FBI backs CIA view that Russia intervened to help Trump win election

[IDL]

And LOL @ 'intervened'. Unless they rigged the votes or the counts... they did not intervene.

What it comes down to is that they are referring to an effect on public opinion (that could then in theory translate to an effect on votes). That is the only way possible to connect emails to the election.

But of course, a great number of foreign influences can be taken into account that would influence public opinion one way or another.

So it isn't about affecting public opinion, obviously. Otherwise they would have to address all influences.

Their language will be tailored towards whatever political objective is desired.

 

[nixkid]

This is a perfect illustration of the lack of reasoning ability that causes confusion as to what is real news and what is fake.

Guys, two independent agencies came to the same conclusion. It's a real fucking story and a major problem.

3 private security companies arrived at the same conclusion too completely independent from the government and each other.

 

[ImNotSurpisedDonks!]

Not just them, Clapper too.

I recall a thread yesterday with a video of some statements from Clapper that were met with much whooping and hollering from conservatives.

I'm curious how many of them are willing to take his assessment at face value now.

The problem is man, we are talking about where hacked emails came from.....on the other hand, there is a 1 in 77 billion chance that the actual primary was not rigged. That is the actual number given to us from the leading election fraud statistician, no joke. Why was there no investigation? Oh yah, because the people that are claiming "Russia hacked it" would be the ones responsible for investigating it and they have again and again proven themselves to be just as corrupt as everyone else in Washington.

Just ponder that, 1 in 77 billion. And on top of that, all the other non partisan elections integrity groups that looked at the evidence agreed: 100% massive election fraud. And, they have provided the evidence for anyone to look at. They have filed lawsuits, begged the FBI to help but the system is so rigged that it's like asking the foxes to stop guarding the hen house because 'it's not right'.

The real issue is that people just don't understand what is going how, how the system works and how corrupt everything is. And with proof yesterday that Obama's Birth Certificate was forged, it gets even crazier!!

 

[Jack V Savage]

Comey looking to set the FBI's credibility all the way back to zero, it seems.

Why? Just because they reached the same conclusion as everyone else on the source of the hacking?

 

[Falsedawn]

The problem is man, we are talking about where hacked emails came from.....on the other hand, there is a 1 in 77 billion chance that the actual primary was not rigged. That is the actual number given to us from the leading election fraud statistician, no joke. Why was there no investigation? Oh yah, because the people that are claiming "Russia hacked it" would be the ones responsible for investigating it and they have again and again proven themselves to be just as corrupt as everyone else in Washington.

Just ponder that, 1 in 77 billion. And on top of that, all the other non partisan elections integrity groups that looked at the evidence agreed: 100% massive election fraud. And, they have provided the evidence for anyone to look at. They have filed lawsuits, begged the FBI to help but the system is so rigged that it's like asking the foxes to stop guarding the hen house because 'it's not right'.

The real issue is that people just don't understand what is going how, how the system works and how corrupt everything is. And with proof yesterday that Obama's Birth Certificate was forged, it gets even crazier!!

You know, I was actually willing to consider your primary fraud argument until you brought up "proof that Obama's birth certificate was forged". I watched Arpaio's video and came away far less than convinced. But the fact that you consider it proof is reason enough for me to ignore you.

But against my better judgment, i'm not going to. Can you substantiate the allegations of primary fraud beyond that macro?

 

[BruceLeeOnTRT]

And none of them will go before congress with their findings, hmmmm...

I think the whole thing is ludicrous. It's like when someone cheats, their bf/gf checks their phone and finds out, and they try to spin the fight to be about privacy violation. Sad!

 

[Falsedawn]

Why? Just because they reached the same conclusion as everyone else on the source of the hacking?

Clearly if everyone agrees, it's collusion. Never before in the history of humanity have multiple groups come to the same conclusion after looking at the same evidence, that's just malarkey.

 

[Cmart]

Why? Just because they reached the same conclusion as everyone else on the source of the hacking?

