|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 12, 2017 11:26:35 GMT -5
www.nationalreview.com/article/454515/russian-cyberespionage-does-mueller-have-proof-beyond-reasonable-doubtIn light of Trump’s allegations that the Russia story is a hoax being labeled Politifact’s “Lie of the Year” I thought I’d post a recent article about the underlying facts of the Russia Cyberespionage case. To be clear: there is evidence that Russia did hack the DNC. However, since the DNC refused to turn over its servers to the FBI, there probably isn’t enough to constitute proof beyond a reasonable doubt. This calls into question the piece in Politifact which really lacks the ability to call the case for Russian hacking a fact. It also calls into question the foundation of Mueller’s case. Unless somehow, he’s able to find a relevant conversation between Putin and Trump.
|
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 12, 2017 13:19:23 GMT -5
Yes, RJ, can Mueller prove something that all US intelligence agencies have concluded did, in fact, happen? It's going to be rough.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 12, 2017 13:41:02 GMT -5
Yes, RJ, can Mueller prove something that all US intelligence agencies have concluded did, in fact, happen? It's going to be rough. That’s not true. 3 intelligence agencies concluded it happened. And a conclusion from an intelligence agency is not a finding of fact. It’s more a “more likely than not” conclusion. It’s a long way from beyond a reasonable doubt. |
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 12, 2017 15:45:12 GMT -5
The US Intelligence Community issued a report on behalf of 17 intelligence agencies that all reached the same conclusion -- Russia hacked the US to try to subvert the democratic process. 17 is a few more than 3.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 12, 2017 17:35:38 GMT -5
The US Intelligence Community issued a report on behalf of 17 intelligence agencies that all reached the same conclusion -- Russia hacked the US to try to subvert the democratic process. 17 is a few more than 3. Only 3 intelligence agencies NSA, CIA, and FBI even looked at this. The report was released through the DNI. That's 3, plus DNI, not 17. The media told you it was 17, but that was another media lie. See the correction at the bottom of this NYT article: www.nytimes.com/2017/06/25/us/politics/trumps-deflections-and-denials-on-russia-frustrate-even-his-allies.html?_r=1&mtrref=t.coWhat's more, this is a judgement call, not the "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" Mueller would need in court. |
|
|
|
Post by breakingbad on Dec 12, 2017 19:48:26 GMT -5
It's looking more and more like this whole thing was a setup. It's clear that at least one of those agencies was highly politicized at the top.
And why the hell do we need 17 Intelligence Agencies? Are the 3 main ones that bad? Or is it just more government waste? (both rhetorical questions...)
|
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 12, 2017 20:41:03 GMT -5
www.nationalreview.com/article/454515/russian-cyberespionage-does-mueller-have-proof-beyond-reasonable-doubtIn light of Trump’s allegations that the Russia story is a hoax being labeled Politifact’s “Lie of the Year” I thought I’d post a recent article about the underlying facts of the Russia Cyberespionage case. To be clear: there is evidence that Russia did hack the DNC. However, since the DNC refused to turn over its servers to the FBI, there probably isn’t enough to constitute proof beyond a reasonable doubt. This calls into question the piece in Politifact which really lacks the ability to call the case for Russian hacking a fact. It also calls into question the foundation of Mueller’s case. Unless somehow, he’s able to find a relevant conversation between Putin and Trump. Mueller has never had a case. To empanel a special counsel, there has to be a crime for him to investigate. There has never been a crime identified, therefore his entire operation is illegal. In addition, he had an apparently corrupt FBI agent leading the 'investigation', the same one that changed Comey's speech so he could declare The Felon unindictable, because he couldn't find "intent". If the fact that she set up a private, illegal server wasn't "intent", he couldn't find his way out of a phone booth if they gave him a map and left the door open. He's moron class incompetent. Mueller's entire reason for existence in the special counsel role is to "GET TRUMP" any way he can. The "Russian collusion" lie was simply an avenue to get him appointed. |
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 12, 2017 20:42:20 GMT -5
It's looking more and more like this whole thing was a setup. It's clear that at least one of those agencies was highly politicized at the top. And why the hell do we need 17 Intelligence Agencies? Are the 3 main ones that bad? Or is it just more government waste? (both rhetorical questions...) It's absolutely a set up. There was no crime for him to investigate, so he's simply wasting our money, looking for anything he can find to "GET TRUMP". If he were investigating Russian collusion, he would be investigating The Felon, her campaign, and the entire Party of the KKK. |
|
|
|
Post by kemmer on Dec 13, 2017 2:18:21 GMT -5
The French complained about Russian shenanigans in their election, too. I think it's safe to presume the Russians are putting out ads with false "information". I doubt they had much effect, though.
Anyone want to reiterate how silly Mitt Romney was to suggest that Russia remains a major problem? Anyone out there who giggled about how "out of touch" Romney was? Putin is an autocrat, ruling a nation accustomed to being ruled by autocrats. Putin makes them comfortable when he rattles his sabres and reminds them that they ought to be a SuperPower (as they were formerly an empire.)
Gads, I do hope we're not on our THIRD PRESIDENT IN A ROW easily conned by Putin. Give Trump credit for one thing, at least. He hasn't said he's "gazed into Putin's eyes and seen his soul."
