Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Well gee wiz , is there anything at all that the democrats didn't lie about ? Wll no , no there isn't.... they lied about every single thing . I would like to say im shocked , but truth is its what they do . There is no greater threat to the United States of America then the democrat party . The proof is , you cant show me one thing they are for that is good for america .
Beating Hillary is not a crimeList his crimes......
The Democrats did, during impeachment. And the Trump team didn't even attempt to deny the charges. They just claimed that presidents are allowed to commit any crimes they want. And you supported that.
Actually, there was literally no crime claimed in the impeachment trial.
That fact was brought up many times.
There were crimes committed. Lots of them. Trumps lawyers lied many times to claim otherwise but that doesn’t make it true.
Extortion, bribery, withholding Congressionally approved funds without notifying Congress. All sorts of things.
Ha! From the genius that thinks that Adam Schiff is head of the intelligence community, I take that as a compliment.PC, that's why I completely ignore Colon now - he is like an annoying, bussing gnat, never providing anything to substantiate his arguments and seemingly existing just to lie, deny, and annoy the shit out of people with ridiculous, opinionated crap. The fact that you got the better of him is not in dispute ... except to him.
Little problem. The office of national security advisor belonged to someone else at the time.Well, when they call up Russian government officials to talk foreign policy and strategy, that means that you have a legitimate foreign intellifence interest.obama was spying on officials from an incoming administration !What does that have to do with the thread?Hilarious. Relying on 3 year old reports as if anything in them was still relevant.
It was confirmed by Crowdstrike. The information they gave to the FBI was as good as what they would have gotten examining the server. Also the hacked information ended up on WikiLeaks mixed with false information.
1. False.
2. Remember who and what CrowdStrike is....
"What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google"
What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google | Zero Hedge
3. And this....
"WASHINGTON —
U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year's American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented datapublished by an influential British think tank."
Cyber Firm Rewrites Part of Disputed Russian Hacking Report
Did I mention that everything that comes from a Democrat source is a lie?
4. ".... if the evidence that they’ve used to level major accusations at a foreign government comes not from agencies of the U.S. government or direct law enforcement investigations, but rather from private sector firms like CrowdStrike, then the “high confidence” of the government counts for very little. "
The FBI Relied on a Private Firm’s Investigation of the DNC Hack—Which Makes the Agency Harder to Trust
Either it didn’t ask or wasn’t allowed to examine the DNC’s server.www.slate.com
After four years of lying to the American people, newly released documents find that every Obama official admitted that here was never….NEVER…even a hint of collusion.
“Other newly declassified transcripts released Thursday by the House Intelligence Committee revealed that top Obama administration officials had no concrete evidence that the Trump campaigned colluded with Russia in the 2016 Election.
The transcripts come from 57 witnesses who were interviewed by the committee during the Trump Russia probe. Obama's National Security Advisor Susan Rice and Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch were among those who gave their testimony.
In her interview with the House Intelligence Committee, conducted on September 8, 2017, Rice admitted there 'wasn't anything smoking' that showed the Trump campaign had helped with Russia's election meddling.
'I don't recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that effect... prior to my departure,' she stated.
…former AG Loretta Lynch similarly stated that she 'could not say' whether evidence of collusion, coordination or conspiracy existed when she gave her interview on October 20, 2017.
Other officials who worked in the Obama Administration were also asked about whether or not there was any concrete evidence they had seen.
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stated: 'I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.
'That's not to say that there weren't concerns about the evidence we were seeing, anecdotal evidence. ... But I do not recall any instance where I had direct evidence.'
Samantha Power, who was appointed by Obama to be the US Ambassador to the United Nations, was also among the 57 interviewees probed by the House Intelligence Committee.
'I am not in possession of anything—I am not in possession and didn't read or absorb information that came from out of the intelligence community,' Power stated, according to the newly released transcripts.” Obama surprised DoJ officials with knowledge of Michael Flynn's calls
You moron.....that's the job of a national security advisor.
Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
May 7 2020
I'd still like to understand what was improper about the incoming National Security Advisor of a newly elected administration calling his Russian counterpart to try to tamp down tensions in the weeks before he took office.
What law would apply to Flynn's doing so?????
