Breaking: FBI BACKS CIA View that Russia Intervened to Help Trump Win Election

[Lewdog]

This just in, jc456 is fucking brilliant! My bad, just fake news. Disregard.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

No need. The reporting agencies already have.

The fake news agencies?

That's why you aren't seeing each of those people refuting it publicly.

If that were really true then you wouldn't have had asked me "why not"...Fake news will always catch up with you...they can say anything they want and get away with it because there is no fear of rebuttal, but when you repeat it here where people have a voice it all falls apart on you.

Show me one of them publicly refuting the veracity of the reports that cite them.

What reports? Can you produce a link to one so we can read what it says?

Can you produce proof Tillerson isn't Putin's boyfriend? Can you provide proof Melania isn't a KGB spy?

The burden of proof falls to the one making the claim not the one denying it.

 

[jc456]

The fact that none of them are publicly refuting it is your proof. Do you believe those individuals in those positions would just sit there and let these claims go unanswered if they knew them to be false?

The only claim is that they agree in nature, scope and intent..what is there to refute?

And the article described the scope, nature and intent as what?

Exactly what is that?

Part of the thread you should be reading.

It's all fake

 

[Lewdog]

No need. The reporting agencies already have.

The fake news agencies?

That's why you aren't seeing each of those people refuting it publicly.

If that were really true then you wouldn't have had asked me "why not"...Fake news will always catch up with you...they can say anything they want and get away with it because there is no fear of rebuttal, but when you repeat it here where people have a voice it all falls apart on you.

Show me one of them publicly refuting the veracity of the reports that cite them.

What reports? Can you produce a link to one so we can read what it says?

Can you produce proof Tillerson isn't Putin's boyfriend? Can you provide proof Melania isn't a KGB spy?

The burden of proof falls to the one making the claim not the one denying it.

WRONG. Trump supporters support his claims as truth and tell others to prove he is wrong. Therefor I can make a claim and you have to prove it wrong... that is unless you are a hypocrite?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

They couldn't verify the claim in the article that they met and each agreed in the manner reported?

Why not?

Call them and ask...see how that works?

No need. The reporting agencies already have.
That's why you aren't seeing each of those people refuting it publicly.

Who are the "reporting agencies?"

You aren't a native speaker are you?

The news AGENCIES who are REPORTING the very story you are currently discussing.

You should really be waiting a few minutes between hits.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

l

Why believe CIA on Russia? (Letter to editor)

I am baffled by the lack of skepticism regarding a CIA assessment that Russia influenced the election ("Russian interference," Dec. 12). No evidence, much less proof, has been offered. I am loath to agree with Donald Trump ("a short-fingered vulgarian," in the words of the late, great "Spy" magazine), but I suspect he got it right about the unproven CIA report: "These are the same people that said Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction."

That's just the tip of the CIA's history of lying (anthrax labs and aluminum tubes in Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Syria using gas against its own people in Damascus, and the extent of National Security Agency spying domestically and abroad, just to name a few). And it strains credulity to swallow whole an assessment by an agency with a long, sordid and well-documented history of election fraud and overthrowing governments in Europe and South and Central America. . .

. . . A quick online search of military budgets shows that Russia spends $46.6 billion a year on defense, in fifth place behind Great Britain. The U.S. military budget, in first place, is a whopping $581 billion, more than 10 times that of Russia, more than double that of second-place China, and more than the combined military budgets of the next 12 nations down the list. . .

(Excerpt) Read more at baltimoresun.com ..

Except... it isn't JUST the CIA. But hey, don't let facts get in your way!

Do you suppose we're arguing with run of the mill, dopey Americans or disinformation agents working for the Kremlin?

Can people really be this dumb?

Have any proof?...They even refused to go in front of a Congressional committee with their NO PROOF.

Proof of what? A request for someone's opinion?

Try to keep up, asswipe, proof that Russia did the hack, you moron!

You responded to my post to lewdog asking for an opinion.

 

[jc456]

The fake news agencies?

If that were really true then you wouldn't have had asked me "why not"...Fake news will always catch up with you...they can say anything they want and get away with it because there is no fear of rebuttal, but when you repeat it here where people have a voice it all falls apart on you.

Show me one of them publicly refuting the veracity of the reports that cite them.

What reports? Can you produce a link to one so we can read what it says?

Can you produce proof Tillerson isn't Putin's boyfriend? Can you provide proof Melania isn't a KGB spy?