(Yeah, I'm still not over that bizarre moment of US history.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 13, 2017 9:00:51 GMT -5
The French complained about Russian shenanigans in their election, too. I think it's safe to presume the Russians are putting out ads with false "information". I doubt they had much effect, though. Anyone want to reiterate how silly Mitt Romney was to suggest that Russia remains a major problem? Anyone out there who giggled about how "out of touch" Romney was? Putin is an autocrat, ruling a nation accustomed to being ruled by autocrats. Putin makes them comfortable when he rattles his sabres and reminds them that they ought to be a SuperPower (as they were formerly an empire.) Gads, I do hope we're not on our THIRD PRESIDENT IN A ROW easily conned by Putin. Give Trump credit for one thing, at least. He hasn't said he's "gazed into Putin's eyes and seen his soul." (Yeah, I'm still not over that bizarre moment of US history.) I think it’s safe to say other foreign powers frequently practice meddling in elections. The Chinese and probably the Norks and Iranians would tinker in our elections in a heartbeat if they thought they could influence them to their advantage. But after the Iran deal, and the previous Clinton-China connections, it doesn’t help the Democrats to promote such stories. |
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 13, 2017 9:56:31 GMT -5
The French complained about Russian shenanigans in their election, too. I think it's safe to presume the Russians are putting out ads with false "information". I doubt they had much effect, though. Anyone want to reiterate how silly Mitt Romney was to suggest that Russia remains a major problem? Anyone out there who giggled about how "out of touch" Romney was? Putin is an autocrat, ruling a nation accustomed to being ruled by autocrats. Putin makes them comfortable when he rattles his sabres and reminds them that they ought to be a SuperPower (as they were formerly an empire.) Gads, I do hope we're not on our THIRD PRESIDENT IN A ROW easily conned by Putin. Give Trump credit for one thing, at least. He hasn't said he's "gazed into Putin's eyes and seen his soul." (Yeah, I'm still not over that bizarre moment of US history.) I'm not sure why we have this hysteria about Russia. We interfere in othere country's elections. Remember when The Puppet spent hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to defeat Netanyahu? Or how he imposed himself in the French elections? It's realpolitik. Every major country interferes to a greater or lesser degree in other country's elections. What we have is one party doing it's best to undo an election just because they lost. It's a case of "we were owed this election, and you better give it to us". Lying, withholding information, creating a bogus "investigation" with a bogus "special counsel", all are simply an attempt at a bloodless coup. What would the Party of the KKK do if Trump decided to start charging some of these screeching howler monkeys with sedition? He has grounds. |
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 13, 2017 10:53:05 GMT -5
The French complained about Russian shenanigans in their election, too. I think it's safe to presume the Russians are putting out ads with false "information". I doubt they had much effect, though. Anyone want to reiterate how silly Mitt Romney was to suggest that Russia remains a major problem? Anyone out there who giggled about how "out of touch" Romney was? Putin is an autocrat, ruling a nation accustomed to being ruled by autocrats. Putin makes them comfortable when he rattles his sabres and reminds them that they ought to be a SuperPower (as they were formerly an empire.) Gads, I do hope we're not on our THIRD PRESIDENT IN A ROW easily conned by Putin. Give Trump credit for one thing, at least. He hasn't said he's "gazed into Putin's eyes and seen his soul." (Yeah, I'm still not over that bizarre moment of US history.) I'm not sure why we have this hysteria about Russia. We interfere in othere country's elections. Remember when The Puppet spent hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to defeat Netanyahu? Or how he imposed himself in the French elections? It's realpolitik. Every major country interferes to a greater or lesser degree in other country's elections. What we have is one party doing it's best to undo an election just because they lost. It's a case of "we were owed this election, and you better give it to us". Lying, withholding information, creating a bogus "investigation" with a bogus "special counsel", all are simply an attempt at a bloodless coup. What would the Party of the KKK do if Trump decided to start charging some of these screeching howler monkeys with sedition? He has grounds. Especially if they’re going to continue pushing their own ridiculous unconstitutional outdated laws like the Logan Act. |
|
|
|
Post by palealeman on Dec 13, 2017 17:50:22 GMT -5
Easy to prove -- Just call Tillerson to testify.
And be careful, RJ. The Logan Act has not been determined to be unconsitutional yet. I realize that many people think it is, but until it's rescinded or found to be unconstitutional it's the law of the land. Of course, people on the right like to be selective in the laws they follow.
|
|
|
|
Post by breakingbad on Dec 13, 2017 19:45:31 GMT -5
Of course, only a blind partisan would only accuse one side of that.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 13, 2017 19:47:10 GMT -5
Easy to prove -- Just call Tillerson to testify. And be careful, RJ. The Logan Act has not been determined to be unconsitutional yet. I realize that many people think it is, but until it's rescinded or found to be unconstitutional it's the law of the land. Of course, people on the right like to be selective in the laws they follow. I almost hope Flynn is indicted under the Logan Act. That way the courts could do away with it once and for all. And the country could see hard proof of how corrupt and partisan Mueller is, and Obama's DOJ was. The Democrats love to over-reach on this stuff, and this Logan Act garbage is proof. |
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 13, 2017 20:33:52 GMT -5
Easy to prove -- Just call Tillerson to testify. And be careful, RJ. The Logan Act has not been determined to be unconsitutional yet. I realize that many people think it is, but until it's rescinded or found to be unconstitutional it's the law of the land. Of course, people on the right like to be selective in the laws they follow. I almost hope Flynn is indicted under the Logan Act. That way the courts could do away with it once and for all. And the country could see hard proof of how corrupt and partisan Mueller is, and Obama's DOJ was. The Democrats love to over-reach on this stuff, and this Logan Act garbage is proof. If they do, Trump should order the DOJ to pull in all of The Puppet's henchmen, and The Puppet, and charge them under the same law. |
|