None of any use. But it appears you missed the entire point.
CrowdStrike said they couldn’t prove it but everything in their experience said it was Russia. Further investigation by authorities with more resources and authority determined that CrowdStrike’s suspicions were correct.So crowdtsrike lies. Now. LOLNo one who knows anything about this actually believes that.IndeedOMG AGAIN i will say there is no proof russia hacked the DNC.I said RUSSIA, not in general. you dilapidated bag of dumbfuck.RNC got hacked too. And there is no proof russia hacked the DNC. None.The Kremlin wanted Hillary to win
That is why they hacked the RNC servers and leaked what they found.
Oh wait.......that was the DNC servers
NO PROOF THE DNC SERVER GOT HACKED
but
RNC GOT HACKED TOO
see there - idiots step on their dress every time
The Russians hacked anything remotely hackable to see what they could come up with to use for meddling, fomenting confusion and partisan divides. That doesn't mean they wanted Clinton to win. And yes, there is proof the server got hacked.
Do you two understand now?
In fact, the testimony that was received by Congress from CrowdStrike indicated that there was no proof that this happened. Right now, the thought is that it was an inside job from a whistleblower in the DNC that passed the information to Julian Assange.
How convenient.
No one actually thinks it was an inside job.
Let's look at the facts:
Fact 1. In 2016 the DNC hired the Ukrainian-owned firm CrowdStrike to analyze their server and investigate a data breach.
Fact 2. CrowdStrike experts determined that the culprit was Russia.
Fact 3. The FBI never received access to the DNC server, so the Russian connection was never officially confirmed and continues to be an allegation coming from the DNC and its Ukrainian-owned contractor.
Fact 4. Absent the official verdict, other theories continue to circulate, including the possibility that the theft was an inside job by a DNC employee, who simply copied the files to a USB drive and sent it to WikiLeaks.
None of these facts was ever disputed by anyone. The media largely ignored them except for the part about the Russian hackers, which boosted their own, now debunked, wild conspiracy theory that Trump was a Russian agent.
CrowdStrike: a Conspiracy Wrapped in a Conspiracy Inside a Conspiracy - Frontpagemag
I couldnt agree more . Fortunately , trump is so thin skinned . These traitors that ha e been attacking him , his family , and general Flynn are in for a thumpin . Trump dont let the little 5hings go , he is gonna gut these anti American criminals. Trump 2020. Hillary was right about one thing , they might hang if trump wins.Well gee wiz , is there anything at all that the democrats didn't lie about ? Wll no , no there isn't.... they lied about every single thing . I would like to say im shocked , but truth is its what they do . There is no greater threat to the United States of America then the democrat party . The proof is , you cant show me one thing they are for that is good for america .
The last 4 years (8-12 actually), all the exposed crimes, and what they continue to do now is evidence enough to justify President Trump declaring the Democratic party to ne an official criminal organization and a threat to the Republic.
link?The Kremlin wanted Hillary to win
That is why they hacked the RNC servers and leaked what they found.
Oh wait.......that was the DNC servers
No proof that anyone hacked the DNC server you big fat liar.
your daddy says
Putin says “patriotic” Russian hackers may have meddled in U.S. election
VICE is the definitive guide to enlightening information.www.vice.com
and
A jailed Russian hacker claims he can prove he broke into the DNC server
He says he left a secret calling card inside the system.
Moron......Cloudstrike the non-government company the DNC used instead of the FBI stated they can't prove that there was a hack, that the hack, if it happened was an outside hack....and they couldn't tell if it was, in fact, Russians...
You have no truth, facts or reality........the actual players are telling us you are stupid, lying, or both...
Little problem. The office of national security advisor belonged to someone else at the time.Well, when they call up Russian government officials to talk foreign policy and strategy, that means that you have a legitimate foreign intellifence interest.obama was spying on officials from an incoming administration !What does that have to do with the thread?Hilarious. Relying on 3 year old reports as if anything in them was still relevant.
It was confirmed by Crowdstrike. The information they gave to the FBI was as good as what they would have gotten examining the server. Also the hacked information ended up on WikiLeaks mixed with false information.
