military intelligence services and others—to pull together under a leader with direct access to the president.

In practice, it hasn’t worked out that way, with the DNI’s authority more theoretical than practical. In less than six years, we’ve already had five DNIs. In that time, we’ve also seen the Fort Hood massacre, the attempted bombing of an airliner over Detroit, the deaths of seven CIA agents and contractors in Afghanistan in a security-lapse suicide bombing, and the Times Square near-miss." Our "intelligence community" keeps making wild mistakes about Muslims--because it is ideologically committed not to know the truth about Islam

9. "A series of stumbles over the past seven years have given credence to the red flags raised by these experts. In quick succession, the IC failed to predict the so-called Arab Spring, the resurgence of al-Qaeda,[1] the adventurism of Putin, the aggressiveness of China,[2] and a number of terrorist attacks on the U.S., from the Detroit “underwear bomber” to the San Bernardino massacre.[3] The intelligence failures surrounding the Arab Spring were especially important, since the IC had not understood the implications of an entire series of seismic shifts in the strategic landscape, suggesting that there are serious problems with the analytical side of the community. It is noteworthy that the community’s intelligence collection—clandestine and open source—appears not to have focused on the deeper questions of regime stability and the underlying causes for the Arab Spring. In this Backgrounder, the focus will remain on analysis and improvements to the analytic aspects of the IC." Reforming Intelligence: A Proposal for Reorganizing the Intelligence Community and Improving Analysis

10. "The tactical blame falls on the U.S. government, which has grievously failed in its topmost duty to protect American citizens from harm. Specialists on terrorism have been aware for years of this dereliction of duty; now the whole world knows it. Despite a steady beat of major, organized terrorist incidents over 18 years (since the car bombing of the U.S. embassy in Beirut in 1983), Washington has not taken the issue seriously. … American officials have consistently held the view that terrorism is a form of criminal activity. Consequently, they have made their goal the arrest and trying of perpetrators who carry out violent acts. That's all fine and good as far as it goes, but it does not go far enough. This legalistic mindset allows the funders, planners, organizers, and commanders of terrorism to continue their work untouched, ready to carry out more attacks. The better approach is to see terrorism as a form of warfare and to target not just those foot soldiers who actually carry out the violence but the organizations and governments who stand behind them. … Many indications point to the development of a large Islamist terror network within the United States, one visible to anyone who cared to see it. … The information was out there but law enforcement and politicians did not want to see it." U.S Intelligence Mistakes Pre-9/11

11. "...other surveillance activities were used against President's Trump and his associates."

Soooo.....Trump was correct....and every Liberal site, and outlet was lying.
Like this:

FBI Director James Comey testified Monday before the US House Intelligence Committeethat “I have no information that supports those tweets, and we have looked carefully inside the FBI.” “The Department of Justice has asked me to share with you that the answer is the same for the Department of Justice and all its components. The department has no information that supports those tweets,” Comey added." FBI bugged Trump Tower while probing Russian gambling ring | New York Post

Get that????
"...we have looked carefully inside the FBI.” “The Department of Justice has asked me to share with you that the answer is the same for the Department of Justice and all its components."



And now they all have to eat their words.



Soooo.....ready to admit that you're a moron????

You can stop copy pasting. No one's gonna read that lengthy shit written by no one knows who. It's completely off topic and you're stuck to word evidence as though by obsession. This world doesn't run on facts and evidence. It just goes without them, sometimes with them. You turn the most sophisticated personal or professional comments on any subject a matter of evidence when it is merely a matter of discussion.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Trump Soviet partners didn't 'control the ballot box', they heavily influenced the ballot box tally

big dif, and completely lost on the Trumpeteers

LMFAO all they did was leak evidence to the press that Hillary was/isa corrupt lying *****...how the **** is that heavily influencing the election...


By stating the truth?


.

 

[PoliticalChic]

What's your point, aside from the one under your hat, you dunce???