Everyone else? Is that so?

 

[TheStruggle]

The Russians influenced the election by releasing e-mails that proved the Democrats were using multiple media outlets (including Washington Post) to influence the election in their favor. That's what we are arguing here.

 

[Gas121]

Its fake news. Why are people fooling for this nonsense?

 

[TheGreatA]

You're talking about Assange right? The guy who runs a site that is supposed to be dedicated to government transparency but criticized the Panama Papers leak because it embarrassed Putin. The guy that had a show on RT. You mean that guy? Yeah, he's a Putin stooge. You're crazy if you believe anything he says when Russian interests are involved.

Assange criticized the Panama leaks for being selective with their releases, and for not releasing the documents in their entirety.

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes...an-assange-panama-papers-160409121010398.html

As for appearing on Russia Today, that's the only channel where he was going to have creative control and be capable of running his own show.

Even if he were a Putin stooge, appearing on Russia Today and having criticized the way that the Panama leaks were handled, aren't enough evidence to prove such a link.

 

[ndwolfwood]

Assange criticized the Panama leaks for being selective with their releases, and for not releasing the documents in their entirety.

http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes...an-assange-panama-papers-160409121010398.html

As for appearing on Russia Today, that's the only channel where he was going to have creative control and be capable of running his own show.

Even if he were a Putin stooge, appearing on Russia Today and having criticized the way that the Panama leaks were handled, aren't enough evidence to prove such a link.

"Just coincidences" says the conspiracy theorists of the MSM.

 

[IDL]

The Russians influenced the election by releasing e-mails that proved the Democrats were using multiple media outlets (including Washington Post) to influence the election in their favor. That's what we are arguing here.

It is all rather bizarre.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Everyone else? Is that so?

Every group that has weighed in on the issue, and there have been a lot.

I can't fathom how you think it would hurt their credibility in this case.

 

[Cirris]

The Russians influenced the election by releasing e-mails that proved the Democrats were using multiple media outlets (including Washington Post) to influence the election in their favor. That's what we are arguing here.

Funny isn't it. Russia was unfair to the Democrats they didn't release GOP dirt instead. Mind you if the GOP had dirt the media would have found it anyways. I.E. "pussy grabbing"

"Breaking news: GOP e-mails show GOP chair didn't want Trump just like DNC chair didn't want Bernie."

 

[dissolved]

I think the Democrats want riots, not a win. More division more division more division. Set the table for Meccan tyranny.

 

[TheStruggle]

Funny isn't it. Russia was unfair to the Democrats they didn't release GOP dirt instead. Mind you if the GOP had dirt the media would have found it anyways. I.E. "pussy grabbing"

"Breaking news: GOP e-mails show GOP chair didn't want Trump just like DNC chair didn't want Bernie."

Yeah if the GOP was fixing a debate to favor Donald Trump and Wikileaks released it, best believe the MSM wouldn't go radio silent on it until the election.

 

[TheGreatA]

"Just coincidences" says the conspiracy theorists of the MSM.

All we need is some hard evidence. WikiLeaks provided it, mainstream media hasn't. If Assange is a Putin stooge, like many MSM journalists have turned out to be Clinton/Democrat stooges, then it shouldn't be overly difficult to prove.

It is only reasonable that the people aren't fully buying the story, after having been told lies about "Iraq's WMD's", which similarly came from such "trustworthy" sources. People learn.

 

[Falsedawn]

I think the Democrats want riots, not a win. More division more division more division. Set the table for Meccan tyranny.

Why is it the the only people using 'civil war' rhetoric is conservatives? I don't think anyone wants a civil war, but you guys keep popping it like it should be on the table.

 

[ndwolfwood]

Why is it the the only people using 'civil war' rhetoric is conservatives? I don't think anyone wants a civil war, but you guys keep popping it like it should be on the table.

Because they are furious that they aren't as smart as liberals and their only solution is to try to destroy the government. They also live in the garbage parts of the country.