The burden of proof falls to the one making the claim not the one denying it.

WRONG. Trump supporters support his claims as truth and tell others to prove he is wrong. Therefor I can make a claim and you have to prove it wrong... that is unless you are a hypocrite?

His claims of what?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

tl;dr

The FBI, CIA and DNI are all in agreement -- Russia intervened in our election in order to help Trump win.

What this means, is Russian leaders would rather Trump be president than Hillary.

It does not mean that voting machines were hacked and the results of voting were changed.

Not one person has claimed that the Russians hacked any voting machines, but thanks for stating the obvious.

So in other words the Russians only influenced the election, much like the UK attempted when leaders there did not want to see Trump win the presidency.

Only with espionage in the form of cyber attacks and a disinformation campaign.

What "disinformation" is that?

Pretty much everything you believe to be reality. It surrounds you kind of like the force but you're a plant who blindly takes up nutrients and is oblivious.

 

[Vigilante]

No need. The reporting agencies already have.

The fake news agencies?

That's why you aren't seeing each of those people refuting it publicly.

If that were really true then you wouldn't have had asked me "why not"...Fake news will always catch up with you...they can say anything they want and get away with it because there is no fear of rebuttal, but when you repeat it here where people have a voice it all falls apart on you.

Show me one of them publicly refuting the veracity of the reports that cite them.

What reports? Can you produce a link to one so we can read what it says?

Can you produce proof Tillerson isn't Putin's boyfriend? Can you provide proof Melania isn't a KGB spy?

Can you prove you're human, and can think....

l

Except... it isn't JUST the CIA. But hey, don't let facts get in your way!

Do you suppose we're arguing with run of the mill, dopey Americans or disinformation agents working for the Kremlin?

Can people really be this dumb?

Have any proof?...They even refused to go in front of a Congressional committee with their NO PROOF.

Proof of what? A request for someone's opinion?

Try to keep up, asswipe, proof that Russia did the hack, you moron!

You responded to my post to lewdog asking for an opinion.

And I gave you one...try to keep up , Futch!

 

[Lewdog]

Show me one of them publicly refuting the veracity of the reports that cite them.

What reports? Can you produce a link to one so we can read what it says?

Can you produce proof Tillerson isn't Putin's boyfriend? Can you provide proof Melania isn't a KGB spy?

The burden of proof falls to the one making the claim not the one denying it.

WRONG. Trump supporters support his claims as truth and tell others to prove he is wrong. Therefor I can make a claim and you have to prove it wrong... that is unless you are a hypocrite?

His claims of what?

Everything... every single fucking thing he says. He said he could shoot and kill someone on 5th Avenue and you guys would still support him... and you believe it.

 

[Frankeneinstein]

The fact that none of them are publicly refuting it is your proof. Do you believe those individuals in those positions would just sit there and let these claims go unanswered if they knew them to be false?

The only claim is that they agree in nature, scope and intent..what is there to refute?

And the article described the scope, nature and intent as what?

The election

 

[jc456]

What reports? Can you produce a link to one so we can read what it says?

Can you produce proof Tillerson isn't Putin's boyfriend? Can you provide proof Melania isn't a KGB spy?

The burden of proof falls to the one making the claim not the one denying it.

WRONG. Trump supporters support his claims as truth and tell others to prove he is wrong. Therefor I can make a claim and you have to prove it wrong... that is unless you are a hypocrite?

His claims of what?

Everything... every single fucking thing he says. He said he could shoot and kill someone on 5th Avenue and you guys would still support him... and you believe it.

Did he do that?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Bripat's dictionary:

Independently verified - .....................

You're the one who used the term. I didn't. You haven't verified jack shit.

You don't even understand what it means. I haven't been arguing with you so much as ridiculing you. You didn't even get that.
OK then. Off to bed with you now. Run along.

Explain to us what you think it means.

I know. I chose to use it. Your posts betray your ignorance.

You still haven't explained what you think it means. Obviously, you don't want to go down that road.

It's English and it's meaning is self evident. I've humored you for sometime to stretch this out so all of the readers can get a clear picture of the depths of your dysfunction and you have obliged happily. For that, I thank you.

 

[bripat9643]

No need. The reporting agencies already have.

The fake news agencies?

That's why you aren't seeing each of those people refuting it publicly.

If that were really true then you wouldn't have had asked me "why not"...Fake news will always catch up with you...they can say anything they want and get away with it because there is no fear of rebuttal, but when you repeat it here where people have a voice it all falls apart on you.