If there was proof....state it..

The proof, as you call it, is classified top secret, so there will be no posting of it here. But the assessments of the intelligence community is not classified, and that has been posted here.

"The proof, as you call it, is classified top secret, so there will be no posting of it here."

So....no proof, just you drooling idiots, ready to march to whatever the Democrats tell you to.


You're dismissed.

 

[postman]

6. In a February 2003 appearance before the U.N. Security Council to make the case for confronting Iraq, Secretary of State Colin Powell declared that his accusations about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were based on “solid intelligence.” Indeed, an October 2002 intelligence estimate had concluded that Iraq was continuing its WMD program and could make a nuclear weapon “within several months to a year” if it acquired sufficient fissile material. But the United States never found evidence for such programs after its invasion of Iraq — an intelligence failure that President George W. Bush called his “biggest regret.” The Ten Biggest American Intelligence Failures
Soooo.....ready to admit that you're a moron????

Actually this is a good example. The 'intelligence' was influenced by the office of special plans, that added 'curveball' reports, and Dick Cheney's midnight visit to CIA headquarters, that changed the initial assessments. Add to that, Colin Powel was given a script to read to the UN, one which upon see it, was said to have yell "This is bull-shit, I'm not reading it." to Armitage.

So you example of bad assessment, is actually proof of good assessment by the intelligence community, but that was hijacked to Bush and company.

 

[postman]

LMFAO all they did was leak evidence to the press that Hillary was/isa corrupt lying *****...how the **** is that heavily influencing the election...

.

The difference between Trump and Clinton was less than 1/10th of 1% vote count in the swing states. The Russians only has to influence one in every thousand people to change the outcome.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Soooo.....ready to admit that you're a moron????

NOPE, You left out that the intelligence community predicted 9-11, and briefed Bush that BinLaden was determined to strike inside the USA on August 6th 2001

"You left out that the intelligence community predicted 9-11, and briefed Bush that BinLaden was determined to strike inside the USA on August 6th 2001."

OMG!!!!

I used to think that you drones couldn't be this stupid....but you are.


He didn't get any warnings, you moron.
Nor were there predictions of 9/11 by the intelligence community!!!

"There was . . . an awareness by the government, including the president, of Osama bin Laden and the threat he posed in the United States and around the world," Fleischer said. "That included long-standing speculation about hijacking in the traditional sense, but not involving suicide bombers using airplanes as missiles."

A CIA spokesman said the agency routinely passed on intelligence citing the possibility that al Qaeda might be planning to hijack an airliner as part of a terrorist action against the United States. But a suicide attack involving an aircraft was never envisioned, the spokesman said."
Bush Was Told of Hijacking Dangers (washingtonpost.com)

Pretty specific warning, huh?


And...do you know who asked for intelligence briefings?

"The White House said the presidential daily briefing, or PDB, was requested by Bush, who sought information about the possibility of an al Qaeda attack in the United States."
CNN.com - White House releases*bin Laden memo - Apr 12, 2004



Seems like Bush was far more responsible than the oaf in the White House after him.....the one who took a nap while Benghazi was under attack.


Now....those 'predictions'????

"...information prompted administration officials to issue a private warning to transportation officials and national security agencies. ... In a press briefing, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice said the threats were very general and did not mention a specific time, place or mode of terrorist attack." August 6, 2001, President's Daily Briefing Memo (External Links) - SourceWatch

 

[Wyatt earp]

LMFAO all they did was leak evidence to the press that Hillary was/isa corrupt lying *****...how the **** is that heavily influencing the election...

.

The difference between Trump and Clinton was less than 1/10th of 1% vote count in the swing states. The Russians only has to influence one in every thousand people to change the outcome.

Again **** head how did they do it?


By telling the truth about Hillary..



...



By the way turn about is fair play after Hillary and her state department meddled in Russias election..


.