1. False.
2. Remember who and what CrowdStrike is....
"What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google"
What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google | Zero Hedge
3. And this....
"WASHINGTON —
U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year's American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented datapublished by an influential British think tank."
Cyber Firm Rewrites Part of Disputed Russian Hacking Report
Did I mention that everything that comes from a Democrat source is a lie?
4. ".... if the evidence that they’ve used to level major accusations at a foreign government comes not from agencies of the U.S. government or direct law enforcement investigations, but rather from private sector firms like CrowdStrike, then the “high confidence” of the government counts for very little. "
The FBI Relied on a Private Firm’s Investigation of the DNC Hack—Which Makes the Agency Harder to Trust
Either it didn’t ask or wasn’t allowed to examine the DNC’s server.
After four years of lying to the American people, newly released documents find that every Obama official admitted that here was never….NEVER…even a hint of collusion.
“Other newly declassified transcripts released Thursday by the House Intelligence Committee revealed that top Obama administration officials had no concrete evidence that the Trump campaigned colluded with Russia in the 2016 Election.
The transcripts come from 57 witnesses who were interviewed by the committee during the Trump Russia probe. Obama's National Security Advisor Susan Rice and Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch were among those who gave their testimony.
In her interview with the House Intelligence Committee, conducted on September 8, 2017, Rice admitted there 'wasn't anything smoking' that showed the Trump campaign had helped with Russia's election meddling.
'I don't recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that effect... prior to my departure,' she stated.
…former AG Loretta Lynch similarly stated that she 'could not say' whether evidence of collusion, coordination or conspiracy existed when she gave her interview on October 20, 2017.
Other officials who worked in the Obama Administration were also asked about whether or not there was any concrete evidence they had seen.
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stated: 'I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.
'That's not to say that there weren't concerns about the evidence we were seeing, anecdotal evidence. ... But I do not recall any instance where I had direct evidence.'
Samantha Power, who was appointed by Obama to be the US Ambassador to the United Nations, was also among the 57 interviewees probed by the House Intelligence Committee.
'I am not in possession of anything—I am not in possession and didn't read or absorb information that came from out of the intelligence community,' Power stated, according to the newly released transcripts.” Obama surprised DoJ officials with knowledge of Michael Flynn's calls
You moron.....that's the job of a national security advisor.
Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
May 7 2020
I'd still like to understand what was improper about the incoming National Security Advisor of a newly elected administration calling his Russian counterpart to try to tamp down tensions in the weeks before he took office.
What law would apply to Flynn's doing so?????
None of any use. But it appears you missed the entire point.
You know the very opposite is the truth, about missing the point.
So we agree that no such law applied that would have cast Flynn under the view of the Obamunists.
See....you're learning.
Great. Let’s see the evidence. Thanks!The actual evidence connects Seth Rich and Wikileaks.
Too late.Docs show John Brennan suppressed intel showing Russia actually wanted Hillary to win
You can’t be serious. Really, you can’t be.If such testimony existed, it wouldn’t have been covered up by Devin Nunes.How about behind-doors sworn testimony?
Just declassified and released by Grenell.
Nunes has not had difficulty declassifying information in the past.
Oh, and nothing of the sort has been released.
Little problem. The office of national security advisor belonged to someone else at the time.Well, when they call up Russian government officials to talk foreign policy and strategy, that means that you have a legitimate foreign intellifence interest.obama was spying on officials from an incoming administration !What does that have to do with the thread?Hilarious. Relying on 3 year old reports as if anything in them was still relevant.
It was confirmed by Crowdstrike. The information they gave to the FBI was as good as what they would have gotten examining the server. Also the hacked information ended up on WikiLeaks mixed with false information.
1. False.
2. Remember who and what CrowdStrike is....
"What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google"
What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google | Zero Hedge
3. And this....
"WASHINGTON —
U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year's American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented datapublished by an influential British think tank."
Cyber Firm Rewrites Part of Disputed Russian Hacking Report
Did I mention that everything that comes from a Democrat source is a lie?
4. ".... if the evidence that they’ve used to level major accusations at a foreign government comes not from agencies of the U.S. government or direct law enforcement investigations, but rather from private sector firms like CrowdStrike, then the “high confidence” of the government counts for very little. "
The FBI Relied on a Private Firm’s Investigation of the DNC Hack—Which Makes the Agency Harder to Trust
Either it didn’t ask or wasn’t allowed to examine the DNC’s server.