Show me one of them publicly refuting the veracity of the reports that cite them.

What reports? Can you produce a link to one so we can read what it says?

Can you produce proof Tillerson isn't Putin's boyfriend? Can you provide proof Melania isn't a KGB spy?

Why would I bother doing that since I'm not accusing Tillerson of being Putin's boyfriend or Melania of being a KGP spy?

 

[Lewdog]

Can you produce proof Tillerson isn't Putin's boyfriend? Can you provide proof Melania isn't a KGB spy?

The burden of proof falls to the one making the claim not the one denying it.

WRONG. Trump supporters support his claims as truth and tell others to prove he is wrong. Therefor I can make a claim and you have to prove it wrong... that is unless you are a hypocrite?

His claims of what?

Everything... every single fucking thing he says. He said he could shoot and kill someone on 5th Avenue and you guys would still support him... and you believe it.

Did he do that?

Google it.

 

[Lewdog]

No need. The reporting agencies already have.

The fake news agencies?

That's why you aren't seeing each of those people refuting it publicly.

If that were really true then you wouldn't have had asked me "why not"...Fake news will always catch up with you...they can say anything they want and get away with it because there is no fear of rebuttal, but when you repeat it here where people have a voice it all falls apart on you.

Show me one of them publicly refuting the veracity of the reports that cite them.

What reports? Can you produce a link to one so we can read what it says?

Can you produce proof Tillerson isn't Putin's boyfriend? Can you provide proof Melania isn't a KGB spy?

Why would I bother doing that since I'm not accusing Tillerson of being Putin's boyfriend or Melania of being a KGP spy?

So you admit it's true? Ok thanks.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

The fact that none of them are publicly refuting it is your proof. Do you believe those individuals in those positions would just sit there and let these claims go unanswered if they knew them to be false?

The only claim is that they agree in nature, scope and intent..what is there to refute?

And the article described the scope, nature and intent as what?

The election

Are you really trying to get me to pull this out of you word by word?
Did you suddenly forget what this discussion is about?

 

[bripat9643]

You're the one who used the term. I didn't. You haven't verified jack shit.

You don't even understand what it means. I haven't been arguing with you so much as ridiculing you. You didn't even get that.
OK then. Off to bed with you now. Run along.

Explain to us what you think it means.

I know. I chose to use it. Your posts betray your ignorance.

You still haven't explained what you think it means. Obviously, you don't want to go down that road.

It's English and it's meaning is self evident. I've humored you for sometime to stretch this out so all of the readers can get a clear picture of the depths of your dysfunction and you have obliged happily. For that, I thank you.

The meaning of any word is not self evident when Left wing douche bags like you are using them. Left wingers always have idiosyncratic definitions for the words they use.

You haven't "humored" jack shit. You're just running away because you are a fucking coward who is wriggling on a hook.

Now try it again: What does the word "verified" mean in your opinion?

 

[bripat9643]

The fake news agencies?

If that were really true then you wouldn't have had asked me "why not"...Fake news will always catch up with you...they can say anything they want and get away with it because there is no fear of rebuttal, but when you repeat it here where people have a voice it all falls apart on you.

Show me one of them publicly refuting the veracity of the reports that cite them.

What reports? Can you produce a link to one so we can read what it says?

Can you produce proof Tillerson isn't Putin's boyfriend? Can you provide proof Melania isn't a KGB spy?

Why would I bother doing that since I'm not accusing Tillerson of being Putin's boyfriend or Melania of being a KGP spy?

So you admit it's true? Ok thanks.

Hmmmm. . . . no, only a moron would draw that conclusion.

 

[jc456]

No need. The reporting agencies already have.

The fake news agencies?

That's why you aren't seeing each of those people refuting it publicly.

If that were really true then you wouldn't have had asked me "why not"...Fake news will always catch up with you...they can say anything they want and get away with it because there is no fear of rebuttal, but when you repeat it here where people have a voice it all falls apart on you.

Show me one of them publicly refuting the veracity of the reports that cite them.

What reports? Can you produce a link to one so we can read what it says?

Can you produce proof Tillerson isn't Putin's boyfriend? Can you provide proof Melania isn't a KGB spy?

Why would I bother doing that since I'm not accusing Tillerson of being Putin's boyfriend or Melania of being a KGP spy?

More cry baby whining from losers