 

[PoliticalChic]

LMFAO all they did was leak evidence to the press that Hillary was/isa corrupt lying *****...how the **** is that heavily influencing the election...

.

The difference between Trump and Clinton was less than 1/10th of 1% vote count in the swing states. The Russians only has to influence one in every thousand people to change the outcome.

"The Russians only has to influence one in every thousand people to change the outcome."

Except that they didn't.

Simple to prove.....

All you have to do is provide what the Wikileaks make known about the career criminal and congenital liar that nobody knew before.....




Just a few (25) of the scandals, lies, and criminal activity of Hillary Clinton.




1. Travelgate: After their election, the Clintons fired the White House Travel Office...which had served 7 administrations, and turned it over to their pals. As part of this, they brought bogus corruption charges against the civil servants therein.

The individuals were cleared on all counts.

The Independent Council found that Hillary lied when she claimed she wasn't behind the scam. “The overwhelming evidence establishes that she played a role in the decision to fire the employees. … Thus, her statement to the contrary under oath was factually false.”


a. " Hillary described Travelgate with cool indifference as, “perhaps worthy of a two-or-three-week life span, instead, in a partisan political climate, it became the first manifestation of an obsession for investigation that persisted into the millennium.” But for Billy Dale, it wasn’t a partisan manifestation. It was the termination of a thirty-plus-year career, and a fight for his freedom. If convicted, he faced a maximum of twenty years in prison and up to $500,000 in fines.”

Read more: How Hillary Clinton sicced the FBI on the White House travel office

b. For you or I that would mean a perjury charge and criminal record for trying to destroy an innocent American who had served honorably under eight administrations and lying about it. For Hillary it meant a future as the junior New York Senator and then President Barack Obama’s Secretary of State." Ibid.

2. @ 0:58 Hillary's pal Vince Foster was involved in several of the Clinton scandals. When he was found dead: was that why Hillary had Foster's files ransacked before investigators could view them?

WASHINGTON, July 26— A Secret Service officer today flatly contradicted the White House account of the night of Vincent W. Foster Jr.'s death, telling the Senate Whitewater panel that he had seen Hillary Rodham Clinton's top aide remove files from Mr. Foster's office. The aide vehemently denied doing it.

Testifying under oath before the special Senate committee investigating Whitewater, the officer, Henry P. O'Neill, said that on July 20, 1993, several hours after Mr. Foster's body was found in a Virginia park, he saw Mrs. Clinton's chief of staff, Margaret A. Williams, carrying two handfuls of folders from Mr. Foster's office." 2 Conflicting Accounts on Files From White House Aide's Office

3. @ 1:47 To see how a President Hillary would 'rule,' take a look at her methods when Bill put her in charge of the earlier attempt at a take-over of healthcare: " WASHINGTON, Dec. 1— A Federal district judge said today that he intended to impose sanctions on Clinton Administration officials for their "misconduct" in a court case involving the disclosure of documents from Hillary Rodham Clinton's task force on health care..... "The court understands plaintiffs' frustration with the defendants' misconduct during the course of this litigation, and the court intends to impose sanctions." Misconduct Found on Clinton Health Plan

The Kremlin would be proud!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. @4:07 Whitewater....15 Clinton pals were convicted of 40 federal crimes.

5. @4:35 Cattlegate...."... computerized records of her trades, which the White House obtained from the Chicago Mercantile Exchange, show for the first time how she was able to turn her initial investment into $6,300 overnight. In about 10 months of trading, she made nearly $100,000, relying heavily on advice from her friend James B. Blair, an experienced futures trader.