After four years of lying to the American people, newly released documents find that every Obama official admitted that here was never….NEVER…even a hint of collusion.
“Other newly declassified transcripts released Thursday by the House Intelligence Committee revealed that top Obama administration officials had no concrete evidence that the Trump campaigned colluded with Russia in the 2016 Election.
The transcripts come from 57 witnesses who were interviewed by the committee during the Trump Russia probe. Obama's National Security Advisor Susan Rice and Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch were among those who gave their testimony.
In her interview with the House Intelligence Committee, conducted on September 8, 2017, Rice admitted there 'wasn't anything smoking' that showed the Trump campaign had helped with Russia's election meddling.
'I don't recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that effect... prior to my departure,' she stated.
…former AG Loretta Lynch similarly stated that she 'could not say' whether evidence of collusion, coordination or conspiracy existed when she gave her interview on October 20, 2017.
Other officials who worked in the Obama Administration were also asked about whether or not there was any concrete evidence they had seen.
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stated: 'I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.
'That's not to say that there weren't concerns about the evidence we were seeing, anecdotal evidence. ... But I do not recall any instance where I had direct evidence.'
Samantha Power, who was appointed by Obama to be the US Ambassador to the United Nations, was also among the 57 interviewees probed by the House Intelligence Committee.
'I am not in possession of anything—I am not in possession and didn't read or absorb information that came from out of the intelligence community,' Power stated, according to the newly released transcripts.” Obama surprised DoJ officials with knowledge of Michael Flynn's calls
You moron.....that's the job of a national security advisor.
Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
May 7 2020
I'd still like to understand what was improper about the incoming National Security Advisor of a newly elected administration calling his Russian counterpart to try to tamp down tensions in the weeks before he took office.
What law would apply to Flynn's doing so?????
None of any use. But it appears you missed the entire point.
You know the very opposite is the truth, about missing the point.
So we agree that no such law applied that would have cast Flynn under the view of the Obamunists.
See....you're learning.
Not at all. Flynn’s conversations with the Russian government were useful and legitimate foreign intelligence. The Obama administration is the only body tasked with engaging in foreign policy which includes collection of intelligence. They are not merely a law enforcement agency. Therefore, no law needs to have been broken to make Flynn’s conversations subject to their review.
You wish it would become old news. Guess what? It’s gonna haunt you for awhile yet.Too late.Docs show John Brennan suppressed intel showing Russia actually wanted Hillary to win
That's four-year-old news.
Nobody cares about that old $hit anymore.
We've got bigger fish to fry.
Like 1,400,000 COVID-19 cases and 85,000 deaths, and an incompetent administration that delayed its response long enough to cost a great many lives.
And voting-out a corrupt, egotistical, selfish, incompetent chief executive whose recent unraveling behaviors are costing him the confidence of Republicans.
You can’t be serious. Really, you can’t be.If such testimony existed, it wouldn’t have been covered up by Devin Nunes.How about behind-doors sworn testimony?
Just declassified and released by Grenell.
Nunes has not had difficulty declassifying information in the past.
Oh, and nothing of the sort has been released.
Little problem. The office of national security advisor belonged to someone else at the time.Well, when they call up Russian government officials to talk foreign policy and strategy, that means that you have a legitimate foreign intellifence interest.obama was spying on officials from an incoming administration !What does that have to do with the thread?Hilarious. Relying on 3 year old reports as if anything in them was still relevant.
It was confirmed by Crowdstrike. The information they gave to the FBI was as good as what they would have gotten examining the server. Also the hacked information ended up on WikiLeaks mixed with false information.
1. False.
2. Remember who and what CrowdStrike is....
"What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google"
What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google | Zero Hedge
3. And this....
"WASHINGTON —
U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year's American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented datapublished by an influential British think tank."
Cyber Firm Rewrites Part of Disputed Russian Hacking Report
Did I mention that everything that comes from a Democrat source is a lie?
4. ".... if the evidence that they’ve used to level major accusations at a foreign government comes not from agencies of the U.S. government or direct law enforcement investigations, but rather from private sector firms like CrowdStrike, then the “high confidence” of the government counts for very little. "
The FBI Relied on a Private Firm’s Investigation of the DNC Hack—Which Makes the Agency Harder to Trust
Either it didn’t ask or wasn’t allowed to examine the DNC’s server.
After four years of lying to the American people, newly released documents find that every Obama official admitted that here was never….NEVER…even a hint of collusion.
“Other newly declassified transcripts released Thursday by the House Intelligence Committee revealed that top Obama administration officials had no concrete evidence that the Trump campaigned colluded with Russia in the 2016 Election.
The transcripts come from 57 witnesses who were interviewed by the committee during the Trump Russia probe. Obama's National Security Advisor Susan Rice and Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch were among those who gave their testimony.
In her interview with the House Intelligence Committee, conducted on September 8, 2017, Rice admitted there 'wasn't anything smoking' that showed the Trump campaign had helped with Russia's election meddling.
'I don't recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that effect... prior to my departure,' she stated.
…former AG Loretta Lynch similarly stated that she 'could not say' whether evidence of collusion, coordination or conspiracy existed when she gave her interview on October 20, 2017.
Other officials who worked in the Obama Administration were also asked about whether or not there was any concrete evidence they had seen.
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stated: 'I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.
'That's not to say that there weren't concerns about the evidence we were seeing, anecdotal evidence. ... But I do not recall any instance where I had direct evidence.'
Samantha Power, who was appointed by Obama to be the US Ambassador to the United Nations, was also among the 57 interviewees probed by the House Intelligence Committee.
'I am not in possession of anything—I am not in possession and didn't read or absorb information that came from out of the intelligence community,' Power stated, according to the newly released transcripts.” Obama surprised DoJ officials with knowledge of Michael Flynn's calls
You moron.....that's the job of a national security advisor.
Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
May 7 2020
I'd still like to understand what was improper about the incoming National Security Advisor of a newly elected administration calling his Russian counterpart to try to tamp down tensions in the weeks before he took office.
What law would apply to Flynn's doing so?????
None of any use. But it appears you missed the entire point.
You know the very opposite is the truth, about missing the point.
So we agree that no such law applied that would have cast Flynn under the view of the Obamunists.
See....you're learning.
Not at all. Flynn’s conversations with the Russian government were useful and legitimate foreign intelligence. The Obama administration is the only body tasked with engaging in foreign policy which includes collection of intelligence. They are not merely a law enforcement agency. Therefore, no law needs to have been broken to make Flynn’s conversations subject to their review.
So, now morons are just peachy keen with spying on, ruining, and threatening an American citizen for........not breaking any law, not doing nothing wrong....
Do you realize what you've become in the service of your corrupt party?????
You can’t be serious. Really, you can’t be.If such testimony existed, it wouldn’t have been covered up by Devin Nunes.How about behind-doors sworn testimony?
Just declassified and released by Grenell.
Nunes has not had difficulty declassifying information in the past.
Oh, and nothing of the sort has been released.
The article is referring to documents that haven't been released. I'm just pointing that out.
So, now morons are just peachy keen with spying on, ruining, and threatening an American citizen for........not breaking any law, not doing nothing wrong....
Do you realize what you've become in the service of your corrupt party?????
Little problem. The office of national security advisor belonged to someone else at the time.Well, when they call up Russian government officials to talk foreign policy and strategy, that means that you have a legitimate foreign intellifence interest.obama was spying on officials from an incoming administration !What does that have to do with the thread?Hilarious. Relying on 3 year old reports as if anything in them was still relevant.
It was confirmed by Crowdstrike. The information they gave to the FBI was as good as what they would have gotten examining the server. Also the hacked information ended up on WikiLeaks mixed with false information.
1. False.
2. Remember who and what CrowdStrike is....
"What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google"
What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google | Zero Hedge
3. And this....
"WASHINGTON —
U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year's American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented datapublished by an influential British think tank."
Cyber Firm Rewrites Part of Disputed Russian Hacking Report
Did I mention that everything that comes from a Democrat source is a lie?