The new records also raise the possibility that some of her profits -- as much as $40,000 – came from larger trades ordered by someone else and then shifted to her account,...." http://www.washingtonpost.com/wpsrv/politics/special/whitewater/stories/wwtr940527.htm

a. "....guided through the risky trades by James Blair, a friend and top lawyer for one of Arkansas' most powerful companies, Tyson Foods Inc." Business | Hillary Clinton Invested $1,000, Netted $100,000 Through Trading | Seattle Times Newspaper

b. "....Tyson was everything shed been taught to despise at Wellesley and Yale, a greedy capitalist who hated labor unions and had no compunction about polluting Mother Earth for financial gain. Yet she allowed Blair, Big Daddys right-hand man, to manage her financial affairs. Second, assuming the speculation in Marshalls Magazine is correct, she was the conduit for a bribe." Democrook: Hillary Clinton

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6. @5:38 Raw naked power: Filegate. The Clintons illegally obtained FBI files on potential political enemies. "... in 1996 when it was discovered that the Clinton White House illegally obtained FBI files on adversaries, and used them to smear them, continues to this day. Strangely, although Mrs. Clinton is the principal defendant, and although there is sworn testimony, obtained during earlier discovery that Mrs. Clinton was the mastermind of this illegal scheme, the Court has never granted Plaintiffs requests to depose her —.... civil lawsuit which seeks to hold her accountable for illegally violating the privacy rights of American citizens she and her husband Bill Clinton viewed as political adversaries during their administration in the 1990s." Hillary Clinton tries to escape from on-going Filegate case

a. "It was also during this Filegate case that it was learned that President Clinton, on the advice of his top political adviser, James Carville, had illegally released Privacy Act protected information from White House files to smear Kathleen Willey, a woman who was a material witness in the impeachment proceedings, as she was also sexually harassed by the “philanderer in chief” while working for him in the White House."
http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/proof-hillary-isnt-fit-to-be-president/#sdOkMsPFKtC3oQzH.99

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. @ 6:35 Chinagate. Foreign countries funneled millions into Clinton's campaign. ".... Hillary then masterminded a scheme whereby the Clinton-Gore presidential campaign of 1996 took bribes from communist Chinese banks and their government to bankroll the president’s and the Democratic Party’s re-election efforts ."
http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/proof-hillary-isnt-fit-to-be-president/#sdOkMsPFKtC3oQzH.99

a. "When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, Chinese missiles were greatly limited in terms of their range and accuracy. But as journalist Richard Poe noted in 2003, “Thanks to Bill Clinton, China can now hit any city in the USA, using state-of-the-art, solid-fueled missiles with dead-accurate, computerized guidance systems and multiple warheads.”.... "'We like your president. We want to see him reelected,' former Chinese intelligence chief General Ji Shengde told Chinagate bagman Johnny Chung.

"Indeed, Chinese intelligence organized a massive covert operation aimed at tilting the 1996 election Clinton’s way.

"Clinton’s top campaign contributors for 1992 were Chinese agents; his top donors in 1996 were U.S. defense contractors selling missile technology to China.

"Clinton recieved funding directly from known or suspected Chinese intelligence agents, among them James and Mochtar Riady who own the Indonesian Lippo Group; John Huang; Charlie Trie; Ted Sioeng; Maria Hsia; Wang Jun and others." http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=644

b. "Agents for the Chinese government and military funneled millions into President Clinton’s re-election campaign, the Clinton Legal Defense Fund and the DNC.

The DOJ reported “A pattern of events suggests a level of knowledge within the White House–including the President’s and First Lady’s offices–concerning the injection of foreign funds into the reelection effort.” http://lybio.net/tag/hillary-clinton-a-career-criminal-video/

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

8. @6:35 ChinaGate Against campaign finance law, China donated to Bill Clinton's campaign so as to influence US policies. Agents for the Chinese government, and the military, funneled millions into Clinton's campaign.