4. ".... if the evidence that they’ve used to level major accusations at a foreign government comes not from agencies of the U.S. government or direct law enforcement investigations, but rather from private sector firms like CrowdStrike, then the “high confidence” of the government counts for very little. "
The FBI Relied on a Private Firm’s Investigation of the DNC Hack—Which Makes the Agency Harder to Trust
Either it didn’t ask or wasn’t allowed to examine the DNC’s server.
After four years of lying to the American people, newly released documents find that every Obama official admitted that here was never….NEVER…even a hint of collusion.
“Other newly declassified transcripts released Thursday by the House Intelligence Committee revealed that top Obama administration officials had no concrete evidence that the Trump campaigned colluded with Russia in the 2016 Election.
The transcripts come from 57 witnesses who were interviewed by the committee during the Trump Russia probe. Obama's National Security Advisor Susan Rice and Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch were among those who gave their testimony.
In her interview with the House Intelligence Committee, conducted on September 8, 2017, Rice admitted there 'wasn't anything smoking' that showed the Trump campaign had helped with Russia's election meddling.
'I don't recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that effect... prior to my departure,' she stated.
…former AG Loretta Lynch similarly stated that she 'could not say' whether evidence of collusion, coordination or conspiracy existed when she gave her interview on October 20, 2017.
Other officials who worked in the Obama Administration were also asked about whether or not there was any concrete evidence they had seen.
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stated: 'I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.
'That's not to say that there weren't concerns about the evidence we were seeing, anecdotal evidence. ... But I do not recall any instance where I had direct evidence.'
Samantha Power, who was appointed by Obama to be the US Ambassador to the United Nations, was also among the 57 interviewees probed by the House Intelligence Committee.
'I am not in possession of anything—I am not in possession and didn't read or absorb information that came from out of the intelligence community,' Power stated, according to the newly released transcripts.” Obama surprised DoJ officials with knowledge of Michael Flynn's calls
You moron.....that's the job of a national security advisor.
Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
May 7 2020
I'd still like to understand what was improper about the incoming National Security Advisor of a newly elected administration calling his Russian counterpart to try to tamp down tensions in the weeks before he took office.
What law would apply to Flynn's doing so?????
None of any use. But it appears you missed the entire point.
You know the very opposite is the truth, about missing the point.
So we agree that no such law applied that would have cast Flynn under the view of the Obamunists.
See....you're learning.
Not at all. Flynn’s conversations with the Russian government were useful and legitimate foreign intelligence. The Obama administration is the only body tasked with engaging in foreign policy which includes collection of intelligence. They are not merely a law enforcement agency. Therefore, no law needs to have been broken to make Flynn’s conversations subject to their review.
So, now morons are just peachy keen with spying on, ruining, and threatening an American citizen for........not breaking any law, not doing nothing wrong....
Do you realize what you've become in the service of your corrupt party?????
You're talking about two different things. FISA is used for foreign intelligence. The Obama administration was spying on Kislyak, as anyone would expect them to. When someone starts engaging in foreign policy and making deals with the Russian government, that person becomes subject to the same spying. That's the law. That's how it works.
Now, when Flynn started lying about what he discussed with Kislyak, that's when the FBI got involved. Flynn is in a position where he is privy to our nation's biggest secrets. If he is lying about his engagement with a foreign government, that makes his trustworthiness questionable. The FBI has an obligation to protect our security and therefore he is subject to investigation should that come into question. Lying to the FBI in the course of doing their job is against the law. Had he not lied, he would have been able to retain his position and not be prosecuted.
See, two separate but connected episodes.
www.foxnews.com
Little problem. The office of national security advisor belonged to someone else at the time.Well, when they call up Russian government officials to talk foreign policy and strategy, that means that you have a legitimate foreign intellifence interest.obama was spying on officials from an incoming administration !What does that have to do with the thread?Hilarious. Relying on 3 year old reports as if anything in them was still relevant.
It was confirmed by Crowdstrike. The information they gave to the FBI was as good as what they would have gotten examining the server. Also the hacked information ended up on WikiLeaks mixed with false information.
1. False.
2. Remember who and what CrowdStrike is....
"What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google"
What Is CrowdStrike? Firm Hired By DNC Has Ties To Hillary Clinton, A Ukrainian Billionaire, And Google | Zero Hedge
3. And this....
"WASHINGTON —
U.S. cybersecurity firm CrowdStrike has revised and retracted statements it used to buttress claims of Russian hacking during last year's American presidential election campaign. The shift followed a VOA report that the company misrepresented datapublished by an influential British think tank."