DoJ: ...knowledge within the President's and First Lady's Offices...concerning the injection of foreign funds in the reelection effort.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9. @7:10 Using the IRS against political enemies....a Democrat tactic. A senior IRS official admitted that Clinton opponents were singled out for audit....including Bill Clinton's female accusers.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10. @ 7:45 PardonGate He issued pardons to 450 individuals including cocaine traffickers, terrorists and kidnappers. Several pardons directly benefitted Hillary Clinton, with ties to her NYSenate bid. Marc Rich was actually a fugitive on the run at the time...on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted List....while his wife donated thousands to Hillary Clinton's Senate Campaign, the Clinton Legal Defense Fund and the DNC.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

11. @12:00 As Senator....introduced three minor bills which became law in seven years. That includes naming a post office.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

12. @12:33 Enthusiastically voted for the Iraq War

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

13. @13:10 "....prosecutors revealed Monday that the mastermind of Mayor Vincent C. Gray’s “shadow campaign” also funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to aid Mrs. Clinton’s bid for the White House.

Jeffrey E. Thompson’s scheme included diverting more than $608,000 in illicit funds to a New York marketing executive, Troy White, who organized “street teams” to raise Mrs. Clinton’s visibility in urban areas during her Democratic primary battle against Barack Obama.

.....from February to May 2008, Thompson used two firms to disburse $608,750 in “excessive and unreported contributions to pay for campaign services in coordination with and in support of a federal political candidate for president of the United States and the federal and the candidate’s authorized committee.” That candidate was Mrs. Clinton." http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/mar/10/hillary-clinton-campaign-received-funds-jeffrey-th/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

14. @ 13:39 " State Department spokeswoman can't name Hillary Clinton's diplomatic achievements ... and neither can Hillary Clinton!
· Jen Psaki, the State Department's chief spokesperson, seemed blindsided by a question about Clinton's accomplishments

· A CNN panel erupted into laughter when Psaki's gaffe was shown

· Clinton herself couldn't articulate what she was 'most proud of' during her time as America's top diplomat when asked just weeks ago

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ts-neither-Hillary-Clinton.html#ixzz4B04XlE93

Not one achievement in her 4years collecting a salary from the taxpayers.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15. @ 14:33 " The State Department misplaced and lost some $6 billion due to the improper filing of contracts during the past six years, mainly during the tenure of former Secretary of State Hilary Clinton, according to a newly released Inspector General report." http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/4/state-dept-misplaced-6b-under-hillary-clinton-ig-r/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16. @ 14:48 " Hillary's State Department Refused to Brand Boko Haram as Terrorists" http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...efused-to-brand-boko-haram-as-terrorists.html
Even though FBI, DoJ and CIA had requested it, so they could pursue group.Result was kidnapping of 300 Nigerian school girls.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. @ 14:58 A special investigator for the State Department found that with Hillary in charge, the following investigations were blocked or called off:
a) Sexual assaults by state dept security officials in Beirut
b) "Endemic" use of prostitutes by Hillary's security detail
c.) Drug use by state dept contractors in Baghdad
d) Solicitation of child male prostitutes by US ambassador in Belgium
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
18. @16:10 Benghazi cover-up
Hillary testified that she had submitted all documents related to the inquiry. 20 months later....41 new documents were found....including changes to Susan Rice's talking points.
More documents are being withheld.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. "State Dept. Promises to Release Clinton Emails on Day That Literally Doesn’t Exist" http://lawnewz.com/columnists/state...on-emails-on-day-that-literally-doesnt-exist/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

20. This, from the Mexican paper...the NYTimes:

"In April 2012, representatives from Qatar were apparently hoping to get “five minutes” with former President Bill Clinton while in New York to present him with a $1 million check for his foundation as a birthday gift from the previous year.


While it is unclear whether that meeting ever took place, the offer,mentioned in one of thousands of hacked Clinton campaign emailsreleased by WikiLeaks last week, was an example of the complex ethical issues the Clinton Foundation faced in managing relationships with foreign governments when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. It also raised questions about whether the foundation had fully followed procedures it had voluntarily agreed to in order to avoid those very issues."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/16/us/politics/wikileaks-bill-clinton-foundation.html