Cyber Firm Rewrites Part of Disputed Russian Hacking Report
Did I mention that everything that comes from a Democrat source is a lie?
4. ".... if the evidence that they’ve used to level major accusations at a foreign government comes not from agencies of the U.S. government or direct law enforcement investigations, but rather from private sector firms like CrowdStrike, then the “high confidence” of the government counts for very little. "
The FBI Relied on a Private Firm’s Investigation of the DNC Hack—Which Makes the Agency Harder to Trust
Either it didn’t ask or wasn’t allowed to examine the DNC’s server.
After four years of lying to the American people, newly released documents find that every Obama official admitted that here was never….NEVER…even a hint of collusion.
“Other newly declassified transcripts released Thursday by the House Intelligence Committee revealed that top Obama administration officials had no concrete evidence that the Trump campaigned colluded with Russia in the 2016 Election.
The transcripts come from 57 witnesses who were interviewed by the committee during the Trump Russia probe. Obama's National Security Advisor Susan Rice and Former Attorney General Loretta Lynch were among those who gave their testimony.
In her interview with the House Intelligence Committee, conducted on September 8, 2017, Rice admitted there 'wasn't anything smoking' that showed the Trump campaign had helped with Russia's election meddling.
'I don't recall intelligence that I would consider evidence to that effect... prior to my departure,' she stated.
…former AG Loretta Lynch similarly stated that she 'could not say' whether evidence of collusion, coordination or conspiracy existed when she gave her interview on October 20, 2017.
Other officials who worked in the Obama Administration were also asked about whether or not there was any concrete evidence they had seen.
Former Director of National Intelligence James Clapper stated: 'I never saw any direct empirical evidence that the Trump campaign or someone in it was plotting/conspiring with the Russians to meddle with the election.
'That's not to say that there weren't concerns about the evidence we were seeing, anecdotal evidence. ... But I do not recall any instance where I had direct evidence.'
Samantha Power, who was appointed by Obama to be the US Ambassador to the United Nations, was also among the 57 interviewees probed by the House Intelligence Committee.
'I am not in possession of anything—I am not in possession and didn't read or absorb information that came from out of the intelligence community,' Power stated, according to the newly released transcripts.” Obama surprised DoJ officials with knowledge of Michael Flynn's calls
You moron.....that's the job of a national security advisor.
Glenn Greenwald
@ggreenwald
May 7 2020
I'd still like to understand what was improper about the incoming National Security Advisor of a newly elected administration calling his Russian counterpart to try to tamp down tensions in the weeks before he took office.
What law would apply to Flynn's doing so?????
None of any use. But it appears you missed the entire point.
You know the very opposite is the truth, about missing the point.
So we agree that no such law applied that would have cast Flynn under the view of the Obamunists.
See....you're learning.
Not at all. Flynn’s conversations with the Russian government were useful and legitimate foreign intelligence. The Obama administration is the only body tasked with engaging in foreign policy which includes collection of intelligence. They are not merely a law enforcement agency. Therefore, no law needs to have been broken to make Flynn’s conversations subject to their review.
So, now morons are just peachy keen with spying on, ruining, and threatening an American citizen for........not breaking any law, not doing nothing wrong....
Do you realize what you've become in the service of your corrupt party?????
You're talking about two different things. FISA is used for foreign intelligence. The Obama administration was spying on Kislyak, as anyone would expect them to. When someone starts engaging in foreign policy and making deals with the Russian government, that person becomes subject to the same spying. That's the law. That's how it works.
Now, when Flynn started lying about what he discussed with Kislyak, that's when the FBI got involved. Flynn is in a position where he is privy to our nation's biggest secrets. If he is lying about his engagement with a foreign government, that makes his trustworthiness questionable. The FBI has an obligation to protect our security and therefore he is subject to investigation should that come into question. Lying to the FBI in the course of doing their job is against the law. Had he not lied, he would have been able to retain his position and not be prosecuted.
See, two separate but connected episodes.
